Three of the burglaries happened on Fourth Street, at Oceanview Diner, Kiehl's and iScream, authorities said.

One happened at Casa Latina on San Pablo Avenue.

Two others happened in the Southside neighborhood, at Kingpin Donuts on Durant Avenue and Hashtag Poki on Telegraph Avenue.

"Got hit at 3AM 🤒 Happy Halloween I guess!" Hashtag Poki wrote on Instagram.

Berkeley police said the burglars smashed windows at each of the shops and stole their cash drawers — which typically contain little cash.

Authorities are looking into whether the incidents, which took place early Sunday morning, are related.

Readers also reported several Albany businesses also hit.

This story will be updated as additional details become available.

As of Sunday night, Alameda County had issued 983,060 ballots, with 25% returned. Berkeley had 76,272 issued ballots, with 30% returned.

On Tuesday, Berkeley voters will decide on four City Council races and seven city ballot measures.

Polls close at 8 p.m. Nov. 3, with the first election results expected in the hours that follow. Here's the list of Berkeley vote centers and ballot drop-off locations.

Berkeley election results: Key reminders

• Ranked-choice voting: Any race without a majority vote results in an instant run-off where candidates are eliminated from the bottom. Votes are redistributed until one candidate has a majority. Those results take longer to come in. Learn more about ranked-choice voting on the county website.
• Don't be confused by "precincts reported" language in county results; it does not indicate how much of the total vote has been tallied.

Click the links below to jump to results for each race once they're posted.

• City Council District 1 (Northwest Berkeley)
• City Council District 4 (Downtown Berkeley)
• City Council District 7 (Southside Berkeley)
• City Council District 8 (Claremont-Elmwood)
• Berkeley ballot measures

City Council District 1 results (Northwest Berkeley)

Five candidates are competing for the open D1 seat. As of Sunday night, 32% of District 1's ballots had been returned.

In 2022, 6,625 votes were cast in the District 1 council race, with Rashi Kesarwani taking 53% after a ranked-choice contest. That year, just 420 ballots were cast in person on Election Day.

City Council District 4 results (Downtown Berkeley)

Majdi Gaith and incumbent Igor Tregub are vying for the District 4 seat. As of Sunday night, 25% of District 4's ballots had been returned.

In 2022, 3,049 votes were cast in the uncontested District 4 council race, with 466 ballots cast on Election Day. A special election for the downtown seat in May 2024 saw 2,335 ballots cast, with Tregub taking 51% after a ranked-choice contest.

City Council District 7 results (Southside Berkeley)

Aidan Hill and Syrak Micael are looking to claim the open District 7 seat. As of Sunday night, 8% of District 7's ballots had been returned.

In 2022, 691 votes were cast in the uncontested District 7 council race, with 490 ballots cast on Election Day. A special election for the Southside seat in April 2024 saw 488 votes cast, with Cecilia Lunaparra taking 60% of the vote.

City Council District 8 results (Claremont-Elmwood)

Three candidates are battling over the D8 seat: incumbent Mark Humbert and challengers Michael Wallman and Mari Mendonca, who have teamed up to unseat him. As of Sunday night, 31% of District 8's ballots had been returned.

In 2022, 5,176 votes were cast in the District 8 council race, with 479 ballots cast on Election Day. Humbert won 64% of the vote.

2026 Berkeley ballot measure results

Unless otherwise noted, a simple majority is needed for approval.

In 2022, about 44,000 votes were cast on each Berkeley ballot measure, with about 47,000 ballots cast in the city overall.

Find more Alameda County election results online.

At a Sept. 28 election forum hosted by the League of Women Voters of Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville, the candidates described how they would approach northwest Berkeley's pressing issues.

The District 1 race is the city's most crowded council contest, with five candidates vying to replace outgoing Councilwoman Rashi Kesarwani.

Under her leadership since 2018, District 1 has been a reliable vote for the City Council's more moderate wing, which has supported police funding and tools, stricter enforcement of homeless encampment rules and the decision not to call for a ceasefire in Gaza last year.

The five candidates, in ballot order, are Steve Kromer, Daria Wrubel, Laura Babitt, Ross Bernet and Moni Gangopadhyay.

Flock cameras: Privacy violation or critical tool?

One of the starkest divisions at the forum emerged over Berkeley's contract with Flock Safety, the vendor Berkeley police use to access license plate data.

The Berkeley City Council extended the Flock contract in May but its future in the city remains uncertain.

Gangopadhyay took the broadest stance against surveillance, arguing that it provides too many opportunities for abuse.

"It is a violation of our civil rights. And we've all read 1984, right?" she said.

She said community members had made clear their "overwhelming objection" to Flock, and surveillance as a whole, the night council voted on the Flock contract.

"I don't think that even a closed system is safe because the federal government can secretly subpoena that data and we would never know," Gangopadhyay said.

Wrubel, who has made opposition to mass surveillance a centerpiece of her campaign, said she would not only have voted against Flock but also removed Berkeley's existing cameras.

She said she would consider license plate readers only if the data remained on city servers accessed solely with a judicial warrant.

Bernet and Kromer were more receptive to license plate readers, while acknowledging concerns about Flock.

Bernet said Berkeley officials had taken the right approach by slowing down the process to expand surveillance technologies, seeking proposals from interested vendors.

He called for a "nuanced take" with appropriate data and privacy safeguards in any city contract.

"I think these cameras work, and I think that's why they've expanded so rapidly," he said.

Kromer similarly distinguished between the technology and the city's procurement process, saying he wanted to evaluate the available options and consult experts.

"I'm not particularly worried about the technology," he said, adding: "You got to break up the problem, think about it separately: the technology, how it's applied — license plate readers, red light readers, contracts — and use balance."

Babitt criticized Flock's record and said Berkeley should not expand its relationship with the company.

"There are cities all over this country that are divesting specifically from Flock. To me, it shouldn't have even been a question or a debate," she said.

She left open the possibility of working with another provider, but said she'd have to be convinced.

"Crime is down," Babitt said. "There's no correlation that it's because of license plate readers."

Berkeley police have said Flock is a critical part of their work in terms of solving crimes and building strong cases for prosecution, particularly amid a years-long staffing crisis that has hurt morale and hampered their efforts.

D1 candidates split on public safety

The candidates' positions on surveillance reflect broader disagreements about public safety, even as Berkeley faces difficult decisions about police staffing and spending.

In his campaign platform, Bernet explicitly supports providing police with the resources to respond to violent crime, alongside civilian oversight, community policing and alternative emergency response programs.

"Every family in District 1 deserves to feel safe at home, walking to school, or out in their neighborhood at night," he wrote.

Kromer alone identified public safety as one of the city's biggest challenges in response to questions posed by The Scanner.

"Berkeley needs to accept that it's the city's role to provide order," he wrote in his candidate Q&A, while also expressing support for accountability for police technology and spending.

Babitt has expressed support for "effective police, fire, and emergency response," without going into detail, while also giving weight to civil liberties concerns.

