one recording in progress. Good evening everybody. Welcome to the special meeting of the Berkeley City Council. Or Monday, September 30th, 2024. We have one item on our agenda tonight. And that is. To adopt for clean municipal, 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. Councilmember Tapplin. Here. Bartlett. Present. Traygum. Present. On. Present. Lengrap. Present. Luna Pgum. Present. On. Present. Lengrap. Present. Loonopara. Here. Humbert. Present. And Mayor Erigine is currently absent. So, a quorum is present. And then before we get started, we do need to. Do the AB 2449 script for Councilmember Taplin to participate in the meeting remotely. So just briefly, Councilmember Taplin is participating in the meeting remotely, pursuant to the Brown Act is amended by AB 2449 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 satisfies the requirement of the Brown Act. Council member Taplin has notified council it's need to participate remotely. And council member Taplin 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 minutes of green slutting. Thank you. Okay, and Councilmember Tapplin 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 encourage you well. Okay and then Councilmember Taflin 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 of the orderly conduct of the council meeting. A summary of these rules is available in the one page handout on the table in the rear of the boardroom. Disruptive behavior includes, but is 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, entering into or remaining in an area of the meeting room that is not open to the public, or approaching the council bias without consent. We ask that you observe these rules so that all members of the public 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. And we don't take speaker cards. Do we have 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 one minute per speaker, however, speakers can yield time to each other up to a maximum of four minutes for any one speaker. Okay, so how many people would like to speak tonight? Okay, that looks like more than 10 to me. So you'll need to have one minute, unless you yield your time to another speaker. So you please find up at this side of the room. Hello, good evening. Welcome, Mr. City Manager. So wonderful to have you here with us. Absolutely, yes to TARPA. Yes to TARPA. I'm curious, when is this meeting scheduled? I'm going to schedule very recently. Obviously, you all know, and there's been four new commissioners appointed in the past months to the peace and justice commission, which is happening in 35 minutes. So it's leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to leave the meeting. I'm going to read because I'm very nervous. Toa is a common sense solution. It offers tenants a fair opportunity to purchase the homes that they have lived 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 five eviction notices. I have been asked to close my business. 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 one bedroom unit. She's going to enlarge it to a three 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. I'm ready. Hi, 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. My building is being considered 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 like an ongoing work to provide affordable housing and Berkeley by adding this last step to ensure that things aren't dropped at the last minute through misfortunes with timing. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next slide. Good evening, council members. My name is Christina Oatfield. And I am a member of the planning commission, although I'm not here tonight on behalf of the planning commission. I'm also an attorney for numerous nonprofit affordable housing organizations around the Bay area 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 Copa to be ordinance moving forward in whatever manner that may be getting more staff analysis first is fine, but having been through a number of acquisitions with non-profit affordable housing organizations, I can tell you that they often need a little extra time to make a deal happen because they have to leverage funding from multiple sources and some of those sources have a stringent requirements to make sure that their dollars are being stretched and put to good use. So the timing that this legislation would afford organizations to get their funding and their act together could make a world of a difference. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Karen Nemsek. I'm a 17-year Berkeley resident and I'm also here speaking on behalf of United Way Bay Area. We ask you to consider and to pass the Tenant Opportunity Purchase Act. I'm really excited about Berkeley's commitment of money 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 were paving the way for future to purchases and helping to ensure that affordable housing 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 carrying for for 17 years. Good evening. My name is George. I'm a Berkeley resident. And I am a new immigrant without good English. Let me share my story. When I bought my house in 2019, you heard every news. If Topa at that time, it has Topa. I couldn't bought this property. This organization not help people have housing. They just make money from the Hoppa. So I oppose. Hoppa. Right now, I become, I'm not only a home owner, I also become a very small housing provider because I build I do buy my labor. I lower the rent. This is the you to support the TAPA, 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 it's still occupied. It's in line with my values, wanting to support the community around me. Owners get fair market value for the property that Tope of 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 there, I would support it if matter. Ask that you do the same. Thanks. Good evening. Benita, Goyle, Berkeley resident and urban planner. The processes have best intentions for communities and conversations around urban growth and development. But what is sometimes, most of that equation is how we can achieve more if we actually prioritized what is at most take care the agency of residents are sensitive belonging in our community and a decision making of who controls the futures of our own neighborhoods. all city leaders. In Berkeley approaches that center raising equity such as Stopa, that would prioritize keeping current residents in place as opposed to unleashing expensive marketed development that does not not only benefit current residents, but also Rob's both the wealth and stronghold for many 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 Perez, supplemental and make top priority in Berkeley. Thank you. Good evening Council members. I'd like to yield my time to the next speaker. Good evening Council members. Tracy Pant with the Bay Area coming to our interest. Thanks so much for having this special hearing this evening. I want to reiterate that the current revised Topo ordinance. It's not intended to put tenants against Berkeley landlords looking at property radar data over the past two years, half of the sales of multi unit buildings and Berkeley were bought by investors who actually don't live in Berkeley. residents a first opportunity to make an offer to buy the 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 first offer. More specifically, nearly half of the buyers of two to four unit buildings had property tax mailing addresses outside of Berkeley, and 60% of buyers of five or more unit buildings had property tax mailing addresses outside of Berkeley. So that is the context in which TOPA is coming to Berkeley. TOPA gives Berkeley renters a fair chance at buying their building, or partnering with a nonprofit like a community land trust before the property is listed on the market. By which time it's just too late to explore mortgage options. This revised ordinance, which was first submitted back in December of 2023, is the result of focus groups and input from Moomers Community Groups and Residents, many of whom are represented here tonight. You know that there is question about administrative procedure. And so I also wanna really support with both supplemental submitted to the council, one by council members, Honopopara, IntraGub, asking to refer this to the city manager for further administrative review. And another one by council member Hahn, which asks to really look at the San Francisco model of the COPA. So please support TOPA. And thank you. I'm here to speak against TOPA. I'm also broke for 30 years. I have helped so many many tenements become homeless. And as a medical effect last year, I also saw one of my property enrichment to a long container. To us, it's not whether you're ten or not, but it's in a upper-the-world, even with it, incapable, so that you have a free chance to come to. Now, for the government to put its thumb on the otherwise private transparent and thorough change section, I think is going to create urban. So don't do it. We don't want to create a department to solve a non-digesting problem. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening. My name is Betty Gray. I am a resident of one of the Topa 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 is 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 eight 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 too here to speak in favor of Topa. 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 TopPA 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 ADU, the latest proposal for TOPA does not apply to you. So if you're just a homeowner, it was an ADU, you have nothing to worry about, nothing to change. So once again, we've worked on this for many years. Please support TOPA. Thank you. Hello, good evening. I am a I work at PolicyLink, which is a National Equity Research Institute. And we do all kinds of work on HOPA 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. 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 hope and hope I don't know if I'll be able to stay here long term. So thank you. Good evening, Council members. I'm V Coleman. I not a commodity, and those who oppose, Tope, believe that they have a right to make money off of where people live, which is just super problematic and not okay, and maybe some of those too. But honestly, we know that there are 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 tenants live in this repair until they move out 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 SOPA. Thank you. Hi council members. You guys look so excited to be here tonight. My name's Iris. I'm a community health education educator as well as a housing specialist in San Francisco. Also someone bored and raised in California. I was supposed to start at this talking point, but my name's Iris. I asked that you support the tenant opportunity purchase act. This policy is essential for community for the following reasons. I'm just going to stay to offer tenants. I'm going to be a member of the community. I ask that you support the TENET Opportunity Purchase Act. This policy is essential for our community for the following reasons. I'm just going to stay, TOTEPA offers tenants, afford 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, Ben. So continue supporting those who support our communities. Allow us here to speak to you tonight. Have a good night, Igor. Bye. Hi folks, my name is Ebubekhar NDI. I also go by Asin. 