Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agenda 2019-06-19 —� TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Council Tiburon Town Hall �•', June 19,2019 1505 Tiburon boulevard. Special Meeting—6:30 P.M. Tiburon CA 94920 Regular Meeting—7:30 P.M. = : TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA Teleconference Location: Councilmember Holli Thier Solaz Lobby KM 18.5 Carretera Transpeninsular CSL-SCJ, Cabo Real San Jose Del Cabo 23405 Mexico PURSUANT TO THE RALPH M.BROWN ACT,ALL VOTES SHALL BE BY ROLL CALL DUE TO COUNCILMEMBER TRIER TELECONFERENCE FROM SOLAZ, KM 18.5 CARRETERA TRANSPENINSULAR CSL-SJC,CABO REAL,SAN JOSE DEL CABO, 23405 MEXICO SPECIAL MEETING—6:30 P.M. Special Joint Meeting Tiburon Town Council Tiburon Heritage&Arts Commission CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Town Council:Councilmember Fraser, Councilmember Thier,Councilmemher AVc1ncr,Vice vla�,or Fredericks, M i\,or Kulik Heritage&Arts Commission: Commissioner Ftemad, Commissioner Hall,Commissioner\-lujica- Bcavers,Commissioner Noguez,Vice Chair Norris,Chair Fong ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishii;g to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda ma},do so at this time. Pleasc note ho\vcvcr,that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referrecl to the appropriate Commission,Board, Committee or-taff for consideration or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Pleasc limit !our comment to three (3)minutes. ACTION ITEMS AI-1. Heritage&Arts Annual Report-Receive 2018-19 annual report by Heritage&Arts Commission (Heritage&Arts Commission) AI-2. Public Art Policy-Review and discuss draft Public Art Policy(I-Ieritage S Arts Commission) ADJOURNMENT- to reaularmeetzn, REGULAR MEETING-7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmcmber Fraser,Councilmember Thier,Councilmember Wclner)Vice Mayor Fredericks,Mayor Kulik ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION IF ANY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission,Board, Committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your continents to three(3)minutes. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion of the Town Council unless a request is made by a member of the Town Council,public or staff to remove an item for separate discussion and consideration. If you wish to speak on a Consent Calendar item, please seek recognition by the Mayor and do�,o at this time. CC-l. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of May 1, 2019 special and regular meetings (Department of Administrative Services) CC-2. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of May 15, 2019. special and regular meetings (Department of Administrative Services) CC-3. Local Emergency-Adopt Resolution continuing the dectaration of a local emergency related to damage caused by February 2019 storms (Office of the Town Managcr) CC-4. Town Budget and Gann Limit Resolution - Adopt Resolution approving Fiscal Year 2019-20 Tiburon Municipal Budget and Capital Improvement Program and Gann limit appropriations limit for Fiscal Year 2019-20 (Office of the Town Manager/Department of Administrative Services) CC-S. California Department of Emergency Services Signature Authority - Adopt Resolution .authorizing the Town Manager to act as signing agent for required forms for state and federal reimbursement related to local storm emergency (Dcpartnncnt o1 Public \Yorks) CC-6. Signature and Safe Deposit Box Authority - Adopt resolution updating references to Town ,ignature authority to reflect changes in staff composition and location and authorit)> to access town safe deposit boxes (Department of Administrative Services) CC-7. SB 2 Grant Funding(Planning Funds) -Authorization to apply for SB 2 Grant Funding related to future planning activities ACTION ITEMS AI-I. Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project - Discuss a financial contribution toward the expansion project and the shared public space between Town Hall and the Library (Community Development Department) PUBLIC HEARINGS PH-l. Unmanned Aerial System ("UAS") Regulations - Consider municipal code amendments that would regulate takeoff,landing and operation of UAS (commonly known as drones) near public schools,public special events and emergency operations-Introduction and first reading o f ordinance PH-2. Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District("TTBID") -Conduct public hearing to: a. Consider any protests to continue TTBID assessments as set forth in Resolution No. 17-2019 b. Consider adoption of Resolution to continue TTBID assessments as set forth in Resolution No. 17-2019 TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS TOWN MANAGER REPORT WEEKLY DIGESTS • Town Council Weekly Digests-June 7&14, 2019 :ADJOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Town Cleric at (415) 435- 7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's 'website, toNvnoftiburon.org. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address,phone number and brief description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 clays before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at,or prior to, the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19. 2019 Agenda Item: N/A 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon. CA 94920 To: Mavor and Members of the Town Council From: Heritage & Arts Commission Subject: 2018-19 Annual Report to the Town Council Reviewed By: 1 ''�-- - n/a Greg Chanis,Town Manager Ben'amin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY The heritage&Arts Commission vwill present the Commission's annual report to the Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Receive the annual report. BACKGROUND Per the Heritage & Arts Commissions adopted bylaws, the Commission is required to make an annual report to the Town Council on the Commission's activities and goals for the future year. The annual report is attached as Exhibit 1. ANALYSIS No further analysis provided. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff anticipates no direct fiscal impact to the Town by discussion of this item. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project tinder CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town COunC11 receive the annual report. Exhibit(s): 1. Heritage & Arts Commission 2018-19 Annual Report to the Town Council Prepared By: Patti Pickett. Liaison to I I&A Commission - Administration TOWN OF TiBURON PAGE I OF I TIBURON HERITAGE &ARTS COMMISSION Report 2018-19 to Tiburon Town Council June 19, 2019 This report has been generated to fulfill statutory requirements as outlined in the General By-Laws of the Town of Tiburon (hereinafter, "The Town"), with regard to the annual activity of the Tiburon Heritage and Arts Commission (hereinafter, "The Commission"). Report from July 1, 2018–June 19, 2019: The Commission generated a variety of projects to preserve the Town's unique heritage and to advance the arts in the community. The Commission recognized that quality artistic programs and activities in our Town will enrich civic pride and will elevate appreciation of our heritage and arts. The Commission also achieved important goals and objectives in its work. • Improved and increased public access to, participation in and information about The Commission: a. Established and continued development of a new website. b. updated current documents and publications. c. Created a presence in Town Hail to engender public interest. • Broadened connections with other organizations: a. Participated with Marin County Arts Council programs. b. Connected with Mill Valley Arts Commission. c. Communicated with POST(Parks, Open Space,Trails) and the Library for future public projects. Awards The Commission presented two annual community-based awards at Town Council meetings.The awards were given to celebrate the work and service by the honorees. Receptions were well-attended. • Presented the Heritage Preservation Award to Joan Palmero on October 18, 2018. • Presented the Arts EducatorAward to Ella Steinberg on May 15, 2019. Artist Laureate The Commission worked in cooperation with and in support of the Artist Laureate's work. Richard Rozen, Tiburon's Artist Laureate, led the effort to establish the Public Art Program Policy for the Town. vp Established an od hoc committee to formulate a Public Art Program Policy. Members included Joan Palmero, Lorrie Green, Commissioners Jaleh Etemad &Victoria Fong. • Consulted with Town Manager on the Public Art Program Policy. • Approved the Public Art Prograin Policy to be presented to Town Council, • Hosted a special program on Public Art held on December 6, 2018—over 40 people attended. • Developed programs still in progress: a. Begin inventory of existing public art and public spaces in Town byJaleh Etemad. b. Explore painting utility boxes. EXHIBIT 1 Art Shows in Town Hall Gallery and Atrium The Commission continued to jury and select artists for shows. It sponsored 12 art shows that featured individual artists, artists' groups such as Marin Society of Artists&The Originals as well as the annual shows from Landmark Society(2018)and Del Mar School (2019). • Made available weekend times for artists' reception. • Continued coordination with other schools in Marin County and youth arts organizations. • Planned future shows and events with local and county organizations, i.e. Marin Open Studios. • Explored creative concepts for art shows, i.e. upcoming show for"Closet Artists" in our community. Concerts at St Hilary's The Commission co-sponsored concerts under the direction of and in cooperation with Town Historian, David Gotz, and The Landmarks Society. The Commission paid for the seven public banners publicizing the concerts and received printed acknowledgement in the programs for these musical performances. What's Ahead? The Commission will recommend the Public Art Program Policy to the Town Council and will support early approval and implementation of the policy. The Commission would like the Town Council to consider a funding mechanism for public