To that end, unlike Bernet and Kromer, she has been more circumspect about license plate readers, suggesting that her support for law enforcement may not translate into support for the tools police say they need.

Bernet — Kesarwani's chosen successor — has been endorsed by the Berkeley Police Association and was the firefighter union's second choice, behind Babitt.

Gangopadhyay, the pick for progressive coalition Flip the Berkeley City Council, has called for a stronger Police Accountability Board with more input into city policies and a continued ban on tear gas for Berkeley police.

At a Flip the Berkeley City Council event in August, she advocated for alternatives to traditional policing, including sending mental health professionals to certain calls instead of officers, and opposed police "tools of force," such as helicopters and dogs.

"They haven't been working and are costing our city money," she said. "I am completely against that."

Wrubel, meanwhile, explained at the same event that she had entered the race partly because of Kesarwani's stance on policing, after she "started making proposals for expanded police powers and quadrupling mass surveillance budgets."

(Kesarwani never introduced a proposal related to mass surveillance.)

Wrubel continued: "I decided that was the place where I could contribute, where I could stand against authoritarian overreach, against collaboration with that kind of regime, and I could make a positive difference for my community."

Asked why Berkeley still lacks a 24/7 alternative to police emergency response, Wrubel pointed to the budget.

"Everything that costs money requires sacrifice and they didn't want to make the sacrifice," she said.

Exclusive: Rashi Kesarwani will not seek re-election

In a deep-dive interview with The Scanner, she looked back at her nearly eight years as the Berkeley City Council member for District 1.

The Berkeley ScannerEmilie Raguso

Homeless encampments expose another divide

At the League of Women Voters forum, the candidates also differed over how Berkeley should address homeless encampments in District 1.

Babitt argued that the city's approach had failed both unhoused residents and surrounding neighborhoods.

"We do need a no camping ordinance on our streets," she said, adding that many people had been offered homes but refused them "because they would actually prefer to be on the sidewalks."

Babitt also emphasized the need for mental health care, substance use treatment and transitional housing, and said she would work to secure more state funding to support expanded services.

"We know that it's going to take deeper pockets than Berkeley has," Babitt said.

Wrubel pushed back on the idea that unhoused people prefer to remain outside, saying shelter offers often come with curfews, and restrictions on pets and belongings.

Wrubel said it would be important to ask unhoused individuals what they would need to go inside.

"I don't actually believe that people prefer to live on the street," she said. "I really worry a lot about a camping ban criminalizing homelessness. Jailing people is not a solution."

Gangopadhyay also emphasized the need to "listen and acknowledge and be informed" by unhoused residents themselves.

"I have talked to people in the encampments. I think that's very important to talk to the people who are going to be affected," she said.

Bernet called for a "kind, compassionate, and firm approach" that would prevent encampments from getting started in the first place. He stressed the need to expand housing opportunities and tackle the issue regionally in coordination with Alameda County.

Kromer, meanwhile, said homelessness was too complicated to address in a one-minute answer. He emphasized the legal complexity and the need to balance competing rights, particularly with ongoing federal litigation impacting how Berkeley approaches its rules around encampments.

Hopkins bike lanes raise questions

The controversial Hopkins Street bicycle lane project produced another clear split.

Wrubel supported moving forward with the plan — but only if the city could address "ADA accessibility, loading zones for the businesses and maintaining as many parking spaces as possible in the commercial zone."

She said she was concerned about how "divisive" the issue had become in Berkeley.

"It's really become a stand-in for a generational struggle between older residents who feel like they're being disregarded and neglected and younger residents who feel like they're also being vilified in some way."

Bernet was the staunchest supporter of the bike lanes, saying Berkeley needs streets where families can safely travel without cars.

He said he agreed with Wrubel, however, that the issue had "become bigger" than the bike lanes themselves.

"Infrastructure improvement is scary," Bernet said. "And then when it happens, life goes on, and it's even better than before. I feel very confident the shops will be just fine if we figure out curb management to ensure folks that can't drive or can't bike can still drive there."

Babitt questioned whether the proposed design would actually improve safety, citing driveways, intersections, emergency access and parking losses.

She said she would have supported an alternative proposal calling for more analysis rather than proceeding with the council vote in July.

"I was surprised when I learned how little information council had when they made that decision," Babitt said. "I don't see that as a safe solution."

Gangopadhyay was even more pointed, calling the vote "irresponsible and not good governance." She agreed with the need for more analysis, particularly by first responders.

"It's not necessarily safer and it removes accessibility to the majority of Hopkins users," said Gangopadhyay.

Kromer focused less on the merits of the bike lanes than on what he saw as a "flawed process."

"Having a meeting the last week before summer break that didn't have all the facts left us in this disarray that — everyone's nodding to that, right? The process was broken," he said.

"I'd first and foremost want to bring all the facts to the table," he said. "Those things were not done, and that's the main thing I'm worried about here."

Election Day is Nov. 3. Read more election coverage on TBS.

Watch the full District 1 Berkeley City Council candidate forum

Learn more about Berkeley's District 1 candidates

Who is running for Berkeley City Council District 1?

We posed a dozen questions to all five candidates running for the District 1 (northwest Berkeley) City Council in November 2026.

The Berkeley ScannerEmilie Raguso

Incumbent Mark Humbert defended the city's use of automated license plate readers and called for increased police staffing, while challengers Mari Mendonca and Michael Wallman questioned the need for surveillance technology and some police equipment.

Wallman and Mendonca, part of a progressive coalition running to "Flip the Berkeley City Council," have joined forces in the race, encouraging voters to rank them first and second under Berkeley's ranked-choice voting system.

On his campaign website, Wallman asks supporters to rank him first and Mendonca second, leaving the remaining candidates unranked. The two have also endorsed each other, with Wallman praising Mendonca's "unrelenting commitment and dedication to Berkeley and its people."

Former candidate Fred Feller, who suspended his campaign but remains on the ballot, has endorsed Wallman and encouraged his supporters to rank Mendonca second.

Under ranked-choice voting, voters' second choices are counted if their first-choice candidate is eliminated. The arrangement could help either challenger consolidate support against Humbert if the other is eliminated.

During the Sept. 30 forum hosted by the League of Women Voters of Berkeley, Albany and Emeryville, the candidates clashed over plans to allow taller, denser housing developments along College Avenue and other commercial corridors, with Humbert defending his approach and both challengers raising concerns about the impact on neighborhood businesses.

District 8 candidates divided on Flock

One of the clearest differences emerged when candidates were asked whether they would support renewing Berkeley's contract for automated license plate readers, currently provided by Flock Safety.

Mendonca said the community had spoken "loud and clear" against renewing the contract and questioned whether the city could adequately protect data collected by the cameras.

She also raised concerns about data access through the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center and called for further scrutiny before any new agreement.

Wallman took an even stronger position against surveillance technology.

"Mass surveillance is very concerning to me, and honestly I don't want to live in a country that has mass surveillance everywhere," he said.