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 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 rehab being stabilizing keeping tenants' house, including moving them across the stewardship and ownership pipeline, making them property owners and taxpayers in this city. Where we're asking for years for you to support the tenant opportunity to purchase act, because it would present an opportunity for organizations like mine and organizations like Bay Area CLT to turn Berkeley residents' attendance into permanent members of our community and not only for them, but also for their children and their children's children. So I also wanna give you a really big story. I just came back from DC. It turns out capitalism is live and well over there and they already have to open up. So thank you so much. Thank you. Even council members my name is Leo Grogberg 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 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 Asin said, that's been proven elsewhere. We have three community land trust active in Berkeley and other nonprofits already doing anti displacement projects. So these are the types of projects that TOPPA 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 Chopra, support this supplemental that's before the council tonight and thank you for the time. Good evening councilmembers. My name is Amanda Trang. I am a staff member of Urban Habitat and a former resident of Berkeley. I have been working with the Toboe 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 used 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. We don't want to be asking you this for like another four years, but we're not going anywhere. So the more you push us back, the more we're going to come back stronger. And you were elected by the people sitting in this room. 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're all thank you. Hello, council. My name is Avery Arba. I'm a student district seven resident, a labor commissioner and a tenant in Berkeley. I'm here today to speak in favor of Topa. Topa to me means giving tenants the opportunity to own their home. This is an opportunity that most tenants living in Berkeley without Topa 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 TOPA, but I understand that some council members here today are not ready to vote for it. As such, I strongly support TOPA, but I understand that some council members here today are not ready to vote for it. As such, I strongly support council members Cecilia, Lunapara as supplemental, in hopes that further administrative. I am a resident of Berkeley for over 40 years. I oppose topa. that has not been fulfilled, as he said there would be a comprehensive equity study measuring the impact on small property owners, such as myself. I find that Topa 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 Topa just completely hamstrings us. We need solutions that increased rental housing availability and allows small property owners to enter the market, not fear tactics. Hi, my name is Sarah Sarasin. I've lived 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, Miss 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. Everyone knew her. Everyone had a mislullian story. And the reason mislullian 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 mislullian 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, Councilmembers. My name is Jasmine Sozi. I'm a staff member at the East Bay Community Law Center. I'm a board resident of Berkeley. I'm here to strongly encourage you to support Councilmember Luna Paras 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 Buy Families, and the Berkeley Tenant Union. The community has spoken, and it's time for us to respond and by moving to PO 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 within, or 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 council member Luna Paro is supplemental and make housing a security for Berkeley residents. Thank you. Good evening, my name is Sam Franco. I'd like to see my minutes of money law. Good evening city manager city attorney and council. It's my pleasure to be here today to speak on behalf of the tenant opportunity purchase actor 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 who my know and love, I don't believe that it's contrary to the best interests of an owner, particularly small owners as well. I've seen it and then 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 my lawyer, 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 our cash offers and a million dollars minimum. So I have a window house in seaside and I've written 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 of 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 at least people who've been in Berkeley for decades are being displaced at rapid amounts. Last point, we have one of highest in the scares and saddens me so much. I love elders and I'm rowing elder at 64. Gosh, who would have known? Time flies. We have the largest population and growth of older people in Berkeley. And many of them are going to be unhoused and displaced when buyers buy the building and their displaced. Thank you. Good evening Council members. My name is Matt Gustafson. I'm a district two resident, a home owner and I also 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, like next mothers in East San Jose, around housing. And in all of our conversations, 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 an attorney at Public Advocates based in San Francisco. We are in 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 written a strastic 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 provides 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 steeple 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... Thank you. Okay. 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 was has a proportion that is aimed at affordable housing, and that can be used to help for that any minimal administrative costs that TOTE by will require. Thank you. I ask that you now throw out the baby with bath water. You are not prepared to move this version of TOTE before work. But 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. And in fact, when you begin addressing missing metal, 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. I, for anything in terms of affordable housing, I do believe there needs to be oversight. I live in a tenant operating place that is completely misrunning. Hopefully, the oversight will be addressed by. Can I get a couple of minutes? Okay. Cool. Cool. I think that's four. Hi, all. I'm sin. I am the Berkeley Student Cooperatives president this year and board rep for Wolfhouse. 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 Cooperative 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 to the right of first offer and refusal that 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 Co-operative 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 steering organizations. As UC Berkeley continues to expand enrollment and homeownership grows increasingly out of reach for many. It is essential that the BSE 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 Berkeley and the opportunity to become collective homeowners, grant co-ops like ours the opportunity to expand, and grant the collective power, people power to trump the grade of the few who are traditionally able to become home homeowners. This is tiring y'all. All of the reasons shade, I stand in support with Councilmember Luna Patas supplemental. Please let us keep pushing topper forward. Thank you. Hello everyone. I think there might be a few co-oppers left to see their minutes. A couple. Thank you guys. Thank you guys. So yeah, my name is slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. I'm going to have to go to the next slide. being shared. Yeah, there's there's a lot of us in the city and and we're all part of this this cooperative movement, this this beautiful cooperative movement and I just wanted to read a couple of the watchdale principles of cooperation kind of kind of that specifically you know highlight this this kind of relationship as a co-op a watch up principle number two democratic member control. As a co-op we believe Rochelle principal 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 total nonprofits and or tenants, we need to come together to collectively decide if and how to go about studying the land, creating an opportunity for progress towards a more cooperative world. Rochelle principal number four, autonomy and independence. Soapment of co-ops are aligned in the shared goal to create autonomous and self-help oriented spaces for the community. Topo grant sentence, the unprecedented opportunity to advocate for themselves and create an ecosystem of shared responsibility and collective justice. Racial principle number seven, concern for the community, latest block parties, they're concerned 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 there by providing an educational opportunity for students who might not otherwise be able to afford a university education. With this in mind, it's important to ensure housing remains affordable, great 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-oppers, but some of the things were not entirely friendly. So I won't share all of it, but just speaking, you know, not even as a co-opper, 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 having the support there. I recognize this here, 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, the, the the wants and in the face of dozens of, 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. of your citizens and constituents. And I just, I hope you see us now. However many there are here, however many are online. Yeah, I hope you see us. And I hope you see that this is something that we need and that as city council members, you, of Berkeley, of Berkeley, you should be jumping on this opportunity. Thank you. Good evening, councilmembers. My name is Michael Trujillo and I know many of you have met with us and given us feedback heard from community members and contributing along the way. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. just appeared. Okay, maybe she'll come back. Relyana, Relyana, Spinler? Hello. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. I'd like to speak about global because I view TOTA is 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 TOTA 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 how my ownership 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 Margot Rose letterer? Thank you very much. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you very much. For allowing me to speak. My name is Margot 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 Councilmember Luna Para. In particular, the understanding of how utilities are shared in a small unit like an ADU and a single family home is absolutely absurd. What I want to proceed with is an understanding of what they call 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, including financing is approximately five months. A homeowner like myself who is retired and living on just 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. Would you wrap up please wrap up. Okay, and offer them third timeline. If I had to sell, if I had medical conditions or an urgent family need, five months plus the students who are from out of town, who are at Cal, then have a right to first refusal and all their parents are on the lease. They are low income, yes. But behind them are parents who could be from I am objecting to the single family home and two unit properties being included in this version of Topea, thank you. Thank you very much. Paul. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, I am Paul Reed. And my sister's 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 TOPUS creating any affordability. It seems to be a great idea, but I don't see any, you know, statistics are 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. It doesn't need to be placed on the backs of Sheller. So anyway, 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 total 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 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 the 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, this timeline that a people are being given, when someone has an exchange where they have to buy and identify a replacement property, they only have 45 days to do it in. And there's no certainty of clothes if you've got a five-month process to go through it. And the very last thing, it was a gentleman who spoke and said, 80 use our exempt, how's with 80 use our exempt? Maybe they are exempt today, but once you start passing these laws, it's like a slip-bley slope, and then you include everything else. I don't believe the DC-TOPPA was effective. There have 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 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 bought a place. I have a two-adooplex, and I'm using that second unit to help paint my mortgage. I don't think I'm a bad person. I'm on that ladder that we wanted to get on. I think that those people that we're 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 maybe we could exclude people who live in Berkeley and own property here or people who own less than 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 eyes 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 we're doing this less helpful versions on the backs of small property owners. Let's not put the small people against each other. Do that study that does shows what effect it will have on small landlords before, with passing this law and hurting the people who are trying to help. Thank you. Next speaker is Carla Simmons. Good afternoon or evening, sorry. I'm also against Taupa. I am a property owner with my family. The properties were built in the 1930s and have stayed rent time and time again in Berkeley that before 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. Next speaker is Ty Don. Ty Dan. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes, I'm a small owner and a 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 housing. So for the TOPA, basically, you can see as so many speakers, they actually from some sort of organization. And this organization if we get in our small work harder people would be pushed out. So we would not have a chance like we all depend on this little income for our retirement. If we wait for half year or some even more than half year to try to sell a house. And like again, we're not against to sell the house to our tenant. If they willing to buy. I mean like for the affordable things. Please complete your thoughts. Okay. Please complete your thoughts. Okay, so for thought about housing, please do not put this burden for the small housing provider, but we have to think about other way like, you know, like a city from other way to to provide what we're trying to say, to reduce the cost of increase the property tax or the maintenance cost. Thank you very much. Your time is up. Thank you. Next speaker is up. Thank you. Next speaker is Lisa. Oh, Lisa. Can you unmute please Lisa. Okay, we'll go to the next speaker. Karen. Oh, I'm sorry. Lisa's back. Lisa, can you speak please. Lisa, can you unmute please. Yes. Yeah, as I'm already. Can you hear? We can hear. please? Yes. Yeah, it's unmute already. Can you hear her? We can hear her. We can hear her. Yeah. Yeah, so she's totally against Cooper. So why now she is the landlord of the Berkeley. She had a tendon is we bad. And also because those are law that you guys are formulating right now. There'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 consequences of like purchasing property in Berkeley will become the return of the law fact. You've brought a full handful of one. And also is against the safety because right now, when boy is like protecting for the bad tendon 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 will be paid for a lot of money including school, financials, and also like the street maintenance. And also the insurance. That's a lot. Please complete your comments. Yeah, we talked to it and I guess I'll talk about it. No, thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, Karen. Good evening, Vice Mayor and City Council. First off, a big thank you to the Land Use Committee for giving this item a negative recommendation. Topa is an outdated and ineffective policy that should never been supported. Looking at Washington, DC, where Topa has been in place for over 40 years, there's no evidence that it reduces displacement. Topa Copa sales are only economically viable with large buildings. Large buildings are a small sliver of Berkeley's rental housing and similarly co-op on San Francisco has only been marginally effective and applied to larger buildings making its application and 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 open market with the help of the small sites program. We need policies that bring investment into this city and create new affordable housing, not performative legislation like TOPA and COPA that do little to address the real problem. Lastly, Berkeley Lackson financial resources that even support these initiatives. Berkeley deserves real solutions, not policies that simply check a box. The numbers just don't add up. Please vote no on topa and koopa. Thank you. Thank you, Karen. Next speaker is Jennifer Bell. Hello. My name is Jennifer Liu. I'm the president of Farm Business and Housing Network. We represent over 2000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Tenants from this placement? No. Berkeley already has just caused eviction. Selling our property doesn't qualify as a just a course for eviction. There is no need to use OPA for tenant protection. Does OPA help tenants to buy homes? No. I want to sell my, if I want to sell my rental home. The first people I want to reach out is my payments. It's more economical and less effort to sell to my tenants. Why bother to have open? Does open-ass home owners to sell out at the fair market price? No, it is rarely at the fair market price. Why don't they just buy at the open market? Jennifer, please wrap up. Does open help to solve the housing crisis? No, open doesn't increase a single unit. On the contrary, open scarce investors and builders away later no one dares to build any house. OPA kills housing. Please reject the OPA. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Next speaker is, Tuan N. I'm for real tenant opportunities. What I see in Topa, Copa, Opa, it's a false promise to tenants of home ownership. You follow the money. What happens is limited affordable housing funds are taken away from the people that it's meant to help, from tenants and it's being diverted toward housing developers who co-oper really wolves and sheep's clothing and say that they're going to help when you follow the money, there's a tenant have money in their pocket as a down payment to buy a home, there's a tenant have money to really truly have ownership and their name is on the deed with Topa. No, that doesn't happen at all. So it's a total false promise and that's why 40 some years ago Topa was introduced in DC and it didn't spread across the country. There's serious problems with it and that's why San Jose looked at at that policy pass on it. East Palo though looked at that policy pass on it. Richmond looked at that horrible consequences of Topa Copa and pass on it is ineffective. There are many housing tools that we have that we could employ. This is not the sharpest tool in the toolbox. It's the dullest tool in the toolbox. Pass on it. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker is Sophia DeWitt. Good evening, council members. Sophia DeWitt, chief program officer with eSPE Housing Organizations. I'm here tonight to speak strongly in support of Topa as an important policy intervention that can help stabilize tenants in their homes and protect existing affordable housing. Number of years that the TOPA policy has been considered in Berkeley and many, many amendments to address concerns of landlords and small property owners, including exemptions for folks if they need to sell their property quickly due to a health concern or other issue. Topa is an important policy intervention that will help protect affordable housing in Berkeley and address the existing displacement crisis that has already resulted in many of the communities of color and Berkeley leaving the city. So I support you. That's a wrong field. Hi, my name is, can you hear me? Yes. My name is Heather Brownfield. I'm a senior program director of preservation at Enterprise Community Partners in Northern California. I'm calling in to express support for Council Member Luna Partist, Oklahoma, and Nana to refer to the back to city staff for the development if the Council will not approve Toka tonight. Enterprise is a national organization. We work to increase the availability of affordable housing through technical advising to the affordable housing community and policy makers. We're also a community development financial institution that's helped the finance over a million homes nationwide. We've been involved in preserving hundreds of homes in preservation projects throughout the Bay Area over the last 10 years. I'm calling in tonight because TOPA is a critical policy strategy to enable more affordable housing preservation projects. A few months back, the Berkeley C Council made the multiple decision to allocate $10 million to the small sites program program, having a topop policy in place will allow tenants and non-profit operators to utilize this funding as well as additional funding sources that may become available in the coming years, would be forward thinking to approve the topop policy now. Without it, tenants will have an uphill battle to purchase their own homes, and with it we can level the playing field between investors and our local long-time residents. Thanks so much for your time. Thank you very much. Nick Speaker is Chris Moore? Hello. Thank you for letting me speak this evening. Chris Moore with the East Bay Rinal Housing Association. You know, this is the fifth time this has come to Berkeley. I mean, it's obviously getting to be a political type of opportunity for it to be brought over and over again to the community. It's the community's overwhelmingly voted against this. The council has voted against it and there are much better policy opportunities that the council could work on. We know that number one, every time, each of the times that it's come to council, we've asked for an equity study. You have, in our organization, we have 60% of the members are from the Black and immigrant community. They're asking for an equity study before Tope is implemented. It never arrives. Why is that? It's because it hurts Black and Equity and immigrants communities primarily. So we'd like to see this the council to move on and stop bringing something back that obviously hurts the important parts of our community and actually provides less housing to the community. And last comment, there's a lot of stuff. Time is up. Thank you. A little minute. Mark the clock. Okay. Thank you. Next speaker is Hope Williams. Hi, good evening councilmembers. My name is Hope Williams and I'm Board President for the San Francisco Community Land Trust and I ask you to support the tenant opportunity to purchase that this policy is essential for a community, for the following reasons. 