Berkeley council launches public-safety overhaul but rejects immediate 50% defund motion

The Berkeley City Council voted late Tuesday to send a consolidated, multi‑part plan to staff for a data‑driven reimagining of public safety while declining a standalone motion to slash the police budget by half immediately. The package approved by the council bundles audits of 911/call responses and police spending, pilot programs to expand non‑police crisis response, and work toward a new Department of Transportation to remove traffic enforcement from armed officers.

The council’s omnibus referral will fund an expanded audit of police calls, budget line items and expenditures to identify which police functions could be reassigned; it also directs staff to stand up community‑centered pilot programs and develop timelines tied to upcoming budget cycles. Mayor (role) said the aim is to “innovate” and produce options that can be implemented in phases, tied to the city’s budget calendar so dollars can be reallocated as alternatives are ready.

Why it matters: Public testimony at the meeting was dominated by hundreds of callers representing every city district who urged decisive action after nationwide protests and local complaints about racial disparities in stop, search and use‑of‑force data. Many speakers asked for an immediate and large reallocation of general‑fund dollars — particularly Councilmember Cheryl Davila’s draft measure calling for a 50% reduction in the Berkeley Police Department budget and commensurate reinvestment in mental‑health services, housing and community programs. That motion was moved and seconded, but it failed to win a majority vote.

What supporters said: Dozens of callers and community groups pressed the council to move quickly. Will Skinner, a District 2 resident, urged the council to “be brave” and fund non‑police responses to mental health crises; others described personal experiences with coercive police responses or racial profiling. Several nonprofit and neighborhood organizations, along with labor and student groups, submitted written support for a large reallocation of police funds and for transferring traffic enforcement to a non‑armed DOT.

What opponents said: Speakers who opposed an immediate 50% cut warned of unintended public‑safety consequences and urged a careful implementation plan. A few residents and business representatives said the police department’s training and de‑escalation work had value and cautioned that several municipal functions are currently covered by officers during nights and weekends because other departments lack after‑hours capacity.

Council action and votes: Councilmember Davila’s motion to adopt her full 50% cut and reallocation language was seconded but failed to pass. The mayor’s omnibus motion — which incorporated elements of multiple councilmembers’ proposals, added a clarified auditor scope and set timelines tied to the next budget cycles for measures and pilot funding — passed by majority vote. The council also adopted related steps to ensure community representation in the reimagining process and to begin audits and pilots that could support eventual budget transfers.

What happens next: Staff were directed to proceed with the audit of call types, costs and police expenditures; to work with community stakeholders to develop pilot non‑police crisis response teams; and to report back with detailed recommendations timed to the city’s budget calendar (November, April or June cycles, depending on readiness). The motion also asks that settlements and police liability exposures be reviewed and considered as part of any plan to reduce reliance on general‑fund payouts.

Who spoke: Public testimony included hundreds of residents and representatives of groups such as the Racism & Criminal Justice Reform Coalition, the Berkeley Farmers Market, Walk Bike Berkeley and others. City staff who briefed the council included the City Auditor and City Manager. Councilmembers who voted for the omnibus referral emphasized both the need for urgency and for a rigorous, accountable process; several councilmembers said they supported substantial reallocation but raised questions about how quickly and by what mechanism reductions should occur.

The next step: The council’s referral sets a process in motion rather than final dollar shifts. Staff are to return with audit findings, pilot results and staged recommendations tied to budget cycles so elected officials can make clear, accountable reallocations in future budget decisions.