He said there was "probably … some short-term gain in terms of petty crime, but there's a huge danger in AI technologies with mass surveillance" with systems like Flock.

He described a future in which cameras could be combined with facial recognition, microphones and other data to track people's movements and activities, and raised concerns about criminals gaining access to the data.

Humbert countered that the cameras had helped local police investigate serious crimes, including murders, rapes and assaults.

"They have actually improved safety in District 8 and in Berkeley generally," he said.

Humbert, who voted for the most recent Flock contract extension, acknowledged ongoing civil liberties concerns but said any future contract should allow Berkeley to terminate the agreement over improper data handling.

"The question's open," he said, noting that the city was awaiting proposals from potential vendors.

Different approaches to police staffing and equipment

The candidates also disagreed over police staffing and the use of drones, tear gas, police dogs and helicopters.

Humbert said he favored increasing police staffing and providing officers with the equipment they need, subject to oversight by the City Council and Berkeley's Police Accountability Board.

He praised the department's leadership as progressive and expressed confidence in its ability to use technology responsibly.

"I'm going to give them the tools that they need," Humbert said. "I want to give them the technology that they need to keep us safe."

Mendonca — who called previously for a 50% cut to the police budget —  questioned whether Berkeley's crime problems justified such equipment.

"We don't currently have a crime situation where we need all of these tools," she said.

She described seeing a large police response to "one young man with a backpack" and said it raised questions about how police resources were being deployed.

Mendonca also criticized the treatment of Berkeley's former police oversight director, who was terminated by the city, and said the Police Accountability Board had been "hindered" in carrying out its work.

Wallman said he was "certainly against" the use of drones, tear gas, police dogs and helicopters in Berkeley.

"I walk around Berkeley all the time," he said. "I never have a sense of fear per se. And my kids wander the streets freely. And so I have confidence that this isn't a horrific, dangerous place."

(Under current policy, Berkeley police can use drones, dogs and helicopters from other agencies, but tear gas is banned.)

Wallman expressed concern about police vacancies and suggested reducing overtime spending to increase salaries and recruit more officers. Berkeley police, however, have long relied on overtime to maintain minimum patrol staffing amid persistent officer shortages.

Wallman also questioned the city's spending priorities, pointing to proposed spending on surveillance technology and bicycle infrastructure while services for people experiencing homelessness and mental health challenges face cuts.

Upzoning sparks disagreement

Housing development was another major point of contention, particularly the city's plans to allow additional density along College Avenue and other commercial corridors.

The city has pursued those plans in line with its Housing Element, which was unanimously approved by the City Council.

State law requires cities to plan for their housing needs and take steps to affirmatively further fair housing, including addressing historic patterns of segregation and expanding housing opportunities in higher-income neighborhoods.

Humbert's support for the plan has drawn criticism from many constituents, even though a vote against the Housing Element would not have changed the outcome given the support of the other eight council members.

During the forum, he explained that he had developed a more "tailored" zoning approach focused on specific parcels, rather than the blanket upzoning originally proposed by city staff.

He noted that the Planning Commission had accepted his proposal, which is expected to come to council for a vote before the end of the year.

Wallman flatly opposed the proposed upzoning in the Elmwood, North Shattuck and Solano Avenue districts, arguing that state density bonus laws already provide opportunities to build additional housing.

He questioned how the corridor upzoning proposal had been introduced and criticized the prospect of seven-story buildings in established commercial neighborhoods.

"I don't feel it's appropriate to destroy some of our historic districts," he said.

Mendonca also criticized the city's approach, arguing that new market-rate housing does not necessarily address Berkeley's affordability needs.

"We have people who are cashing in on the fact that we have this need for housing, but the affordability thing is still the struggle that we're capturing, and it has to do with predatory capitalism," she said.

"We need to focus on affordable housing and stop the massive upzoning everywhere in Berkeley," she said.

In their questionnaires for The Berkeley Scanner, the candidates offered additional context on their housing positions.

Humbert advocated continued housing construction to address affordability and strengthen city finances. Wallman proposed adding housing through accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes and other smaller-scale developments. Mendonca called for challenging existing density bonus policies and protecting neighborhood businesses.

Candidates split on city taxes

The candidates also differed over measures U and V, which would provide funding for city infrastructure and services.

Measure U, which requires a two-thirds vote, would authorize $300 million in general obligation bonds to fund fire stations, emergency response facilities, parks and other public infrastructure, including climate resilience improvements.

Measure V would increase Berkeley's sales tax by half a percentage point, to 10.75%, generating an estimated $9 million to $10 million annually for the city's general fund. The money could support police, fire, 911 dispatch and other city services but would not be restricted to those purposes.

Humbert said he supported both measures, adding that the city needed additional revenue to maintain infrastructure and preserve police and firefighter staffing.

Mendonca and Wallman opposed both measures, arguing that Berkeley should more closely examine its spending priorities before asking residents to pay more.

"Although it has lofty visions, and it's saying it's for certain things, it's not actually earmarked," Mendonca said of Measure V. Of Measure U, she added: "It's a very big price tag for another kind of open-ended check."

Wallman particularly objected to warnings that the city could lose firefighters without additional tax revenue.

"When you dangle things like, 'Oh, if we don't raise taxes, you're gonna lose your fire department,' that's terribly upsetting to me, particularly when we're in this climate crisis," he said.

All three candidates are participating in Berkeley's public campaign financing program.

Election Day is Nov. 3. Read more election coverage on TBS.

Watch the full District 8 Berkeley City Council candidate forum

Learn more about Berkeley's District 8 candidates

Who is running for Berkeley City Council District 8?

We posed a dozen questions to the candidates running for the Berkeley City Council District 8 (Claremont/Elmwood) seat in November 2026.

The Berkeley ScannerEmilie Raguso

Police say suspect Ashley Frankum, 38, pointed what looked like a handgun and demanded the woman's keys during the carjacking attempt at about 3:30 p.m.

Frankum had been loitering at the Chevron station at 1300 San Pablo Ave. (at Gilman Street) before the crime, authorities said.

The victim, a woman in her 40s, was able to run to safety. The suspect also fled the scene, according to police.

After getting a 911 call, Berkeley officers swarmed the area and found Frankum a few blocks away at Eighth and Harrison streets.

Multiple witnesses identified her as the suspect, police said.

During the investigation, police said they recovered the weapon Frankum used, which turned out to be a realistic-looking BB gun.

Where are the artists now? - Street Spirit

Some are housed while others are living in a motel. One remains outside.

Street SpiritAlastair Boone

Thursday wasn't Frankum's first arrest. Localcrimenews.com arrest reports linked to her go back to 2015.

According to Alameda County court records, Frankum was charged in three separate felony cases in 2024, one of which put her on probation through June 2028.

Charges in those cases included burglary, auto burglary, criminal threats and several counts of felony vandalism, records show.

One of the cases initially resulted in a drug diversion program, but it was terminated several months later, according to court records.