10 million dollars were allocated to Berkeley Small Sites program. Berkeley's recent commitment to the Small Sites program is a key first step in building an ecosystem that supports community driven housing purchases. With this investment, we're paving the way for future topa purchases, helping ensure that affordable housing stays in the hands of those who live and thrive here rather than speculative fires. Funds from measure and bank and see tax, which are coming soon with these funds set to be so become available soon. We have a new opportunity to invest in affordable housing projects. These funds projected to generate between 3.9 million and 5.9 million annually can be directed towards topa transactions and help keep people housed. This is another critical step Berkeley can take towards affordable housing preservation to ensure that the low income Berkeley residents can continue to live and thrive here. For all the reasons shared, I stand in support of the supplemental. So let's keep pushing to before we're thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Jocelyn Goldsmith-Decennah. Hi, are you able to hear me? Yes. Hi, my name is Jocelyn Goldsmith-Decena. I am the Cope Coordinator for the City of Berkeley CSU-PTRLA chapter of SEIU-1021. And I'm here to speak in favor of TOPA on behalf of SEIU-1021. We have endorsed this. And many of you sitting up up there may recall that when we have interviewed you for our endorsement, we have asked you if you would support TELPA. That's because this is important to us city of Berkeley workers. Many of us cannot afford to live in Berkeley. and many of the community members that we're so proud to serve have been displaced, our gentrified out. We, never mind everybody else, what CSU, PTR, L.A. stands for, but we're community service, recreation leaders, we work with WIC, senior services, mental health, housing, the day camps. We hear from our clients, many of whom don't have as much agency and voice as we do. As much language access as we do, as much institutional access as we do, that they are suffering from displacement, just as city workers are. Thank you, Jocelyn. Next speaker is Jim Rutt Kowski. Jim can you unmute please? There you go. Jim, you should be able to speak now. Jim, can you hear it? I do. Right, Quas? Yes, we can hear you. Yeah, I've always opposition and I believe that the elephant in the room is that tenants do not have to wear with all the purchases properties and the measure would only delay a sale of the property. You know, my wife wants to get another house. And I say, well, you know, if I get a winning power ball ticket, then we could do that. So I think this only serves to delay a sale because tenants generally do not have enough money to purchase a property in our inflated real estate market. And but I believe that the council should turn to San Francisco which is very instructive with COPA. The results have been resolved. There has also been a bismill. And these nonprofits. We're not gobbled up. Small properties. They're going to look for the big fish. Thank you, Jim. Next speaker is Jennifer Menn dies. Say good evening, Council Member. Can I hear me? Come chat. Yes, we can hear you. Good evening Council Member. This is the land law of Berkeley. So why now we happen, we credential issue between land laws and the tendon. And we all know tendon because tendon because they never approach any property. And then law is the one that puts you in property. Land law giving the money to paying the tax, paying everything. And right now, the topper is telling them, don't expect it profit, don't expect it any reward for them if they're taking away of the house. That's like totally toppers doing right now. So this one will be topper against the constitution of the owners why. And also California why now is like totally different from the whole United States. Please consider. Thank you. Next speaker is Hector Maldvido. So. Hi everyone, I feel my video, uh, like you know something is the Berkeley, um, just wanted to say that we strongly support to pa we did when it was first introduced to it's a draft that's been worked on through a number of different processes and community engagement, something that I think has been, you know, taken very seriously. And just there's been a lot of comments from landlords are saying, you know, it's kind of changed the pricing of our home, it's going to do all these number of things. It's not going to do all these number of things, it's not going to do that. I feel like there's just some very common sense solutions. I mean, Topa is one of those in a slate of solutions that I think can help preserve affordable housing and help preserve tenants within the city of Berkeley. As we all know, there are so many that have been displaced and can afford to live here. And this is just one of those steps that can help people stay in Berkeley because they want to. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker is Krista. Thank you, vice mayor and elected officials. Krista, grants an executive director of the Berkeley Property Honors Association. It's still not clear to me what problem we're trying to solve because despite what you've heard tonight. Elected officials, Christy Goldbrands, and Executive Director of the Berkeley Property Honors Association. It's still not clear to me what problem we're trying to solve because despite what you heard tonight, tenants cannot be addicted when a property goes up for sale. When this was first addressed a few years ago, I actually tried to arrange a purchase by tenants of a 10-unit building in Southwest Berkeley where six of the units had rent under $1,000 per month. But after numerous meetings, sort of about two months going back and forth with the tenants, the tenants decided that they didn't want to be responsible for the cost to keep up the building as well as the property taxes which I told you they understood. So maybe this is about the nonprofit housing providers needing to get a leg up on making an offer. And if that's the case, let's talk about how the city can provide them bridge loans as San Francisco does that could make their offer competitive and more importantly make it more feasible to close the sale in a reasonable amount of time. I mean the land trust has publicly said that even if trouble was in play they could only afford to purchase about two buildings a year. So that tells me the community that are served by identifying those buildings ahead of time and then making the purchase of reality rather than dragging down every sale and your offer seat. But either way I want this I want the elected officials here to know that I remain committed to working with those of you that are interested in working with us and the proponents of TOPE that come up with a reasonable and agreeable. You believe in how monochrome. Thank you. Next speaker is Chans Boreski? Very good. Thank you. Good evening, Councilmembers. My name's Chans Boreski. I'm here with East Bay for everyone. It's been a fascinating night. I've heard some things that I'd ever expect to do. There's a couple of folks here that clearly didn't pay attention in their constitutional law classes when it comes to the takings clause, but that's aside for that's besides the point. East Bay forever one believes that Topa is just a really great way to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing and prevent displacement. You know, it's not necessarily clear how massive the impact will be in Berkeley, but we need to chart the course tonight. I also want to point out that, you know, some of you may recognize the name of East Bay forever one. And I think those of you that do will know that I would not be here to advocate for it on behalf of our organization if we felt that this would in any way compromise other forms of housing production in any way, you know, distort the housing market in ways that they we disagree with. We're behind this. We urge you to support Council Member Lin-Parrow Supplemental. Thank you. Next speaker is Admin. Admin, please unmute. Okay. Abmin, please unmute. Okay. We'll go on to Rick Lewis. Oh, there's admin. Abmin, can you, can you hear us? No. Okay, Rick Lewis. Can you hear me? Yes. I didn't necessarily intend to speak, but have been listening to this. I work with a Bay Area Community Land Trust. I'm very proud that we did a project on Stewart Street and partnership with the Mickey Avenue Baptist Church. To me, it really represents the type of project that we really believe in. The project we're currently working on is just around the corner on California Street. These are low-income tenants who have lived there for many years and around them single family homes are selling for more than a million dollars. These people would otherwise be forced out of their homes. They would be purchased by an out of town speculative landlord. What the work that we do actually comes in about 50% of the cost of building new buildings. It's certainly an important part of affordable housing, but we actually, it costs less to preserve existing housing and allow the people to remain in their neighborhood, in their community and not to be forced out. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, we'll go now to admin. Please unmute. Okay. We're going to skip over to Gary Coe. Gary Coe just dropped off. Okay. We're go on to admin. Admin every time I call your name, you turn on your mute button. Can you unmute? Okay, we're going to go on to admin. Admin? Okay. Can you speak now? Okay, we're going on to EBRHA. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Good evening, City Council members, Derek Barnes with East Bay Rental Housing Association. We are an organization that supports housing ownership, but we do not think you should advance this version of TOPA. It does nothing to create a unit of housing, and more importantly, it just creates a bunch of bureaucracy that the city can afford at the moment. I'm going to echo what Krista Gilbrunson said earlier. Like I would like us to work together to create programs like you know a buyer preparation and education program, expanding first time or multi-unit owner operator buying programs and even developing in centers to bring vacant units back onto the market. And this is Chris Moore said earlier, whatever you do, please perform the equity study to really understand the impact. I can tell you after 40 years in Washington, DC, we love to think that we can protect the culture, but what has happened in Washington, DC is that, we've lost 50% of the black community in the 40 years that TOPA has existed. So I think asking the headline question, which is really about why our legacy owners getting out of the business of rental housing in Berkeley and Oakland, specifically, and why are they selling or taking the units off the market? I think is a question that we should ask and perhaps spend some time thinking about the solutions to deal with that problem. Your time is up. Thank you. Next speaker is Gary Coe. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes. Oh, thank you. Hello, everyone you hear me? Yes. Oh, thank you. Hello, everyone. My name is Gary and the home owner in Berkeley. I don't support a topper because we'll cause a longer selling period with more complicated procedure. The trace should be mutual well. The home owner always wants to sell the house to the renters as the most convenient solution. However, when it's limited by the law, it's become a force. I talk with other Berkeley homeowners in the rental market. People are panicking when we are discussing this topic. The homeowners are thinking about selling the house and investing in another city right away, in case the law is valid. Everyone will have an emergency when the liquidity is limited by the law. The investor and the developer will stay away from the city. Please consider. Thank you. Thank you. Deb, I see your hand up, but I believe you spoke earlier. Is that correct? Did you speak earlier? I did. I wanted to again say if people keep saying that it won't hurt the land. So please do. You only get one. You want to get one chance to speak. Thank you. Benjamin Scott. Good evening. Thank you for. Thank you, my call tonight. Thank you all. I know this has been a long meeting and I respect your time. I own a triplex in Berkeley. I worked very hard to get it. I used all my savings, my work to get it. I understand the mayor proposed this earlier and it was dropped. A council member who quit. It's now back on the agenda. Washington DC has dropped this, which is supposed to be the magic panacea example. It didn't work there. It's not going to work here. I vehemently oppose this. And I think there's a lot of other solutions and we should stop wasting our time bringing up bad legislation, bad policy that clearly doesn't work and isn't going to work for Berkeley. Come up with something interesting and different and be Berkeley, but this is not Berkeley. We are better than this. Thank you. Okay. Are there any other speakers on Zoom who would like to speak at this time? Okay. Seeing none, I'm going to go back to the chamber and see if there's anybody in the chamber now who would like to speak, who hasn't spoken earlier, who didn't speak earlier. Anybody? Okay, see no raised hands. I want to thank you all for listening so well and giving everybody an opportunity to speak and with that we'll close public comment period. And I'd like to suggest if my colleagues agree that we take a break the mayor is on his way and I'd like to take a little little break. So we're going to take a little break and we'll be back when the mayor gets here. Thank you. Recording stopped. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm sorry. I'm going to start with the first one. I'm going to start with the second one. I'm going to start with the second one. I'm going to start with the second one. I'm going to start with the second one. I'm going to start with the second one. I'm going to start started very shortly. If the council members can please join us back on the dius. Recording in progress. Yes. Yes. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. Okay. I'm going to go back to the meeting. Okay. We're back in session. I apologize everyone that I just arrived to the meeting. I had a conflict. But I read the many emails that we received on this issue. The letters that we received. And I think as everyone knows, this is an issue I've worked on for the past several years. So it's now in order for Council to discuss and take action on item one, which is the Purples O'Fornmore Council for Harrison to adopt BMC chapter 13.89, the Community and Tenant Opportunity Purchase Act. I know we receive a supplemental from Council member, Linda Para and Tregoub, and wanna give them the opportunity if you want to make any comments regarding your supplemental and councilmember Han as well. And then we can begin discussion the various proposals. So I'll turn over to Councillor Luna parra. Thank you so much. comments for later but I first just want to thank Council Matryub and his diligent staff for their collaboration on the supplemental item which does not make any changes to the policy or ask for to put it be passed today. It asks staff to give more information about the ordinance before we evaluate in a future meeting. Over 50 community organizations have spent eight years carefully crafting this policy and there is a complete draft on the agenda tonight. But at the same time, I believe that this deserves more of a chance from from staff and council members before we adopt it. Thank you. Okay. Councilor Mahan. Thank you very much. Do you want me to just limit to presenting my you can just present your supplement. Okay. Great. And then questions and comments. I'll stay in the queue for other comments. Thank you so much. Okay. So my supplemental is quite simple. I submitted to the record. San Francisco's COPA program, which is a much simpler program that achieves some many of the goals of TOPA. And in my later comments, I will talk a little bit more about that. But I just wanted my colleagues and the public to have the opportunity to see a similar program that is being used in the Bay Area right now and is also successful. Thank you, Mayor. Okay. Thank you very much. So let's now go to the queue. The first councilor I have is councilor Trigger. Or, well, this is weird. It's a seven, a hundred and then Trigger. Okay, yeah. This is not correct. So we'll go to councilor Humbert and then councilor Trigger and then councilor Hahn and councilor Munipar. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you to the Council members who brought their supplemental here today. I very much support the concept of franchising tenants as owners. I think they're great advantages in people becoming homeowners. Having the option to purchase serves multiple purposes, avoiding displacement, stability for families and communities and the opportunity, and this seems to me to be most critical. The opportunity to build family and intergenerational wealth denied to so many people of color and folks in lower socioeconomic strata. That said, any approach we take is going to come with trade offs. And I'm concerned that this particular version of TOPA's trade offs make it far from the best or most cost effective for Berkeley right now. Fundamentally in general, TOPPA does not expand overall housing opportunities. We have a housing shortage, and at the most basic level, the shortage is what is driving on affordability. I know some here may not agree, but housing still obeys laws of supply and demand. And the science of lowering housing prices is very clear and actually we're starting to see it in Berkeley, creating more homes is necessary for getting to broad-based price stability and affordability. Topa doesn't do that, it doesn't create new homes. And by making it harder to sell multi-family buildings, it actually discourages people from creating more multi-family homes. Topa has a poor track record in Washington, DC, which was an early adopter. It's had lackluster results with its program. And it's considering repeal, and I heard that maybe it had repealed TOTA. I'm not certain of that, so I can't assert that. Studies show that it has created relatively few additional housing or private ownership opportunities for the vulnerable communities it claims to serve their NDC and San Francisco. It copa I think has been more successful. It's a sleeker, simpler program. It's aimed at it's similar to our small sites program and then it's aimed at nonprofits winding up as the owners. But the number of units has been very small. My sense is that the hope center on Berkeley Way has more affordable units than all of the SF COPA projects combined. In any event trying to manage these processes here in Berkeley is going to be complicated no matter what and therefore difficult to get right. And managing these processes well requires significant dedicated staff which brings me to the next issue. Berkeley simply can't afford this program right now. We're facing two fiscal years where we're going to be immensely challenged to balance our budget and the budget we just passed relies heavily on some fixes that most of us agree will not be sustainable long term. There's been little money to fund even the most basic upgrades requests from the city departments and very little to fund current council referrals. And because of high interest rates, our real estate transactions and hence our transfer tax revenue are both way down. That's not an inexpensive program. This is not an inexpensive program, requiring at least one new full time employee and other substantial administrative costs. The previous estimate was $340,000. And I imagine that's probably already escalated very substantially. This is money we don't have right now, and which could be going toward more targeted acquisitions or the construction or maintenance of existing affordable housing. What's worse, this proposed program in ordinance would strongly discourage sales or residential property, which are our major source of transfer tax for the city. And one of the only ways that we see property taxes revert to market value under Prop 13. And in the case of a sale within the program, it would substantially cut transfer taxes by its own terms and our transfer taxes as I said are way down. So and right now is when we actually need increases in transfer taxes and they're hoping that a changing economic economic situation will help us see that increase in transfer tax income. Now, in my view, well, I've just recently become aware that representations were made by council some time ago that the city would do an equity study of the impacts of top on smaller property owners. by council some time ago that the city would do an equity study of the impacts of topon, smaller property owners. No such study has been done and this amended proposal does affect even single-family homes. If they're not owner occupied, it reaches way down. There are other serious problems with the measure, I think. It does not address how internal revenue code section 1031 exchanges would work with all the delay. It does not exempt tenant occupied single family homes, while it does exempt other small properties such as owner occupied duplexes. I don't understand the life along niece provision for tenants who don't want to purchase their current unit. They're already effectively protected for life under our current rent stabilization ordinances. The term life tendencies is not well defined or