art. Possible methods: • Receive a percentage from development fees common in other area towns and cities. • Budget or set a fee structure for maintenance of public art. The Commission will work to continue an integrated and diverse cultural arts program in our community. The Commission will consider possibilities to: • Sponsor a series of performing arts (dance, drama, music) and lecture programs. • Encourage multi-generational art projects with special interest in a youth art program. • Coordinate and collaborate on community events with other organizations, i.e. a plein air event. The Commission would like to participate and be included in policies and projects that might involve artworks or preservation. The Commission would like to establish a process and an understanding of its advisory role in all matters pertaining to heritage and the arts in the Town of Tiburon. Heritage&Arts Commission Victoria Fong, Chair Kenna Norris, Vice Chair Jaleh Etemad, Fran Hall,Azita Mujica-Beavers, Nora Noguez, Members Town COuncll Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 Agenda Item: N/A 1505 Tiburon Boulevard TibLu-on, CA 94920 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town COuncll From: Heritage & Arts Commission Subject: Tiburon Public Art Program Policy c Reviewed By: J n/a Grua Chanis,Tome Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY The Heritage &Arts Conu»ission has requested a joint meeting with the Town Council to present and discuss a draft Public Art Program Policy and seekfeedback from the Council on the draft policy. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Discuss and offer feedback on the draft Public Art Program Policy. BACKGROUND As stated in the resolution founding the Heritage & Arts (H&A) Commission, among the stated goals and objectives are the following: 1 . To preserve and advance the cultural and historic heritage of the Tiburon Peninsula Community. 2. To recommend the appropriate selection, placement, modification and maintenance of art and historic objects on the Peninsula. In order to fulfill these goals. the Commission, together with the current Artist I.,aureate, Richard Rozen, are putting forth a proposal to establish a Public Art Program Policy for the Town of Tiburon (Exhibit 1). Richard Rozen and the H&A Commission have conducted extensive research into the Mill Vallee Public Art Policy and other like communities using the benefits of their lengthy process to craft a proposal they, believe to be applicable to the Tiburon Peninsula, and are now seeking feedback fi-om the Council on the drat-t policy. ANALYSIS The program is committed to expanding opportunities for the citizens to experience public art. The pro()ram policy outlines the goals �md defines the process. TOWN OF TiBFRON PAGE 1 m,2 Funding, eligible artworks, and artist selection committees are explained. Responsibilities of artists are clearly outlined, as well as site and artist selection criteria and process. The policy also outlines the approval process for public art by an artist selection panel, the Heritage & Arts Commission, staff and the Town Council. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff anticipates no direct fiscal impact to the Town by discussion of this item. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Statf has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (Cf--.QA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council discuss and offer feedback on the draft Public Art Prou'ram Policy. Exhibit(s): 1) Heritage and Arts Commission Public Art Program Policy Statement Prepared By: Patti Pickett,Liaison to H&A Commission -Administration 1'01. A OFT1131, RON P,i(;v 2 (>f..2 lit HERITAGE AND ARTS COMMISSION PUBLIC ART PROGRAM POLICY STATEMENT VISION STATEMENT The Public Art Program is committed to enhance the physical beauty of the Town of Tiburon and add to the public experience of art which will enrich the spirit and pride of our community. GOALS The Public Art Program is committed to expand opportunities for our citizens to experience public art creating a more pleasing environment and improving our quality of life. The Program will: • Promote awareness of public art and provide opportunities for individuals to identify with and feel ownership of commissioned artworks. • Utilize public art as a vehicle to educate children and provide avenues for their unique artistic expressions to enrich the community. • Involve artists in the planning and design of public art projects. • Commission artists to create artworks that are responsive to the sites selected without blocking view corridors or impeding the use of public open space. The art work should create possibilities for collaboration between artists, design professionals including architects, landscape architects, planners, engineers and city officials. DEFINITIONS Accessioning: The process of selecting an artwork into a Public Art Collection whether by commissioning, purchase, or donation. • Role of the Heritage and Arts Commission: The Commission formed by Resolution 