Frankum also has a conviction, from 2015, for assault with a deadly weapon likely to cause great bodily injury, according to court records.

She is being held at Berkeley Jail on $200,000 bail and is set for arraignment Tuesday.

Robberies are down about 8% in Berkeley this year, with 136 incidents reported through Oct. 24, according to preliminary BPD data.

The differences between Councilman Igor Tregub and Majdi Gaith Abuhamdieh were on display during a Sept. 28 League of Women Voters forum, where they addressed downtown vacancies, public safety and city finances, among other subjects.

Gaith, a Palestinian American and co-founder of Jaffa Coffee Roasters, repeatedly criticized Tregub's record, accusing him of favoring developers and corporations over residents and small businesses.

Tregub, who narrowly won office in a special election in 2024 after decades of public service, defended his accomplishments and emphasized his ability to deliver results.

Tregub has endorsements from Mayor Adena Ishii, state Sen. Jesse Arreguín, the local Sierra Club, organized labor and many other elected officials.

Gaith has support from Our Revolution East Bay, the Alameda County Green Party, the progressive group Flip the Berkeley City Council and former Berkeley council members Cheryl Davila and Kriss Worthington, among others.

On public accountability

Gaith said he would work to ensure more community voices are heard and urged current city leaders to "take note."

He described himself as a "disgruntled District 4 resident where I found my voice not being listened to," and said many of his coffee shop customers felt the same.

"People tell me: 'I go to City Council meetings, I complain to them about Flock. I bring up the worries about Hopkins, the ceasefire resolution,' which my opponent did not support," Gaith said. "Residents are frustrated with most City Council decisions."

Tregub pointed to his record, noting that his office had "helped resolve hundreds of constituent services cases" over the years.

He said he holds regular office hours throughout the district, to be accountable and accessible, and publishes a monthly newsletter to keep residents informed.

"I do read every single email I receive from constituents, and I do my best to respond," he said.

Surveillance and public safety

During the forum, the candidates found some common ground in opposing Berkeley's contract with Flock Safety, which provides local police with automated license plate reader data.

Tregub noted that he had voted in May to block the contract with Flock. (The effort fell one vote short.)

"As an immigrant, it is very clear to me that Flock or any other company that does business with Trump's immigration enforcement does not actually keep us safe," said Tregub.

Gaith criticized Tregub's earlier support for surveillance technology and called for an outright ban.

"As a business owner, we have enough private cameras inside of our store and outside for the landlord," he said. "We feel safe enough so we don't have to spy on our citizenry."

In response to a broader question about public safety, Tregub described his district as "challenging" but said most calls were nonviolent "but still concerning."

He said he'd coordinated with UC Berkeley, given the district's proximity to campus, and worked to get better lighting in the area.

Gaith emphasized the need for traffic safety improvements, including in school zones, and concerns about community mental health.

He said he thought "a lot about some people that come into the store that have mental health situations, where they'll throw coffee at a regular or throw a chair," he said. "We just don't know sometimes what to do as small businesses."

Who is running for Berkeley City Council District 4?

We posed a dozen questions to both candidates running for the Berkeley City Council District 4 (downtown) seat in November 2026.

The Berkeley ScannerEmilie Raguso

Gaza and political divisions

Gaith has made Palestinian rights and Berkeley's response to the war in Gaza, including its decision not to issue a ceasefire resolution, a prominent campaign issue.

During a question about police oversight, Gaith brought up Tregub's experience living in Israel, contrasting the civil legal system there with the military law governing Palestinians in the West Bank.

"I'm under military law. Igor is under civil law, and he claims that's democracy," Gaith said, before turning to concerns about what he saw as curtailed Police Accountability Board authority.

He said Tregub had not done enough to ensure PAB had access to confidential records it needed to do its oversight work.

Tregub, a Jewish immigrant from Ukraine, rejected suggestions from Gaith about ties to AIPAC, the pro-Israel lobbying organization.

The campaign has also drawn allegations of antisemitism.

In October, Jewish organizations and local clergy condemned Gaith's reported reference to a "Zionist takeover" of the City Council, saying such language evokes antisemitic stereotypes.

Gaith has rejected allegations of antisemitism, describing them as anti-Palestinian racism.

Harassment is democracy’s destruction: Op-ed

In today's guest essay, 11 current and former Berkeley elected officials condemn political intimidation and harassment.

The Berkeley ScannerGuest Essay

Downtown vacancies

Both candidates identified downtown's empty storefronts as a major concern but differed over the city's response.

Gaith described "downtown blight," pointing to stalled development projects. He criticized what he called "runaway upzoning" and proposed a tiered tax on commercial vacancies, incentives for lower rents and greater community involvement in development decisions.

Tregub pointed to his work reducing permitting barriers, requiring landlords to make commercial spaces ready for occupancy and supporting arts and cultural uses downtown.

He highlighted efforts to bring an art gallery to the former Half Price Books building and revive downtown movie and live theater offerings.

City finances

On city finances, Tregub defended difficult decisions made to close Berkeley's $30 million budget deficit, including fee increases, while advocating new ways to increase revenue.

Gaith questioned whether city officials had sufficiently examined spending, including high employee compensation, before asking residents to pay more.

He also decried the sales tax increase on the November ballot, calling it regressive.

Gaith said Berkeley should look to New York City for solutions, to "trim the fat" and find programs that don't benefit the public.

"Mayor Mamdani in New York inherited a $12 billion deficit. Everyone said that they're gonna have to engage in austerity or cut community programs," Gaith said. "They did neither."

In closing remarks, Gaith framed the election as a choice between established leadership and stronger advocacy for community interests.

Tregub argued that his experience and relationships would help Berkeley navigate difficult financial and political circumstances.

"I have shown up. I have fought difficult fights. I've brought people together and I have delivered tangible results," he said.

Election Day is Nov. 3. Voters can read more about Tregub and Gaith in their Berkeley Scanner candidate questionnaires. Read more election coverage on TBS.

Watch the full District 4 Berkeley City Council candidate forum

Something troubling is happening in Berkeley's political life, and it should concern us regardless of where we fall on the political spectrum.

As public officials, we expect criticism. We expect tough questions, frustrated constituents and organized opposition; that comes with the job.

We should not have to fear for our safety.

Yet harassment, stalking and threats have increasingly become part of public life in Berkeley and across the country. If we begin to accept such behavior as simply another form of political participation, we risk driving good people away from public service and damaging the democracy we claim to value.

We saw this in January 2024, when Councilmember Rigel Robinson resigned from the Berkeley City Council and ended his campaign for mayor. Robinson said he had endured years of escalating harassment, stalking and threats. He said he had been followed, received threatening messages at his home and feared for the safety of himself and his loved ones.

Now another Berkeley council member says he is facing similar disturbing behavior.

On Oct. 20, Councilmember Igor Tregub described an incident involving someone who, he said, used a false name to sign up as a volunteer for his re-election campaign and later followed him while videotaping and repeatedly confronting him.