circumscribed. It does not appear to be defined anywhere in the legislation in the slack of clarity is concerning. For one thing, this would create a disincentive for tenants to even participate in the purchase, because they would be able to stay regardless and even lower financial obligation. More importantly, the creation of a life tendency seems like it would prevent neighbors from potentially removing problematic tenants, even criminals from the building which they now own. How do the requirements for organizing a tenants association work with respect to a single family home? I don't know the answer to that. And finally, I see a problem with an exemption only for spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, or grandchildren. Those are enumerated in the proposal. When we have just prohibited via council member Tapplin's measure, discrimination based on family structure. So we're, we'd be discriminating with this potentially against people who live in non-traditional families. And I, I think that itself is a significant problem. On the positive side, change, well, what I'd like to see rather is changing our policies to encourage condo and townhome construction and offering down payment assistance. Those are much better ideas, I think, or perhaps direct assistance with low interest loans. In my view, these alternatives would be more efficient and would also help tenants achieve direct ownership of their homes, again, which I think is a social good, excuse me. I want tenants to become fee simple owners, not just participants in a restrictive multi-party ownership structure that does not really allow for the intergenerational transfer of wealth. For all these reasons and more, I'm not prepared to support former councilmember Harrison's item or direction to the city manager to analyze her version of the item as it stands. I will say, however, that I respect councilmember Luna Paran councilmember tree gubs in Clayton toward additional analysis and iteration for the item and if we were to move forward with anything tonight, I would hope it would be limited to an analysis step. So I'm not be voting to vote for to adopt hope at tonight. And I don't think it makes sense to direct the city manager to set study the former council member specific proposal, I would welcome a revamped version from either council member if they want to bring it back and I think they would very likely do a much better job. So then what we have before us. So thank you very much. Thank you. I'm going to go to council member Taplan who's on Zoom and then we'll go to Councillor Honne's next in the queue. Thank you. I want to thank council members, Chaggit Wyltonapara for their supplemental as well as councilmember Han. I am really curious to learn more about what happened in DC. I'm curious to learn more about SS Copa program, but what I'm most interested in are programs that create direct tenant acquisition and ownership opportunities. So I would ask that we ask staff to look at successful programs that have created direct tenant acquisition and ownership opportunities in comparable cities. And we're turned to council with recommendations for how to implement those kinds of programs in Berkeley. I am also curious, because SF is a county in a city. So I'm wondering what role I'll meet a county might play in a program like this. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Councillor Hahn. Thank you very much and I want to thank everyone who's come here this evening to advocate for something that I think we all believe in. And something that I think we all believe in. And something that I, whose goals I strongly support that we would encourage cooperative housing and that we encourage tenants to become owners and not just encourage, but actually create conditions for that. I think everyone knows that I am a huge advocate for our small sites program and for cooperative land trust based housing. I have worked really hard to get money for affordable housing for all kinds of affordable housing in Berkeley, but in particular have truly thought I would say battled to make sure that our small sites program has enough funding to support a number of projects that our land trust providers have told us they can do in a year. I was surprised to hear people suggest that we haven't paid attention to TOPA. I look back in my inbox and I certainly have been involved in conversations about TOPA since 2021. I've read many versions and I was actually chair of the Land Use Committee when we held hearings on TOPA for months. And I venture to say that I've heard or read probably 2,000 comments on TOTA in my years on council. So for those folks who are joining the conversation, I just want you to be assured that this council has given TOTA a lot of attention and thought. I looked at Washington, DC, and the first thing I did was I just wanted to see what size their budget is as compared to Berkeley. And Washington DC's general fund, only not including all their other funds and capital and expenditures, is $12.7 billion. Our general fund is about half a billion. So I think it gives you a little bit of a sense of scale. They have 36,700 employees. We have less than 2,000. 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 complexity. It's just too many resources for the administration piece. Now, let's also remember the only way these deals get done is if the city has affordable housing money. And right now, the most I was able to eek out was enough money for about two 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. So I have a proposal for us to achieve almost all our topicals, but to do it in a way that is rightsized 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 building through COPA that within a building through COPA that within a certain number of years may be three, that's to be determined, a bonafide offer of going cooperative has to be made. So if you purchase through the COPA program, you actually have to make that offer to the renters in the building to go cooperative and become owners within a certain number of years. I'm also interested in a threshold. 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 for unit, but I'm guessing that it requires a certain scale, maybe eight, maybe 10 units. I'm not sure. But I would like us to have a realistic threshold, not an idealistic one, but a realistic one that reflects what projects were already doing through 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 Berkeley, and also the sources of funds to support the COPA projects, because I don't want to put up an administration for a project we can't fund. And last but not least, I am interested in whether there could be something novel that would provide a right or first refusal for tenants. Should they pull things together and be able to make an offer on a building that goes up for sale, their own building, that they actually have an opportunity to match whatever the market price is that the seller is looking at getting a bonafide 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 topa idea has been kind of knocking around on the on the council level for a long time without analysis. And I'd really like our staff to have the 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 or analysis. For them to look at a potential requirement that the building, that the tenants be offered the opportunity to go co-op within a certain number of years, that staff report to us on a threshold size of building that realistically we could begin applying the COPA program to that they also provide information to us on administration of the program that they think we could do and sources of funds to support it and last but not least to look at a potential right of first refusal for tenants seeking to purchase their own building and that is my motion. Second for the purpose of discussion. Okay, thank you. We're not going to Councillor Loonapara followed by Councillor Moor Barlow. Thank you. First I want to say a huge thank you to staff for taking on the enormous responsibility and commitment associated with this very unique situation. I know that there was 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 rewritten to address the concerns of the community with most of those concerns coming from landlords. I first I want to respectfully push back on Councilmember Humberts comments and highlight East Bay for everyone's support, Ritopa and I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to put it on the right hand side. I'm going to back slightly on the idea that the current proposal is not the right size 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 wanna think the members of the Tobal Working Group who have been working on developing a Berkeley specific Tobpper Copa ordinance for the past nine years. I want to thank endorsers, including the East Bay Community Law Center, the Alameda County Labor Council, Healthy Black Families, the Alameda County Democratic Party and more. I also want to thank District 7 organization specifically. Thank you to the Cal Berkeley Democrats, the Berkeley Student Cooperatives, CalYDSA, and the voice of the entire undergraduate student body, the Associated Students at the University of California, for supporting and advocating for TOPPA. I've spent months working with the TOPPA Working Group to find a way to move this policy forward. Unfortunately, because so much time has passed since its initial introduction, both the policy and conditions surrounding it have changed. And the previous financial and administrative analysis may no longer be accurate. This item requires a more thorough analysis to understand financial implications for the city. I've noted the concerns raised about this policy, particularly regarding staff capacity and administrative costs. And it's 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 it is responsible to put this forward to vote before the policy has an author to answer questions to it. At the urging of the yesterday to talk about coalition, I submitted a supplemental item after conversations with HHCS, the city attorney's office, the city manager and an in affordable housing organizations this item would provide staff with direction so to talk and come back to council with the fuller picture of its potential impacts and I prepared to take to on as a primary author when there is a path for me to do so. I believe that the supplemental before us today gives us an opportunity to evaluate to apply in a responsible procedurally correct manner. And so I would like to make a friendly amendment first to councilmember 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 Taplan had a couple other questions and it'd 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. And I happy to explain. But, uh, and I don't know Council Member Kaplan's, but certainly what you're asking for, I'm going to respectfully decline. Okay. Thank you. Um, can I, is that, can that go to a vote? Can it go to a question, um, to amend the motion to, um, you want to make a motion to amend amend the motion on table. Yes, that is allow a seconder second, 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. Does it clarify the procedure here? Yes, permissible. Any member can make a motion to amend or make a substitute motion. This is a motion to amend. Point of information. I'm not calling the question yet. 