Want to park near Cal’s stadium in Berkeley on game...

Heads up, Cal Bears fans, the cost of a football game-day parking ticket in the neighborhoods around Memorial Stadium just shot up to $225.

“We were trying to address a few different problems,” Berkeley City Councilwoman Lori Droste said. The biggest concern is drivers parking in front of driveways or blocking access to homes.

The surge of cars on game days makes it difficult for residents to park close to their homes, and the previous $98 fine just wasn’t a deterrent.

“One of the reasons a $98 fine wasn’t working was because people in the area were charging $100 to let people park in their own spaces,” said Berkeley Transportation Division Manager Farid Javandel.

The move would bar anyone from parking in the area without a residential parking permit. The change was triggered by complaints from neighbors north and south of the stadium.

“Fraternities and people with residential parking permits were taking their cars out of their driveways, parking on the street, then renting out their driveways for $100 — so it was cheaper to park on the street and get a ticket,” Javandel said.

“It all leads to more parking congestion,” Javandel said.

The “enhanced fine area” will cover streets within a 10- to 12-block radius north and south of Memorial Stadium. The fine for parking for more than two hours without a permit in residential parking areas farther from the stadium stays at $98.

UC Berkeley’s football season typically includes seven home games between August and November.

But beware, you can still be hit with the $225 fine long after the game is over.

“Some games are in the early afternoon, some games are in the evening, so in the interest of consistency the parking will be enforced from 8 a.m. to 11 p.m,” Javandel said.

“We’ll be putting up really big warning signs to make it noticeable,” he said. “We don’t want to cite anyone if we can help it.”

Droste said there was an environmental twist to the higher fine as well.

“We are trying to incentivize people to take alternative modes of transportation to games to reduce greenhouse gases and traffic congestion,” she said.

At that price it just might work.

And then there is the money. The new fines are expected to bring the city an extra $31,650 over the course of the season.

The council vote approving the higher fines was first reported by the Berkeleyside community website.

Go Bears!

Taking the initiative: Hometown e-cigarette giant Juul is working behind the scenes to get reluctant San Francisco lawmakers to the table for a set of jointly negotiated controls directed at curbing the sale of vaping products to teens.

The idea is for restrictions instead of the all-out ban on the sale of vaping goods that is being proposed by Supervisor Shamann Walton.

Walton, however, has refused to sit down with the nicotine giant.

So last week Juul and a coalition of corner grocers and adult smokers took out papers at the San Francisco Department of Elections so they may begin collecting signatures for a ballot initiative that would impose restrictions on online and brick-and-mortar e-cigarette retailers and corner grocers.

The motivation for the ballot measure is based in part on a recent poll of 800 city voters, paid for by Juul, that found 51% opposed an all-out ban on e-cigarette sales, compared with 41% who would support a ban.

When the same voters were asked whether they would support a ban on selling more than two vaping units and five pod packs at a time and the sale or marketing of vaping products to anyone under 21, 71% of those polled said “yes” to the idea, while 20% said “no.”

Chances are the poll won’t budge Walton, who called the ballot play a “smoke screen.”

“They say they are trying to cure people of nicotine addiction when they are just trading one form of addiction for another,” he said Friday.

Other supervisors, however, may be looking for a compromise, as small business and grocers say the loss of e-smokes would kill their businesses. And the argument goes that if the Juul initiative passes it would trump the city’s ban.

Congratulations: Gov. Gavin Newsom has named San Francisco tourism booster Joseph D’Alessandro — who once called San Francisco’s streets “filthy” and “disgusting” — to the California Travel and Tourism Commission.

D’Alessandro heads San Francisco Travel, which markets the city and said he is looking forward to promoting the state with a positive spin but added, “I’m still going to call it as I see it.”

And the ever-honest Joe proved his candid nature is intact when he said that while he was flattered by the appointment, “unfortunately it’s one of those that doesn’t pay.”

That’s not the case with Newsom’s reappointment of Kimiko Burton to her seat on the State Personnel Board, on which she has served since 2012. Burton is also a San Francisco deputy city attorney and daughter of former state Sen. John Burton, Newsom’s political godfather.

The position pays $48,789 a year and requires Senate confirmation, but it’s pretty much a slam dunk.

San Francisco Chronicle columnist Phillip Matier appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Matier can be seen on the KPIX-TV morning and evening news. He can also be heard on KCBS radio Monday through Friday at 7:50 a.m. and 5:50 p.m. Got a tip? Call 415-777-8815, or email pmatier@sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @philmatier