A video subsequently posted on social media shows Tregub declining to engage and walking away while the individual continues to follow and badger him with questions. After the video circulated online, Tregub reported "a spike in death threats and hate speech."

Whatever one's views of Robinson or Tregub, this threatening behavior should not be tolerated.

Threats, stalking and deliberate intimidation are not more passionate versions of political speech. Their purpose — and too often their effect — is to frighten people, silence them or drive them from public life.

This is not simply a Berkeley problem.

Research from Princeton University's Bridging Divides Initiative found that 54% of local elected officials surveyed in the first quarter of 2026 experienced insults, harassment, threats or attacks. Even more disturbing, 43% said concerns about hostility made them less willing to run for re-election.

We have also seen where political violence can lead. In June 2025, former Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, were assassinated in their home in an attack authorities described as politically motivated.

We should not wait for tragedy before deciding that the norms governing political behavior matter.

When people considering public office conclude that serving their community means exposing themselves or their families to stalking and threats, all of us lose. The potential pool of public servants becomes smaller. People become less willing to tackle controversial issues. And intimidation begins to accomplish what argument and elections are supposed to decide.

Berkeley has always been a city of passionate political engagement. We should celebrate that tradition. But passion is not a license for intimidation.

We should condemn threats against candidates and officials — both those whom we support and those whom we oppose. That is the standard a democratic community should set.

Democracy requires disagreement. It should never require fear.

Signed,
Jesse Arreguín, State Senator and former Berkeley Mayor
Tom Bates, former Assemblymember and Berkeley Mayor
Brent Blackaby, Berkeley Councilmember
Sophie Hahn, former Berkeley Councilmember
Loni Hancock, former State Senator and former Berkeley Mayor
Rashi Kesarwani, Berkeley Councilmember
Linda Maio, former Berkeley Councilmember
Shoshana O'Keefe, Berkeley Councilmember
Terry Taplin, Berkeley Councilmember
Susan Wengraf, former Berkeley Councilmember
Gordon Wozniak, former Berkeley Councilmember

The Scanner will periodically publish guest essays from community members on issues of interest or concern. Submit your ideas to TBS.

The ruling left some protections in place for disabled homeless residents represented by Berkeley Homeless Union, which has challenged the city's encampment enforcement practices in federal court.

All three judges agreed that Berkeley could close the Harrison encampment, but Judge Patrick Bumatay dissented from the majority decision to leave court-ordered disability accommodation requirements in place — for now.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled arguments on the broader legal issues for February.

"Whether this process (or any other) is legally required under the ADA is a merits determination," the judges wrote. "We recognize the need to expedite resolution of this dispute."

The city cleared much of the sprawling Harrison encampment in September but had been prevented by a federal judge from removing some residents who had sought disability accommodations. At the time, the city said its plans did not include vehicle removal.

The new ruling says the city can proceed with complete closure.

"Even on an incomplete record, we are persuaded that the City must be able to clear the Harrison Encampment because of the public health risk posed by leptospirosis," the court wrote.

The city has found leptospirosis, a potentially deadly disease, in rats and two dogs in the neighborhood. A man with leptospirosis who lived not far from the Harrison Street encampment also died.

"We agree that the conditions in the encampment warranted intervention without delay," the court said.

Berkeley had also asked the appeals court to suspend broader restrictions imposed by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, including requirements to accommodate disabled homeless residents during enforcement actions. The majority declined to do so while the appeal proceeds.

The court noted that a possible miscommunication during a July hearing may have contributed to the dispute over how broadly the restrictions applied.

Berkeley argued that Chen had improperly expanded his restrictions beyond the Harrison encampment. The appeals court was not persuaded.

During the July hearing, the city had asked Chen to make a final ruling so its 9th Circuit appeal could proceed. Chen had cautioned that the ruling would apply "throughout the city." The city had not objected, the 9th Circuit wrote.

The panel wrote that the city would have a chance to raise the matter at a hearing before Chen on Oct. 29.

Berkeley has also sparred with Chen over how its posted "No Lodging" areas fit into its plans. At a recent hearing, Chen said the city had failed to provide evidence as to why the areas should remain off-limits to Berkeley Homeless Union members.

The appeals court did not resolve that dispute, which remains an issue in the district court proceedings.

Ultimately, the appeals court denied Berkeley's broader stay request "without prejudice," allowing it to renew the request if circumstances change.

The court also observed that it had been given limited materials to review, "which leaves much of the relevant litigation story unexplained."

It said both sides would need to provide a more complete record if they sought further relief.

Read more about homeless camps in Berkeley.

In a sharply worded, 56-page partial dissent accompanying the 17-page majority ruling, Judge Bumatay argued that the appeals court should have gone further and suspended Chen's broader restrictions while the case proceeds.

He criticized the district court's involvement in Berkeley's homelessness policies, arguing that decisions about how to address encampments should rest primarily with elected officials rather than federal judges.

Bumatay wrote that the district court had "weaponized the Americans with Disabilities Act" by imposing unreasonable requirements on the city.

"Berkeley’s efforts face the ongoing threat of paralysis by judicial fiat," Bumatay wrote. "Berkeley must be allowed to conduct its homelessness policy without unmerited judicial micromanagement."

The Scanner requested statements from the city and Berkeley Homeless Union but none had been provided as of publication time.

In yet a third incident, a cyclist sustained a leg injury when a driver struck her on Shattuck Avenue, police said.

Earlier Monday, police also investigated a crash involving a teenage cyclist on his way to Berkeley High.

At 7:30 p.m., Berkeley police got a report of a gunshot and a woman screaming in the 1100 block of Euclid Avenue, near Codornices Park.

Another person in the same area reported a hit-and-run collision, which police determined had been the sound mistaken for gunfire.

Responding officers found that a northbound driver, a man in his 60s in a gray Audi, had struck a woman in her 20s as she biked north on Euclid, police said.

The woman, who called 911 herself, according to early reports, had minor injuries and declined medical transport.

According to police, the driver parked some distance away from the crash scene. When a man who had been cycling with the injured woman confronted him, he denied having hit anyone, police said.

The driver, a 61-year-old Berkeley man, ultimately failed field sobriety tests. He was arrested on suspicion of DUI and felony hit-and-run causing injury, police said.

As of Tuesday, the driver had posted bail and was no longer in custody, according to booking records.

Earlier in the evening, police said a driver turning left onto Shattuck Avenue struck a cyclist at Russell Street.

That collision happened shortly before 6 p.m.

Berkeley police said the cyclist, a woman in her 30s, was eastbound on Russell Street when a westbound driver hit her.

The driver, a woman in her 50s in a gray Toyota, had stopped at the stop sign and was turning onto southbound Shattuck when the collision happened, police said.

The cyclist was taken to the hospital with a possible broken leg, police said.

The final crash of the night, a three-vehicle collision, took place at 11:45 p.m. at University and San Pablo avenues.

It was initially reported as another crash involving a pedestrian or cyclist, but that turned out not to be the case.