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 questions. So when if it were to be amended could I then withdraw my whole 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. We'll learn about Roberts rules of order here. We'll go next to Councillor Barlett. Thank you. And I think everyone that's been working so hard on this through the years, has been subject to many, many, many conversations about Taupa and of course it's wonderful. The idea of tenants owning the buildings, stabilized in the housing market. I first ran my first ran for ops in 2016. I ran on what we now call the Small Sites Initiative. It was an idea to create organic housing that we came up with way back in the day. And so I'm really excited we have that program. It's active. It's doing it. It's in my district happening really nicely. Very excited about it. It took, but you know,. It took it, but interesting, it's, I wanna learn more from someone in DC that worked on it, some staff or the tells us, give us tells how it could work here, what the elements are, really looking forward to 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 authoritative bodies acquire buildings and Berkeley. So maybe there's a way to sort of extend or reach financially. You know, really excited about that. And we'll say for everything, you know, that the key in Berkeley, just like everywhere else, the key to wealth and prosperity is land. It has 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 next generation. And now we are attempting to finally develop the land and let people share in the proceeds of 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 missing middle. I think there's a burly in the missing middle project thesis to allow for some ownership in there. We have dramatically strengthened in protections in our adip-dimension ordinance. Things are strong in the state now. We have the very strong potential for ownership housing at SBBARP, truly affordable home ownership with equity for the tenants and wealth building. And again, this is the neighborhood. This is the city that could the Fair Housing Act. We made it legal to buy houses if you have a different ethnic and general persuasion in California and then the country, when it was adopted by the country. And that was the basis for the Renaissance we talk about that we are harking 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, I can just, there's no other way. So, you know, building on our policies that we already have, like the Open Doors Initiative, the Small Sites Initiative, I'm curious to see what we can develop in terms of deploying our further tools. And I'd love to hear from the city once we, if you'd, if you'd be able to study it, give us some real information so we can see if it works. Because I'm here, I really, the information about T right, D.C. is conflicting, some of my understanding. So I want to learn more from the source and as my points, thank you. Okay, thank you. I'm going to go to those Councillors. I've not spoken and we'll come back to those who have previously. So by smear wing graph, then trade good, then in case they're wanting them myself. Thank you. Well, 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's in the details on this thing. And so I find myself a little confused. And maybe my colleagues can help me. Topa and Copa are two very different programs. Yet this is called topper Copa. So I'm confused. Which is it? What is it? Okay, I don't know. Does anybody, does anybody know? Okay. I'm looking at blank faces up here. Okay, so when the referral from Council Member Lunapara and Council Member Trigger does not deal with the content of the item, it only is purely procedural and does not amend nor introduce new material to the content of the policy. When do we get to talk about 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 as we refer all 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 can throw some of them out. I had a very lovely conversation with the land trust. 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? It's not realistic. And it's going to probably have a negative impact on single-family home rentals. So, what is the reasoning for including single-family homes in this proposal? I'd like to see, you know, as look at different models, five units, ten units, fifteen units, as units, 15 units, is Councilmember Hahn recommended in Maryland that don't look at anything less than 20 units. So maybe that's instructive, but we don't know what we're doing. That's unfortunately, that's the situation that we're in. I have a whole bunch of questions. If we, if this council votes to send it to staff, I'd like to be able to include my questions in that referral. Their content questions. So I'd like. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. Um, Um, Um, their content questions. So I'd like. Actually, the motion to be amended to include content questions. Um, about. On. On. I didn't. Well, you didn't refer to. Just Copa. Okay. So you're only referring. Colpa. Yes Kopa. Okay, so you're only referring Kopa? Yes, okay. But Council member Nunapara is referring Kopa to Pah. 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 pretty risky thing to do. It was that, is that a really amendment? Yes. The purpose of the referral is first off to be able to look at the content and see how it would actually play out in Berkeley. So that makes perfect sense. That's not what the item says. the policy that you do all and does not amend or introduce new material to the content of the policy. Yes, um, are the purposes for staff to be able to look at this at the policy, but as it's written now and determine how it could apply in Berkeley, and then we can amend the content with that information of the content from staff of how it would actually play out in Berkeley. Does that? So, um, yeah, I just- It's procedural because it doesn't change the content itself, but that doesn't mean that the referral can't be complete content. I mean, the content has been revised actually several times. Yeah. And, 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 that may be more practical based on the size of our city, our budget, the resources that we have. I mean, my big basic question is, is this the best way for us to spend resources on housing? We have limited resources. Is this the best way to do it? And I would like some analysis of that. So, especially with the adding the amendment to Councillor Mahon's motion, I think that's the point. I think that's the point. Especially with the adding the amendment to comes from our Hans motion. I think the goal is to have several options for the city to adopt. And then when that comes back to us, we can decide which of those options. We'll be the best for the city. So I think that I think we're on the same page here. And it's a matter of. Of minor misunderstandings. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if that's the right. I'm not sure if you. I first wanted to actually see if Council member Luna Power would be amenable to withdrawing for amendment and seconding a substitute motion, which would be to refer a community slash tenant opportunity to purchase act to the city manager to conduct an analysis of the fiscal operational administrative impact of the policy. The referral will include analysis of the San Francisco co-pub program and other known co-past slash topop programs that exist or are in development. I'm of zero the process. As well as a review of any comparable tenant acquisition and ownership programs in 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 amendment and second your substitute motion. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And if that fails, then we will vote on council member Hans motion. Just to clarify, you're still seconding the Han motion to right anything's possible. Councilor Trigger, we saw the floor. Correct. The emotions, the Han motions, sub-sews now is to refer the Topa Copa to staff of the analysis, right? Yes. Moved by Trigger, seconded by Lutipar. Yes. Plus what? Most of the penopole a little par. Yes. Plus what? Most monopoly of potential solutions. Yes, plus the monopoly of potential solutions. OK, so we'll clarify this before we vote. But does that reflect some ocean? OK. Yes. And the floor still. Yes, so I'm going to be brief. A lot of things have been said. I've been following this policy as it has wound. Through its way through the city council on multiple occasions now and at the end of the day, you know, and I agree with the Vice Mayor. It is important for staff to study the operational and administrative implications of any policy that we pass. That is why I signed on to Council Member Luna Powers' item to begin with. And I really applaud our 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 a lot of questions, there are questions about the cost, there are questions about what are the going to be the cost for benefits of this. I can tell you that I got interested in TOPA after as a Wentport Commissioner I stood with other council, other Wentport Commissioners and some members of the City Council, particularly Council member Han 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 Council Member Hanin particular and many others on the council, certainly the mayor. Toglams 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 call 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 toolbox. And I think if I'm honest with myself and I ran on studying things and using an evidence-based approach, let's study the evidence. Staff, are you available to provide resources? Should this be required to study this policy? We certainly would, although I will say we have three policy housing staff in HCS. One of those positions is vacant. The other ones on a long term and I'm not trying to go for, I mean, I would love fast, but I would actually prefer a throw and I know that given everything on your plate, I understand that this needs to be prioritized. Maybe behind some other items, you're already 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, you know, a lot of, a lot of information that has been previously provided when it was introduced last year has changed. And so 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. Councillor Kessor Wani, 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. Actually held a one hour forum with Council Member Wengraff 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, 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 to acquire a building to ensure that if there are low income tenants in that building, they will not be displaced. That 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. So I don't understand why we need to have this only one staff person at HHS 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. So 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 tap and then on after. 