31-2014 of the Tiburon Town Council has among its duties "To recommend the appropriate selection, placement, modification and/or maintenance of art...in the Town of Tiburon". • The Commission may appoint a committee to help with the selections. The Heritage and Arts Commission recommends an artist to be approved by the Town Council as the Artist Laureate of Tiburon. Part of the Artist Laureate's duty will be to work with the Commission to select sites along with the Parks and Open Space Commission, the Public Works Department, and other relevant local organizations. Deaccessioning: The process of permanently removing an artwork from the Public Art Collection by sale, destruction and/or removal from public display. FUNDING The Public Art Program recognizes that funding and maintenance of public art can be challenging. The Program anticipates utilizing the following methods: • Public funds could be used to acquire and maintain public art if built into the Town's budget as a specific line item. • A percentage for ail could be built into capital improvement projects and new projects. • Business sponsorships could be developed for specific proposed art selections or for the Public Art Program in general. EXHIBIT 1 1 • Donations for public art could be sought from private sector groups, both for-profit and/or non-profit. • Individuals may make donations. • Grants and/or matching grants could be sought from national and local foundations and institutions. ELIGIBLE ARTWORKS In general, all forms of artistic expression created by professional artists are eligible for inclusion in the Public Art Program. Free-standing works as well as works that have been integrated into the underlying architecture or landscape are included for consideration. The artwork may consist of both permanent and temporary installations. Design elements which are mass produced such as playground equipment, benches, decorative or ornamental pieces will be considered only if they are integral to the artists overall design. Services or utilities necessary to operate or maintain an artwork shall not be deemed part of the artwork itself. ARTIST SELECTION PANELS The Heritage and Arts Commission may form an ad hoc panel to recommend artists for individual public art projects or groups of projects. The panel can review the credentials, prior work, qialifications, and proposals submitted by artists fOr a partlCUldr public art project. The panel should be sensitive to the public nature of the project and maintain confidentiality of all the discussions. The Heritage and Arts Commission will have the final decision on all art/artist selections and may assign additional duties to the panel as necessary. ARTISTS RESPONSIBILITIES Artists shall submit the following: • Qualifications • Visuals • Proposals and/or project materials requested. • If selected, the artist will execute and complete the artwork in a timely and professional manner as contracted. • The artist will make presentations to the Heritage and Arts Commission or other reviewing bodies as required. • Public presentations and community education workshops may be requested for any public art project as needed. OTHER AGENCIES' RESPONSIBILITIES The Town will assign agencies (i.e. the Department of Public Works) as necessary to review contracts of selected artists and make recommendations regarding the following: • Liability and insurance requirements. • Legal issues. • Safety issues. • Code requirements. • Timelines. • Installation issues will be discussed with the Town Engineer. • Appropriate documentation will be completed which may include design, other drawings, photographs or videos. 2 SITE SELECTION The Heritage and Arts Commission will maintain an inventory of current artworks and a map of the peninsula which will show where artwork is located. The map will provide information where future artwork can be placed. The Commission can either choose a location where artwork would be a valuable addition to the community and solicit proposals for that specific site or identify appropriate artwork and determine which site would be the best location. The criteria to be used for site selection would include: • Compatibility with the principal purpose of the location; work must not block view corridors or impede use of public open space. • Suitability of the artwork's scale and character. • Availability of suitable physical space. • Environmental suitability of the artwork. • Cost to establish and maintain the artwork at the site. • Availability of funding sources. The Heritage and Arts Commission will make every effort to coordinate and share the site selection process with the Public Works Department, Parks and Open Space Commission, and the community at large. ARTIST SELECTION The Heritage and Arts Commission will select artists using one of the following methods: • Request for Qualifications. (RFQ) • Request for Proposal. (RFP) • Invitational competition. • Pre-qualified list. The method used will vary depending on the type of project and the specific requirements