Witnesses reported that a driver in a black Lexus had run the red light while speeding north on San Pablo Avenue at University Avenue, police said.

The driver flashed his brights as he went through the intersection, then broadsided a Hyundai that had been westbound on University, police said.

The Hyundai struck a Prius that had been waiting at the southbound red light on San Pablo.

Police said the Lexus driver fled the scene.

Officers were able to find him on Eastshore Highway at Virginia Street thanks to a community member's help, authorities said.

Everyone involved in the crash declined medical transport, though some reported pain, police said.

The driver, a 47-year-old Oakland man, was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence and hit-and-run causing injury, police said. He no longer appears to be in custody.

Pedestrian crash involving Cybertruck on Saturday

Readers also asked TBS about a collision involving a pedestrian and a Tesla Cybertruck over the weekend.

In that incident, a woman in her 30s was crossing Shattuck Avenue heading east in the southern crosswalk at Virginia Street when a southbound driver struck her, police said.

The slow-speed collision happened Saturday at 9:25 a.m.

The driver, who was traveling at about 5 mph, did not see the pedestrian due to the glare of the sun, police said.

The pedestrian was reportedly thrown 10 to 15 feet but escaped serious injury, according to initial reports.

"As a precaution, the pedestrian was transported to a local trauma center with what appeared to be non-life-threatening injuries," BPD said.

She did not lose consciousness at the scene and was transported "Code 2," without lights or sirens, according to emergency dispatches.

Correction: The age, city of residence and arrest offenses were incorrect for the second driver due to incomplete public records. This has been fixed.

The 16-year-old was taken to Highland Hospital "Code 2" (without lights and sirens) for assessment. He had no broken bones but was undergoing further tests as of Monday afternoon, authorities said.

The collision happened at about 9:50 a.m. Monday at Russell and Adeline streets in South Berkeley, Berkeley police said.

The cyclist was westbound on Russell and the driver, a woman in her 80s, was southbound on Adeline Street, based on the preliminary investigation, police said.

The teenager may have run a stop sign, but police have not determined an official cause, authorities said.

Emergency dispatches reviewed by The Scanner noted windshield "starring," a spiderweb pattern of cracks in the glass that indicates impact.

The teenager did not lose consciousness at the scene, based on initial reports.

The driver was estimated to have been traveling 20-25 mph, according to emergency dispatches. She remained at the scene and cooperated with the investigation, police said.

Liza Lutzker, a member of Walk Bike Berkeley and a city Transportation and Infrastructure Commission member, has urged the city to take concrete steps to prevent future crashes in the area.

"Our school-age youth and vulnerable road users remain at daily risk of life-altering injury or death because street designs consistently prioritize driver speed and convenience over human life," she wrote in an email Monday to South Berkeley Councilman Ben Bartlett. "Adeline Street remains a known hazard, and proactive, aggressive interventions are urgently needed before another child is hurt."

She asked Bartlett to get details from police about "the circumstances of the crash, the condition of the injured teenager, the status of any citation or investigation regarding the driver’s speed and conduct, as well as any aspects of the intersection design that were noted to be problematic."

The girl, a Berkeley resident who goes to Berkeley High School, was arrested on suspicion of assault likely to cause serious bodily injury in both cases, Berkeley police said in response to a Scanner inquiry.

The most recent incident happened Friday, Oct. 16, when a Downtown Berkeley Association ambassador was attacked outside Target on Shattuck Avenue.

At about 4 p.m., the ambassador was cleaning eggshell residue from the sidewalk when a teenager began shooting projectiles nearby from a toy gun, police said.

When the ambassador told the teen to stop, another student took the toy gun and began shooting at the ambassador's face, police said.

When the ambassador tried to defend herself, one of the juveniles "forced her to the ground and repeatedly punched her in the face."

There, a member of the group kicked her in the face multiple times, police said.

The ambassador sustained bruises to her head, face and neck.

Police said the 15-year-old girl arrested Thursday was involved in the attack but did not specify her role.

Her name was not released because she is a minor.

The same teenager was also arrested in connection with an Oct. 8 attack on a 58-year-old woman in the 2000 block of Kittredge Street in downtown Berkeley.

In that case, police said, the woman was chased into a parking structure, physically assaulted and dragged several feet along the ground.

A bystander intervened and pulled her attacker away.

The woman tried to take refuge in a nearby restaurant, but the student pursued her and attacked her again "before being restrained," authorities said.

Berkeley woman had already been attacked twice by students, police say

The 58-year-old woman was also attacked twice the prior day, also in the 2000 block of Kittredge Street, according to police.

On Oct. 7, she was assaulted after confronting a group of teenagers who were throwing trash outside the Berkeley Public Library at about 12:25 p.m.

At 4:30 p.m., two girls confronted the woman, took her cellphone and "kicked her in the leg," police said. One of the girls smashed the phone on the ground.

Police later identified two 14-year-old Berkeley girls as suspects in those incidents, including one they say took part in both of them.

Both cases, a misdemeanor battery case and a robbery case, were sent to the district attorney's office for charging.

Unity Day violence downtown: The rundown

Last Friday's attack on the downtown ambassador happened amid a series of disturbances involving large groups of young people as Berkeley High's Unity Week came to a close.

Police received multiple reports of teenagers throwing eggs and shooting water guns at pedestrians, along with reports of fights and other assaults.

The reports all came in around lunchtime and after school.

Just before noon, police received a report of people riding motorbikes on the sidewalk and throwing eggs in the 2100 block of Shattuck Avenue "as part of BHS Rally Day."

Minutes later, police received a report that a juvenile had been assaulted in the same area. Officers and Berkeley High staff responded, but found no active fights.

At 12:12 p.m., police got a report of students "throwing eggs and shooting water guns at pedestrians" near Shattuck Avenue and Allston Way.

At about 12:30 p.m., a 14-year-old autistic student was attacked by a group of about a dozen boys, some wearing masks, who kicked and punched him and pelted him with eggs. The Scanner broke the news of that incident.

The boy was later taken to the hospital, where he was diagnosed with a concussion.

Parents of students with disabilities have since called for a thorough investigation, stronger safety measures and accountability, particularly in relation to violence against disabled students.

At 4:05 p.m., police received word of the downtown ambassador assault.

"When officers arrived, eggs were thrown at them and their vehicles," police said.

About half an hour later, police got a report of approximately 100 young people fighting and throwing eggs near Shattuck Avenue and Addison Street.

Approximately 20-30 juveniles also reportedly looted the downtown Target at some point during the afternoon.

In a statement this week, Berkeley Police Chief Jen Louis said the department had assigned additional downtown patrols in anticipation of problems during lunch and after school on Unity Day.

"The circumstances presented significant challenges," she said, including roving, large groups and vague suspect descriptions.

The chief noted that, "at times, groups of approximately 100 students gathered, engaged in disruptive behavior, and dispersed before officers arrived, only to regroup elsewhere."