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 to a board and some Berkeley, we were unsuccessful. And I do agree with Councilman Hahn that to compare Washington, D.C.'s ordinance to Berkeley, it's not an app 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 to apply acquisitions as the 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, some Prop 5 so we can actually pass housing bonds at a 55% threshold and get the money to help support acquisition preservation and construction and 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 for a housing bond from the Bay Area ballot arm for this year. So our housing trust fund dollars, we have an extensive discussion about this when we passed the budget in June, or nearly tapped out, we made a $10 million investment, the biggest investment we ever made to the small sites program, which I created, the small sites program. That's going to fund two projects. So I fully support, you know, make 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 to acquisitions and to support our nonprofit partners to make sure that they have the capacity to deliver on these projects. And 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 of the Harrison ordinance. City Attorney's Office, HACS. And so there are elements of this, if there is something that was for 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 gonna pass tonight because we are trying to find a way to write sizes 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 that 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, 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. So I'll send out a proper to owners who also are encumbered by these extensive delays in the cell 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 honn motion is appropriate. Let's move forward with the copapolicy. 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 COPAPOLICY, which San Francisco has had on the books for a number of years, and also other jurisdictions as well, makes 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 copapolicy, 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 this is going to work, given the resources that we have currently. So I fully support the light of tenants to have a light of first offer and to get notice about when a property goes on the market. But we have to, 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 resources 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 hon motion with the understanding that, you know, 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 is ready to pass the Harrison ordinance. I tried for six, seven years to move something forward. We weren't able to do it. And, and clearly more work is needed. More analysis is needed. And so for that reason, I'll support the, the main motion. Council member Tappel. Thank you very much. I just want to say that I think the things the Tregoob Substitute Motion is calling for, most 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 HHS, HHS staffer. If I'm not mistaken, HHS overseas on the neighborhood preference policy, the age friendly age-friendly Berkeley plan, it's a conglomerate department. And if we're gonna ask staff to study things, I wanna make sure that we're prioritizing those things that are gonna be most realistic and right sized for Berkeley. That being said, as I said in my first round, I am strongly interested in programs that create actual acquisition ownership opportunities. And I'm wondering if Councilor Rahan would be amenable to a friendly amendment to include in her motion that we ask staff to see if there are any such programs and comparable cities in California. Programs conferred that to what? Programs that have successfully created pathways for direct tenant acquisition and ownership on a comparable to Berkeley. I'm a co-verbal suburb. So yes, I mean to study to see what other communities have have been successful with absolutely. I will add that. Thank you so much. But I need to check with my seconder who 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. Okay, I'm going. I will try to translate that into emotion. I'm writing it up so you will have a chance to see the language. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, and before we go on, 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, no, no, no. No, no. When something's put on the market for acquisition, there's no legal requirement that they have to get noticed. Yes, I would happily accept that. Trigger. Yes, okay. Councillor on your next. 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 as New York Council members coming in, I would say maybe 90% through this conversation that we've been having for a long time here on council. It 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 hearings. We held hearings that were like three, four 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 thin we 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 road 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 Tocca. 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, in 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, with a genuine desire to focus our staff on what I believe after my numerous years, my last years, they are for sure, but numerous years looking at this, but 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 budget reform, 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 we worked on. So maybe I could ask the city manager, Mr. Booten-Hagen, do you think 100 or 150,000 can be an up to number? What number would I put in here that's realistic? I asked to get some help and move the study. A hundred would be sufficient, I'd say. A hundred? Okay, so. I'll also say, you know, we still have to go through a process to bring that personal. And 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 voting 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 I am now to remember Trega, would you add a budget for 100,000 dollars? Intusiastically. OK. So that 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 go up 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, to consider the potential to require a 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 of first refusal. Is there someone who can nod? That is correct. Yes. What are right of first refusal. Is there someone who can nod? That is correct. Yes. What are right of first refusal? So right of first refusal for tenants or groups of tenants. And then I want to make sure I captured yours, Council Member Taplin. Look at what other jurisdictions are doing. Is that correct? Councilmember Taplin? I'm doing to achieve these goals. Okay. Okay. And then finally, referring $100,000 to the budget process to support study, 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 wanna address my comments to the students at the COA. 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 movement. And those pre-war apartment buildings still are owned cooperatively. So, but Tope 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. So that's one of the reasons why I'm opposed to it. If this were truly about ten-inch opportunity to purchase, your name would be on the title and you would have equity. What Ritope is doing is just transferring one ownership to another ownership, one landlord to another landlord. And my understanding is that when you do a land trust purchase in Dutopia, you lose the benefits of rent control. And your unit is no longer covered by rent control. So it may be de-restricted to a certain income level, but that may not translate into the protections that you have under rent control. So I just wanted to say that because I feel like there's a lot of misinformation out there about what to actually is. So I don't know. I'm having a hard time following doing this motion on the dius and it keeps changing. So if you could type it up and share screen. Mayor, I shared it with you. I'm not on the zoom. Yeah, let's clean you that before. Do we need to do that right now? She was asking. No, I'm finished. Okay. This we have to restate the motions for the vote. Councillor Bartlett. I think you're just curious from the author of the the customer on your emotions. So in your in your conception that the seven study. After acquisition by the organization of the property within a certain amount of years, they they're supposed to transfer it to the tenants and some, a tenant cooperative model or some sort of joint tenancy ownership. Yeah. That's a great issue. The campus is goes COPA. Let me just pull it up. I have it explicitly says that after purchased by the 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 purchase is 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 race hands or people on the queue. So is there anyone else wishing to speak? Okay. Why don't we first, why don't we first ask the clerk to summarize the trigger of motion? Yes, and 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 of 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 corporate to a policy to the city manager to conduct an analysis of the fiscal operational administrative impact of the policy. The FOIA 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 work week tenant protection ordinances before $100,000 to staff on 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. This is my intent was to afford the concept as a starting point, but I want to ask the best if I will limit it to the have a thin item, but we can revise it. Yeah. That's helpful. Just get clarification. Thank you. I want, I didn't understand what that, what you were referring. So, that's helpful for me to know as I consider how I'm going to vote on it. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. helpful to just get clarification. Thank you. 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're going to Councillor Hahn. Wanna present your motion? Mayor, 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 working. 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 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. Yeah, something to think about. Another great idea, but I think I'll have to add 100,000 of that. Okay, so thank you Mayor. I'm referred to the city manager to study and return to council with recommendations for a program based on San Francisco's COPA and to study additional concepts, including that are limited to a potential requirement to offer to go co-op our 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 to support small sites projects which is what COPA projects would be called and 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 a hundred thousand dollars to the budget process to support the study Yes So once clear now on what the motions are. And so let's not proceed to a vote on the subsequent motion. The Trigger will not power motion. Okay. Council member Kessar Wani. No. Taplyn. No. Bartlett. Yes. Tr one. No. Bartlett. Yes. Trigger. I. On. No. When graph. No. Loonopara. Yes. Comber. No. Mayor Ergie. No. Okay. Okay. On the main motion. The hot motion. That's right. The main motion. Councilmember Kess That's right. The motion. Council member Kess Arwani. No. Tapplin. Yes. Bartlett. Yes. Trayga. I. Hon. Yes. When graph. No. Luna. Pa. Yes. Umber. No. And Mayor Errigan. Yes. Okay. That motion carries. Okay. That completes our business for the seeding. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no just kidding. Hi, you can say if you want on Yes, when grab Bonapara yes, umbert. Yes, and Mary. Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you by smare windrop for cheering in my absence We are during thank you Recording stopped.