of the project. The goal is to select artists in a well-documented and transparent process that are best suited to the project in mind. The following factors will be considered when reviewing proposals by the artist and the artwork: • Reasonable maintenance requirements as specified by the artist. Consideration will be given to who will perform the maintenance procedures; the Town, the artist or private parties. • Works of art will be designed considering public safety and decency. • Consideration will be given to issues of security, theft, vandalism. • The design of the art will be site specific. Works must not block view corridors or impede use of key public open space. OVERVIEW OF THE PUBLIC ART APPROVAL PROCESS The general outline of the approval process will be as follows: • Select a site or group of sites • The artist selection panel will determine if the proposed public art project fits the Public Art Program. • The Heritage and Arts Commission will approve the project. • The Town Staff will approve the project. • The Town Council will approve the project. 3 Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Agenda ]tem: CC - I Tiburon. CA 94920 STAFF REPORY To: Mavor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Administrative Services Subject: Adopt Minutes of May 1, 2019 Special and Regular Town Council Meetings Reviewed B �a Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY At the last Town Council meeting, the Council requested additional clarity on direction given on the Capital linprovement Project item prior to adopting the minutes'for the meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Adopt the May 1,2019 Town Council minutes. BACKGROUND At the June 5, 2019 Town Council meeting, the Council requested additional clarity on the direction given on the 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program Overview item, specifically direction on the proposed maintenance building at Blackie's Pasture. The paragraph (on page 7) in question reads as follows: "The Cot,tncil agreed lhol the project shoadd be revie>>,ed by POST ii,ilh the direction fi-oin Council to redefine the need for slora,e of McKegncv Green eg11ip1Pen1 and to come up ii�ilh(I solution ztsing the exisling])toms, or a neer propos,'//, 1rhile providing ample opporlamity for public inorkshops and input. The Mayor ulso rec-ol77171ei7ded.fixing the 1etu1-)or0t1V green fence that is in place noli,. " ANALYSIS Absent a motion or formal vote on the item. stafTsummarized the direction in the minutes as it was summarized by the Mayor prior to closing the item. A verbatim transcript of this discussion is written below. f=or additional clarity. a verbatim transcript of the entire Council discussion on the item is attached as Exhibit 2. The attached transcript begins at timestamp 3:21:44 of the audio available on the Town's \-vebsite. with the portion below beginning at 3:32:28. Mutwr Ku/ik.- Oka-v, so 1 think irhal ]'in hearing--I n°ill voice the second congkiint on the green fence: use need to.fix thin. So 1 think the eireclion irc cine ull saying is to send this hack to POST TOWN OF TiBURON PAGE 1 or 2 with the plays that we have, and the direction that has been described loni; TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETINGS DRAFT MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING —6:30 P.M. On May l, 2019. the Connell held a special meeting as follows: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL COuncilmember Fraser, Co1-mcilniember ,Thier, COuncilmember Welner, Vice Mayor Fredericks. Mayor Kulik CLOSED SESSION Public Employee Performance Review: Government Code Section 54957 Title: Town Manager ADJOURNMENT—to regular meetiu� REGULAR MEETING—7:30 P.M. Mayor Kulik called the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday. May 1, 2019. in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Fraser, Fredericks, Kulik, Thier, Welner ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager Chanis, Town Attorney Stock. Director of Community Development Kwon. Director of Administrative Services Sweitzer. Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes. Associate Planner O'Malley. Town Clerk Stefani ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION IF ANY None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. PRESENTATIONS Recognition of Town Set-vices— Linda Emberson. Design Review Board Pagc 1 of 8 T(Aiw Council illhmles -'108-2019 DRAF7 111u>>1, 2019 EXHIBIT I Mayor Kulik presented Desitin Review Board member Linda Emberson a plaque to commemorate her years on the Design Review Board. and thanked her for her service to the Town. Introduction of New Town Employees—_Kris Bernard. Community Development Aide Director of ComnIunity Development Kwon introduced new "Town employee. Kris Bernard, to the Town Council. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-1. 