"Some students attempted to provoke officers, including by throwing eggs at police vehicles," the chief said.

In her statement, Louis said one of her sergeants had been assaulted after confiscating eggs from a student. The surrounding group "became hostile," she said. The assailant has not been identified.

Detectives are continuing to investigate last week's incidents and working with Berkeley High to improve coordination ahead of future school events.

We recognize that these incidents were disruptive and, in some cases, frightening for those who experienced or witnessed them. I want to share how we prepared, how we responded, and what we are doing moving forward.

In anticipation of the event, our Berkeley High School (BHS) School Resource Officer internally shared the information about potential issues and requested additional patrols during the expected peak hours of lunchtime and after school. He also spent the preceding week connecting with downtown businesses to help them prepare for potential disruptions. This included some of the businesses that were directly affected on Friday.

Berkeley High parents raise alarm after Unity Week fights

An autistic student sustained a concussion after a group attack in downtown Berkeley. Police are investigating.

The Berkeley ScannerEmilie Raguso

On Friday, we assigned officers specifically to patrol downtown. Throughout the afternoon and early evening, officers, sergeants, and the patrol lieutenant responded to multiple incidents involving groups of students. The circumstances presented significant challenges.

At times, groups of approximately 100 students gathered, engaged in disruptive behavior, and dispersed before officers arrived, only to regroup elsewhere. Several calls involved reports of physical assaults and other disturbances involving large groups of juveniles.

In many cases, the information available did not provide sufficiently specific descriptions to identify those responsible or establish grounds for detention or arrest. Officers maintained a presence downtown, monitored activity, and responded as incidents developed.

Our personnel also faced difficult decisions about when and how to intervene. Some students attempted to provoke officers, including by throwing eggs at police vehicles.

Our officers worked to address disruptive behavior, protect public safety, and avoid unnecessary confrontations that could escalate into uses of force involving juveniles.

The size of the groups and the rapidly changing circumstances required a measured response. During one incident, a sergeant conducting high-visibility patrols confiscated a pack of eggs from a student. The surrounding group became hostile, and the sergeant was subsequently assaulted by an unidentified individual.

We recognize that for those who witnessed these incidents, were victimized, or experienced disruptions to their businesses, our police response may not have been as visible or immediate as they expected.

While our personnel were actively engaged throughout the event, we understand the frustration and concern expressed by our community, and we take those concerns seriously. I believe our officers and supervisors worked thoughtfully to navigate a challenging and rapidly evolving situation. At the same time, we recognize the importance of evaluating our response and identifying opportunities to improve our preparation and coordination for future events.

Our detectives are actively investigating the crimes reported that day. We are also meeting with BHS staff to strengthen planning and coordination for future school-related events.

We are working collaboratively with BHS to follow up on reported incidents and make referrals to Juvenile Probation when appropriate. As many of these cases involve juveniles, we cannot share additional details.

We encourage anyone who was victimized, witnessed criminal activity, or has video footage of these incidents to contact the Berkeley Police Department so we can investigate and take appropriate action.

Our commitment is to maintain a safe and welcoming downtown for our businesses, residents, students, and visitors. We will continue working with our school and community partners to address these incidents and reduce the likelihood of similar disruptions in the future.

We are writing to you as parents/caregivers, educators, and community members of Berkeley Special Education Parent & Caregiver Group (BSPED) to demand immediate, concrete action by Berkeley Unified School District (BUSD) and by the School Board to protect students with disabilities from violence, bullying, harassment, and discrimination. School traditions and practice have created a severe and escalating safety crisis facing students within Berkeley Unified School District.

In the latest incident, on Friday, Oct. 16, groups of students actively used school grounds as a launchpad to commit targeted, violent physical assaults against a student with disabilities upon departing campus, resulting in hospitalization.

This is not the first time students with protected status have been targeted, specifically on "Freshman Friday" and "Rally Day" or "Unity Day." There is a long history of awareness about these assaults: 2008, 2016, 2019, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2026. (Note that this is not a comprehensive list.)

This continuous pattern of behavior is unacceptable, unlawful, and poses a direct threat to the safety and well-being of all children. While the district may view off-campus incidents as outside its jurisdiction, the law is clear: Because these attacks originate on school grounds and create a pervasive hostile learning environment, the district is legally obligated to act.

Parent and caregiver reports of persistent disability-based exclusion and concerns about inadequate responses to student violence raise urgent questions about student safety and the District's response. Students with disabilities are entitled to safety, dignity, and meaningful inclusion — not a school environment in which they are targeted or left unprotected.

BUSD must act immediately, without waiting for a final police report, to communicate throughout its schools and to the wider community its commitment to student safety and to implement appropriate protective measures. BUSD possesses multiple legal and policy obligations to fulfill its mandate of educating every child.

1. Violation of Civil Rights & Creation of a Hostile Learning Environment (Title II / Section 504)

• Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the district is strictly prohibited from permitting disability-based discrimination and harassment. When off-campus assaults bleed into the school setting--causing disabled students to feel unsafe, miss school, or suffer academically--the district is legally required to intervene.
• The Berkeley Municipal Code, §§ 3.66.010-3.66.020 establishes the City's commitment to the full integration and participation of people with disabilities and the removal of barriers to that participation. BUSD must also uphold these principles in its own school communities.
• Under established federal standards (Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education), school administration possesses actual knowledge of these severe, targeted attacks. Continuing to take ineffective or passive measures constitutes deliberate indifference, exposing the district to substantial financial liability and federal civil rights investigations.

2. Negligent Supervision and Breach of Duty of Care

• Because the school is aware of and continues to foster an environment of targeting disabled individuals and groups, the district retains a direct duty of care. The failure of BHS administration and security staff to secure campus perimeters, search for and confiscate contraband/weapons, and prevent students from leaving campus with violent intent constitutes negligent supervision.

3. Mandatory Reporting Failures

• School personnel — including teachers, administrators, and counselors--are legally mandated reporters. Failing to report reasonable suspicion or actual knowledge of physical abuse, battery, or torture of a child or dependent adult with a disability to law enforcement or protective services is a criminal omission under state law.
• BUSD's Board Policy 5131.2, Bullying prohibits conduct including harassment, threats, intimidation, bodily injury, and hate violence against students. The policy recognizes that disability-based bullying may also trigger state and federal civil-rights obligations.
• Similarly, BUSD's Administrative Regulation 5131.2 requires the District to assess whether incidents fall within its responsibility and, when an alleged criminal act falls outside that scope, to refer it to appropriate law enforcement, provide applicable interventions, and document the matter. Off-campus location alone must not substitute for a comprehensive assessment of a reported incident's connection to school safety and student well-being and of the District's responsibility.
• California Penal Codes §§ 422.55 and 422.6 address criminal conduct motivated by a victim's actual or perceived disability, including certain acts of force or threats that interfere with protected rights. Berkeley Police Department Policy 319, Hate Crimes, specifically 319.5 - Criminal Statutes, directs officers to consider disability bias, including whether a perpetrator perceived a person with a disability as vulnerable or as a target because of that disability. These provisions warrant full consideration; BSPED does not presume that a hate crime has been legally established.

