Berkeley: When the Last Holdout Falls
Despite massive public opposition and a progressive reputation, Berkeley voted 8-1 to encrypt police radio. A case study in advocacy and its limits.
Key Facts
The Last Holdout
As recently as September 2025, Berkeley Police Department was positioned as the last major Bay Area agency maintaining public radio access. In a region where San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose had already encrypted, Berkeley's commitment to transparency stood out.
That made the October reversal all the more significant. When Berkeley's police chief brought an encryption proposal to the City Council, it signaled that the forces pushing for secrecy had reached even the most progressive corners of California.
"A question of having free access to information, as well as basic transparency and accountability."— Eric Scheie, longtime Berkeley resident, on his concerns about encryption
The Arguments Made
Berkeley police cited two primary justifications for encryption:
Officer Safety
The department claimed that criminals could monitor radio traffic to ambush officers or evade arrest.
State Requirements
Police cited unspecified state requirements mandating encryption.
The Public Pushback
The October 29, 2025 City Council meeting saw remarkable opposition to the encryption proposal:
24+ Public Speakers
More than two dozen residents spoke against encryption during public comment. Speakers included pedestrian advocates, bike safety groups, and independent police oversight organizations.
Police Accountability Board Opposition
Berkeley's civilian police oversight body, the Police Accountability Board, along with Director of Police Accountability Hansel Aguilar, issued a statement urging more deliberation. They wanted data on whether claimed dangers were real or theoretical.
The Berkeley Scanner Op-Ed
Local news outlet The Berkeley Scanner published an op-ed titled "Berkeley should not vote for police secrecy over transparency," urging the council to reject the proposal.
One Lone Vote
Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra cast the only vote against encryption, standing with the community against her colleagues.
What Berkeley Got Instead
As encryption went live on November 6, 2025, Berkeley PD launched a "near real-time" online call log as an alternative:
Berkeley's Call Log System
- 10-minute delay on all information
- Displays calls for service from previous 48 hours
- Includes: call type, priority level, date/time, block address
- Does NOT include: officer communications, tactical information, scene updates, real-time developments
What's Lost vs. What Remains
Lost with Encryption
- Real-time awareness of nearby incidents
- Officer-to-officer communications
- Scene updates and developments
- Calls for backup or emergency
- Officer safety concerns as they happen
- Accountability through real-time monitoring
What the Log Provides
- Basic call types (10 min delayed)
- Block-level addresses
- Priority codes
- Time of initial call
Lessons from Berkeley
Berkeley's encryption fight offers important lessons for advocates in other communities:
Progressive Politics ≠ Transparency
Berkeley is among the most progressive cities in America, yet voted 8-1 for encryption. Political identity doesn't guarantee support for police transparency.
Oversight Bodies Can Be Ignored
Even when civilian police oversight boards oppose encryption, elected officials may still approve it. Official opposition isn't enough.
Public Testimony Has Limits
Twenty-four speakers opposing a measure means little if council members have already decided. Advocacy must begin before decisions are made.
"Last Holdouts" Are Vulnerable
Being the last unencrypted agency creates pressure to conform. Regional coordination is essential—don't let your community become isolated.
Delayed Logs Are Not Alternatives
A 10-minute delayed call log provides a fraction of the information available from live radio. Don't let departments claim this as adequate transparency.
Start Organizing Early
By the time encryption reaches a council vote, it may be too late. Engage with police leadership, city managers, and council members before proposals emerge.
What Could Have Worked
Looking at successful fights elsewhere—like Palo Alto's reversal—Berkeley advocates might have succeeded with different tactics:
Earlier Engagement
Palo Alto's reversal took 20 months of sustained advocacy. Berkeley's fight began only when the proposal emerged. Start years before, not weeks.
Council Member Champions
Palo Alto had Councilman Greer Stone leading the charge. Berkeley had only one vote against. Cultivate champions before votes happen.
Demand Real Alternatives
Rather than accepting a delayed log, demand media access programs, real-time feeds with personal info stripped, or partial encryption that keeps dispatch open.
Regional Coordination
As the "last holdout," Berkeley was isolated. Coordinating with advocates across the Bay Area before other cities encrypted might have changed the regional dynamic.
Don't Let Your City Be Next
Berkeley's loss doesn't have to be repeated. Learn from what happened and start organizing now—before encryption reaches your council's agenda.