27 Main Street Conditional Use Permit—Adopt Resolution CC-2. Recommendation to Accept the March 2019 Investment Summary A member ol"the public, Justin Flake, requested Consent Calendar Item No. CC-I be removed for discussion. MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Item No. CC-2, as written. Moved: Thier, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous CC-1. 27 Main Street Conditional Use Permit— Adopt Resolution Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. .Justin Flake, General Manager of the Water's Edge Hotel. was opposed to the approval of the permit. He said lie was oblivious to the recent proceedings. and said the hotel was only in support of acoustical music—not amplified music. He said the approval ofthis permit would hurt the hotel's business. I'he Council discussed the proper noticing procedures for the prior hearing. COunellinember Fraser spoke in support ofthe Council's prior approval. but Vice Mayor Fredericks expressed concern over the misunderstandings between the two businesses and said she would have liked to see the tvv o parties come to an agreement. MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Item No. I. as written. Moved: Fraser. seconded by KLIJIk VOTE: AYES: Fraser. Kulilc. Thier Wolnor NAYS: Fredericks ACTION ITEMS AI-1. Downtown Banners— Request by Chamber of Commerce to hang banners on Town owned light poles Puge 2 of 8 Town Cozmcil Minutes =08-2019 DRAFT jllai> 1, 2019 Town Manager Chanis said the Chamber of Commerce was requesting authorization to hang new banners on light poles around town. DeAnn Biss. Executive Director of the Chamber, showed examples of the proposed banners and said the design and color scheme integrates nicely with the Town and is an opportunity to demonstrate Tiburon's commitment to be a vibrant town to the community. Ms. Biss said the Chamber's proposal was to hang banners throughout town fi-0111 May to September 2019. and requested the Town contribute approximately $2,000. Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. There was none. Several councilmembers spoke in support of the proposal. Councilmember Fraser said there was an apparent conflict with the proposal and the annual use of the banners by Street Smarts Marin. Town Manager Chanis confirmed there is a conflict for a period of time, and the logistics still need to be worked out. The Council discussed the timing conflict. Fraser said the Street Smarts Marin banners were an important message and noted the importance of finding a compromise. MOTION: To approve the request and provide the authority for staff to work with the Chamber of Commerce and Street Smarts Marin to develop a mutually acceptable solution to hang the banners. Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Thier VOTE: AYES: Unanimous AI-2. Library Expansion Project— Update on various Conditions of Approval related to project. Provide direction to staff regarding 2 conditions Town Manager Chanis reminded the Council of the actions taken so far on the Library Expansion project since 2007. He said the library agency submitted a building permit application in March. and is now under review. Chanis said this item was an update on several conditions of approval of the project. and was also an opportunity for the Council to provide needed direction on several of the conditions. The Town Manager said the Town will convey the discussed real property to the library once the library satisfies to the Town that there are sufficient funds to complete the project. Chanis said the Town has been workino closely with the library agency on the condition re-ardin« reciprocal access. and a rough draft of the agreement has been completed. He also updated the Council on the common space between the new library and To\,y n Hall. He continued that the Tov-vn has been working with the library and neighbors to ensure compliance with the parking space requirements. He said staff is confident that agreements v-vill be in place to comfortably satisfy this requirement. P(wc 3 o 8 Town Cozmcil;llizazzte.s L?08-2019 DRAFT ll7co- 1, 2019 Chanis said one of the conditions in the 201 1 resolution required the ]-own and the library to work together to determine a "reasonable contribution'' toN-vard traffic improvements, such as a traffic circle, prior to issuance of building permit. He said staff believes it is premature to determine what a"reasonable contribution" is because this improvement is not anticipated to begin any time soon. He asked the Council for direction on whether to fulfill the requirement as is, or consider amending the condition. The Council acknowledged that the necessary information had not been gathered to determine a contribution toward a traffic circle prior to the issuance of the building permit, and discussed making an amendment to the condition to require the Town and the library to work together at a future date. COuncilmember Weiner thought a fair approach would be to amend the condition to agree upon some percentage split between the Town and the library for a futlll-e project, so both parties know what to expect. The Council agreed. Director of Community Development Kwon presented on the final condition for the Council to provide direction on related to accessible parking and no parking zones. He showed the Council an amended design, and said staff agrees that this design conforms to the required conditions. Mayor Kulik invited Glen Isaacson, project manager, to speak. Glen Isaacson said contributions toward traffic improvements, like the proposed traffic circle, are typically done on a `fair share' basis by conducting a traffic count study. He agreed that trying to come up with a "reasonable contribution" would be difficult without further study. Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. There was none. Regarding the accessible parking condition, the Council agreed with staff`s recommendation. Regarding the traffic mitigation condition, the Council agreed that this item should be considered alongside any other monetary contributions the Town is asked to make toward the library. The Council asked staff to propose a formula for how the traffic mitigation proposal would be paid for by the Town and the library agency in the future. likely to include a percentage allocation and a cap. AI-3. Fiscal Year 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program Overview Town Manager Chanis said this Item would h a broad dISCLISSioh abOffl the CAP With r1;P 0021 of �� seeking direction on several projects as staff prepares the next fiscal year budget. He briefly reviewed the Town's general fund reserve accounts and projectcd fiscal year end fund balances. Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes revieNved projects for funding in the next fiscal year, including storm drain and road repair projects and paving sections of the Old Rail Trail. He also presented on projects lie believes should be funded in the next several years. Page 4(#'8 Town Council Himaes #08-2019 DRAFT Alar 1, 2019 Barnes said there were also three projects staff was seeking specific direction from the Council. Barnes presented on the project to put solar panels on the police station. Ile said that upon further design and research, this project may not save as much money as originally thought. He also noted that the Town has accomplished a major part of its "green" initiatives by opting into Deep Green with Marin Clean Energy. The Council discussed the project. Councilmember Fraser recommended ceasing the project. COuneilmember Welner agreed, and said this project was well-intentioned. but had now become a symbolic effort. He said the Town is still working on a number of sustainable initiatives. Barnes then presented on the Corporation Yard repair project. He said this building is in need of repair and does not meet building and safety codes. He said studies have been done in the past, but never pursued. He said there are several options at various costs and asked the Council for direction on saving for the most comprehensive (and expensive) option, or to repair only what needs to be repaired. Finally, Barnes presented on the proposed maintenance storage building at McKegney Green. He said the purpose of this building was to provide a safe and secure facility for storage of equipment and supplies related to the ongoing maintenance of Blackie's Pasture. McKegney Green and the Old Rail Trail because the Corporation Yard is inadequate for the current needs. He reviewed the preliminary site plan, elevations, design and what equipment and materials would be stored inside the building. He said other locations were considered.. but this location would be less expensive and have less visual impacts. He asked the Council for direction on whether or not to continue with the current design of the building or to continue with only the bike repair station portion of the project. Vice Mayor Fredericks asked Director Barnes to comment on herbicide storage in the building. Barnes said herbicide is not used on McKegney Field at all. but is used in some select locations. I le said any storage of herbicide was not necessary there at all if it was objectionable. Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. George Barnard, Andrew Drive, spoke in opposition to the equipment storaoc building. Ernie Cervantes, Washington Court, spoke in opposition to the equipment storm-ye buildin1_1. Kathy McLeod spoke in opposition to the equipment storage buildin-1. Carla Rivera, Washington Conrt, questioned why this project is still being discussed despite the public's opposition to the project. A Claire Way resident spoke in opposition to the equipment storage building and said the public needs to be able to have input on the project. Pq_,cjof8 TOwn Cozn7cil Alinzaes 908-2019 DRAFT 1t1uv 1. 