⌂ BERKELEY DECISION PROJECT
Better questions. Better evidence. Better choices.
Read the white paperWhite paper Slides (PDF)PDF White paper (PDF)WP PDF
Slide 1 of 14
Berkeley Budget Framework
A Strategy for Strategy
How Berkeley should decide what earns money, staff capacity, Council attention, and public trust
The goal is not less government. It is government capable of doing important things well.
Eric Friedman · August 2026
Slide 2 of 14
The problem is not a shortage of ideas
First diagnose the failure. Then introduce the method.
1
The problem is not a shortage of ideas.
2
It is how we choose among them.
3
Berkeley needs a durable, consistent method for making choices.
Without that method, every new idea competes with every existing obligation — and the contest is usually political, not strategic.
Slide 3 of 14
Why this matters
The warning signs show up in services residents use and taxes residents are asked to pay.
Core work
Streets, public safety, inspections, recreation, and emergency access are already hard to execute well.
New load
New facilities, grants, regional schemes, pilots, and referrals keep adding durable obligations.
No tradeoff
Across-the-board cuts and last-minute agenda items hide rather than disclose what will be displaced.
Low trust
Audits, reports, and campaign promises do not build confidence when outcomes do not improve.
The case for a framework begins with the consequences of not having one.
Slide 4 of 14
Warning
Core responsibilities are slipping
The remedy is not another slogan. It is an ordering system for essential performance.
Streets
PCI target 70; repeated plans and audits; no credible route to the metric.
→ Prioritize funding, sequencing, and leadership stability around the metric.
Fire / Wildfire
Station closure presented as a tax contingency while hillside risk remains a core vulnerability.
→ Protect essential safety capacity first; resolve access and evacuation.
Hopkins
Approved politically before emergency access and evacuation dependencies were resolved.
→ Make safety dependencies gates to approval, not reconciliation tasks after.
Pools
Schedules can own facilities without organizing service around residents' lives.
→ Measure resident utility, not facility existence; adjust hours to actual use.
Slide 5 of 14
Warning
Tactical wins can become strategic losses
University Avenue shows why project-by-project decisions are not enough.
Outside funding deadline
→
Emergency conversion
→
Low-cost lease
→
One-off property use
→
Strategic loss

Each action can be defended as urgent, practical, or opportunistic. The aggregate may be a future nobody deliberately chose — a principal gateway losing commercial activity, housing options, tax revenue, and neighborhood stability without Council ever voting on that corridor strategy.

The question is not only whether each decision had a reason. It is whether the accumulated direction has earned a place in Berkeley's strategy.
Slide 6 of 14
Warning
Commitments outlive their assumptions
Representation breaks down when Council cannot absorb what it is asked to decide.
AAHRC
Capital construction proceeds while the operating model and recurring costs remain unresolved. No capital approval without lifecycle cost, operator, staffing, and funding source.
Public Bank
Designed as a regional undertaking; regional participation collapsed. When required partners withdraw, reclassify before money is committed.
Homekey+ / Motels
Outside funding creates pressure to act before long-lived local impacts are tested. A grant deadline cannot replace an evidence package and exit conditions.
Premier Cru
Staggered forward despite staff-described blockers for its original public-office use. Known blockers must trigger reassessment, not a zombie lease.
Pathways / STAIR
A pilot was renewed without the evaluation it was supposed to produce. A pilot expires unless the predeclared evaluation is complete before renewal.
Slide 7 of 14
Warning
Speed is not success
Fast decisions are sometimes necessary. Doing the work well still matters.
Can Berkeley do this well?

A deadline does not turn an unready proposal into a sound one. Urgency can justify a faster process — not a lower standard for durable obligations.

The exception must be bounded
✓ Real deadline or hazard
✓ Minimum evidence stated
✓ Exposure capped
✓ Operating owner named
✓ Review date set
✓ Retrospective evaluation required
When the standard cannot be met in time, narrowing, delaying, or passing can be the responsible choice.
Slide 8 of 14
Warning
Attention is being spent without a budget
Referrals, late items, and agenda overload consume the government's capacity to govern.

Referrals look cheap because they do not always arrive with an appropriation. They are not cheap: they consume staff work, legal review, management attention, agenda capacity, and public trust.

No major referral should proceed without a displaced-work statement. If we do this, what will we delay, reduce, transfer, or stop?
A government that cannot say “not now” eventually says “yes” to more work than it can perform.
Slide 9 of 14
A better framework for decision making
Slide 10 of 14
First decide what the City should own, share, or decline.
The Category 1 / 2 / 3 test gives that decision a common language.
Category 1
Must do
Core municipal outcomes: safety, streets, infrastructure, inspections, recreation, fiscal management.
Category 2
Do with partners
Regional or shared undertakings where cost, governance, risk, and benefit are credibly distributed.
Category 3
Must not do
Wrong scale, missing expertise, failed partners, duplicative structure, or open-ended costs.
Category assignments are not permanent. They move when facts, partners, costs, and performance change.
Slide 11 of 14
Every priority should keep earning its place.
Start / Stop / Continue keeps the portfolio current as needs, evidence, costs, and performance change.
Start
Adopt or repair only what earns a place within finite capacity; every start needs a tradeoff.
Stop
End, transfer, consolidate, outsource, sunset, or redesign work that cannot justify its claim.
Continue
Protect what performs, measure it, and fund it at a viable level.
A STOP decision must remain possible even outside a budget crisis. Contracts, leases, and labor agreements should not make necessary exit impossible.
Slide 12 of 14
Define what success — and failure — look like.
The evidence package turns expectations into things Council can actually test.
Outcome target
Minimum service level
Full lifecycle cost
Operating owner
Performance metric
Dependency gate
Adverse effects
Review or sunset date
Financial audits ask whether money was handled properly. Performance audits ask whether the program actually worked.
Pilots and urgent exceptions need minimum evidence and an evaluation plan before launch. No evaluation means expiration, not automatic continuation.
Slide 13 of 14
Once the what, who, and why are clear, find the best solution.
The undertaking has earned a place in the portfolio.
We know
What
result Berkeley is trying to achieve.
Who
should be responsible for achieving it.
Why
it deserves priority.
Now optimize
How
should we achieve the result?
When
should we act — and what should change, shrink, stop, or wait?
How much
should the solution consume?

The answer may require more money. It may require reallocating existing money. It may cost less than what we do today.

Find the best solution.
How · When · How much
Slide 14 of 14
The governing question
What earns its place in Berkeley's priority portfolio?
Must do? · Do with partners? · Must stop?

What result will be measured, what capacity will it consume, and what will Berkeley decline so the priority can be real?

Priorities are not what Berkeley praises. They are what Berkeley protects, measures, funds, and is willing to choose over something else.
Read the full white paper →
Eric Friedman · Draft, August 2026 · Prepared for civic discussion