The Berkeley City Council passed a resolution to continue its process of renaming city locations, events and holidays named after activist Cesar Chavez at its regular meeting Tuesday.
In addition, it amended guidelines in the landmarking process in an effort to halt development by preventing citizens from initiating landmarking. It also passed items that would facilitate the development of lower-cost ownership homes.
Renaming Cesar Chavez institutions and holidays
The council passed a resolution that will identify a process to rename any locations, events and holidays in the city of Berkeley that are named after Cesar Chavez.
Why it matters: After recent allegations of sexual misconduct against the labor activist, institutions across Berkeley have begun to rename their landmarks and holidays in honor of the legacy of organized labor and farmworkers more broadly.
“I believe (the resolution) creates a path for thoughtful community engagement while ensuring that we continue to honor the legacy of farmworkers and their essential contributions,” said District 4 Councilmember Igor Tregub.
Raising the threshold for citizen-initiated landmarking
The council meeting saw back-and-forth deliberations and concerns voiced by public commenters and Denise Hall Montgomery, the chair of the Landmarks Preservation Commission. Afterward, the council voted unanimously — with an abstention by Tregub — to raise the number of citizen petition signatures needed to start a landmarking process from 50 to 200.
Why it matters: This item makes it increasingly difficult for community members to initiate the process of establishing a landmark through petitioning. Brought to the council by the city manager, this measure was put in place to combat the practice of using the landmarking process to prevent development.
According to District 1 Councilmember Rashi Kesarwani, one-third of the landmark applications from citizen petitions that the council has received in recent years have been the result of housing development applications.
“I think these are overdue reforms to help prevent abuse of the landmarking process, encourage housing development and help conserve city resources,” said District 8 Councilmember Mark Humbert. “There have been multiple recent instances where landmark initiations have come before the council (but) I believe the most basic criteria for a landmark were not met. And it was clear that the initiations only took place as a response to proposed housing development.”
Including condo development under the density bonus program
The council voted to refer to the city manager to develop a local density bonus that is meant to reduce the cost of providing affordable housing. Modeled after the state density bonus, the resolution aims to incentivize condominium development.
Why it matters: The new density bonus would allow developers to pay an affordable housing fee to Berkeley’s Housing Trust Fund in order to facilitate the construction of lower-cost ownership homes, such as condominiums.
More than a dozen public commenters expressed disagreement and concern about the fee, which would allow developers to bypass the city’s affordable housing regulations.
“We love the students, but we need economic diversity in the downtown,” said Downtown Berkeley Association CEO John Caner, who is in support of the item. “We need to support our district. We need to support our restaurants and shops.”