4. Denial of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE / IDEA)

• Students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) are guaranteed a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in a safe environment. A district that permits an environment where disabled students are targeted and assaulted outside the school gates fails to provide FAPE, opening the district to state education department complaints, due process hearings, civil lawsuits, and federal oversight.

BSPED's demands

We demand that the Board and Administration immediately address the following critical areas of district responsibility:

1. Conduct and document a thorough response. Cooperate with law enforcement. Participate in the investigation to the fullest possible extent on behalf of our children; this is a potential criminal matter, not merely an internal discipline issue. Ensure that the reported assault and related concerns are appropriately investigated, that disability-based bias is considered where evidence warrants, and that all District procedures are followed. Communicate the District's response and process to affected families daily, within legal privacy limits.
2. Issue an immediate public statement. BUSD must clearly condemn violence, harassment, and disability-based targeting of students; affirm zero tolerance for such conduct; and explain how students and families may report concerns and obtain support. This statement must not identify the injured student or compromise student privacy and must be posted on the BUSD website, not simply sent to BHS students and families.
3. Establish immediate safety protections.

• Off-campus violent conduct that originates on campus during school hours which produces documented harm against students strictly warrants expulsion.
• Assess risks to the injured student and other students with disabilities, implement campus security protocols, including ending off-campus privileges during Rally Week, Freshman Fridays, or other days — or ending the events entirely — known for student-on-student violence; deploying metal detectors (always); and adding a search procedure for "special" days. Include mandatory contraband checks and active monitoring during dismissal hours to stop students from departing with weapons or projectiles.
• Prevent retaliation, and provide access to needed counseling and educational support. Add safety plans for every student with an IEP in secondary schools. Establish immediate, formal safety plans for all targeted or victimized students with IEPs, regardless of grade level, to guarantee their physical safety during school hours, transitions, and dismissal.
• Review IEPs to re-evaluate and reinforce FAPE assurances and support services for affected students with disabilities. Ensure that students are not effectively excluded from school or educational opportunities because the District has failed repeatedly to address safety risks and bullying.

4. Address off-campus incidents with school-related consequences. Apply BP/AR 5131.2 to assess reported conduct outside school grounds when it may affect school safety, attendance, or students' educational experience. Do not dismiss incidents solely because they occurred off campus.
5. Implement a districtwide disability-safety and inclusion plan. Work directly with students with disabilities, families, special education representatives, and disability-affinity groups to strengthen supervision, reporting, investigation, staff training, disability awareness, and prevention of recurring violence, harassment and exclusion. Include students across disability categories and educational programs--not only those already represented in existing student organizations or IEPs.
6. Update policies. Convene representatives responsible for #5 to review and update Board Policy 5131 (last updated 2019) and Administrative Policy 5131 (last updated 2012) to address current conditions.
7. Report measurable progress and accountability. Provide the Board and community with a written action plan, implementation timeline, and regular updates on reported incidents, response procedures, prevention measures, and their effectiveness, while protecting confidential student information.

Required response

BSPED requests a written response within 5 business days of receipt of this letter confirming the District's immediate actions, the administrator responsible for implementation, and a timeline for addressing each demand.

The safety of students with disabilities is total and not optional. The District's obligation to safety does not exist in degrees and does not end at the school gate. A response limited to expressions of concern, non-committal language on violence reduction, reliance on being out of BUSD jurisdiction, or a general reference to an ongoing investigation will not resolve the systemic issues raised by families herein.

BSPED expects BUSD to demonstrate, through specific actions and transparent accountability, that students with disabilities are valued, protected, and fully included in Berkeley public schools.

Sincerely,

Berkeley Special Education Parent & Caregiver Group (BSPED)
On behalf of participating families and advocates for students with disabilities

Kelly Walsh Rivera
Lindsay Nofelt
Sean Flanagan
Sheela Shankar
Susan Snyder
Cort Worthington
Natasha Sandeford
Chadd Wolfe
Jamila Dunn
Vicki Davis
Tatiana Guerreiro Ramos
Jason Gambatese
Andrea Quong
Kristy Madrigal
Lily Howell
Larry Chien
Dana Hymel
Lisa Haefele
Ardel Thomas
Myra Bautista
Mark Bautista
Stéphane Gros
Jumia Simmons
Eliza Noh
Sarah Bowles
Nicole Chabot

Berkeley's long-struggling 911 dispatch center is getting $1 million in state funding to modernize operations and improve emergency response.

The city's dispatch center handles more than 180,000 calls each year for fire, police and emergency medical services.

Last week, state Sen. Jesse Arreguín announced that he had secured the $1 million grant to help address longstanding challenges at the communications center.

He presented Berkeley officials with a ceremonial check at an Oct. 15 news conference.

"As the former mayor of Berkeley, I know how critical a modern, reliable dispatch center is to keeping our communities safe and ensuring first responders can act quickly when people need help," he said.

A 2019 Berkeley city auditor report found that chronic understaffing and mandatory overtime had contributed to low morale at the city's emergency communications center, where 911 calls were taking longer to answer.

Voters approved Measure FF the next year, a parcel tax to fund firefighting, emergency response and 911 upgrades.

Despite efforts to address the audit's findings, staffing shortages remained a problem in 2025, according to BPD's most recent annual report.

At last week's press event, Berkeley Mayor Adena Ishii said she was thankful for the extra state support in addition to what voters approved under Measure FF.

"When someone in Berkeley dials 911, the person who answers is their lifeline," she said.

The grant will expand the Communications Center, upgrade software and technology to improve response times, and add a wellness space to support dispatchers, who frequently navigate high-impact 911 calls.

Those changes will help address persistent concerns about dispatcher morale and retention, said Erin Netz, who recently returned to the Berkeley Police Department to lead its Emergency Communications Center.

"As a former dispatcher, I know that addressing morale in a high-stress environment is important in retaining qualified dispatchers," she said. "This funding will help us achieve our goal of improving the wellness of our dispatchers, creating better outcomes for all."

Earlier this year, the city also signed a separate $1.7 million contract to modernize its communications center with the help of priority dispatch software.

Vicente Vera is a freelance reporter based in the Bay Area who graduated from the San Jose State University School of Journalism and Mass Communications. He covers politics, community and culture.

Shortly before 5:30 p.m., officers reported smoke and "water flooding the building" as personnel evacuated.

Authorities said the fire was small and began in an office, activating building sprinklers.

"All emergency 911 calls are being transferred to Alameda County Dispatch to dispatch emergency calls," police said in a Nixle alert at 5:28 p.m.

Officers will continue to respond to emergency calls, police said.

Attempts to shut down the sprinklers were hampered because the controls were reportedly secured with a padlock and chain.

Update, 10:15 p.m. The Berkeley dispatch center has resumed normal operations, BPD reported in a Nixle alert.