2019 Jenna Watson, Belvedere, spoke in opposition to the equipment storage building and noted that there were more important capital improvement projects in the budget that require funding instead. Angela McInerney, Mount Tiburon, spoke in opposition to the equipment storage building and believed the decision to remove public park land was being made without a fair and public process. Jerry Riessen, Marinero Circle, suggested the Council plan a workshop to consider a master plan for the park area. Amy Lapp, Paradise Cay. spoke in opposition to the equipment storage building and said all Current park space should be preserved as much as possible. Connor Flaherty said any approval of the storage building Vyould need to go through a public process, and agreed with Mr. Riessen's suggestion. Mayor Kulilt closed the floor, and called for a recess as 10:15 p.m. The Council reconvened at 10:25 p.m. The Council and staff discussed vehicle traffic on the Old Rail Trail, and staff noted that this proposal was an attempt to minimize Trail traffic as McKegney Green will continue to require a significant maintenance. Staff also said that the size of the proposed storage building is as small as it could be to meet the needs. COUncilmernber Welner recommended ceasing the installation of solar on the police station, and said malting a decision on the Corporation Yard xyas premature at this stage. Wehner recommended delaying further review of the storage building until the issues raised tonight are addressed at the Commission level, and the public has been assured that the project has been properly analyzed. He believed it to be a good proposal, but not ready for Council review. Vice Mayor Fredericks said the Town has a responsibility to maintain the new McKegney Field as efficiently and inexpensively as possible. I lowever, she agreed that more public input and process was needed because much of the public perception teemed to be based on misinformation. She recommended the Town provide an opportunity for the public to ask questions and be more involved in the project. ,ouncl member Ther xxias not Ill favor of il-ltldin- the ctnra<oa hi►ilrlino in tha nf-vt ht;rlcrat hitt was in favor of moving forward with the bicycle repair station portion only. She agreed that there had not been enough public input. and there are other projects in the Capital Improvement Program that are higher priority. She also questioned if this building would actually reduce vehicle traffic on the Old Rail Trail. Thier was in favor ofmoving forward on a Corporation Yard project, but said the Council would benefit from an entire presentation on that project only. PQi�e 6 of 8 Town Council Minifies 408-2019 DRAFT Ahty I, 2019 Fredericks asked staff to comment on the priority ranking of the equipment storage building. Town Manager Chanis said the project is not a "Tier I" project. but the COLInCil previously allocated finds to do a preliminary design, which has been completed and the project is ready for next steps. Councilmember Fraser agreed that more public input would be needed on the equipment storage building, but noted that staff had followed the COunCll's direction in designing the building and holding duly-noticed public hearings on the project. He said the Council knees the new field would require significantly more maintenance, but this is not ready for Council review. He recommended the Council direct the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission to find a solution to the equipment storage problem. Fraser agreed with Councihlnember Welner's assessment on the solar panels on the police station. Of the Corporation Yard, Fraser suggested making the best use of the lowest cost option possible. Mayor Kulik agreed on ceasing solar project and agreed that deeper study of the Corporation Yard is needed. He liked the idea of a consultant presentation to the COLincil or an ad hoc subcommittee to study the financial implications of the various options. Mayor Kulik said recognizes the need for more public input on the equipment storage building and recommended including the remaining funds left in the next budget to continue studying the project with more public input. Fredericks agreed with ending the solar project, and shared similar concerns about the Corporation Yard. She said the Council needs to spend the funds necessary to make the area safe. For the storage building, she agreed with including the project in the next year's budget to continue to gather public input. Mayor Kulik said the Council was in agreement about ending the solar on the police station project. The Mayor also said there seemed to be agrcement that a presentation by the consultant on the various Corporation Yard options would be helpful. but there was not clear support for the most expensive option. Mayor Kulik recommended that the remaining funds left over for the storage huilding should be continued into the next fiscal year budget to continue the public process. The Council agreed that the project should be reviewed by POST vv ith the direction from Council to redefine the need for storage of McKeoney Green equipment and to come up with a solixtion using the existing plans. or a new proposal. �yhile providing ample opportunity for public workshops and input. The Mayor also recommended fixing the temporary oreen fence that is in place now. PUBLIC HEARINGS Page 7 of 8 7-mi n Coimcil Minutes #08-7019 DRAFT Alar 1, 2019 PH-1. Manager Minor Contract Signature Authority Ordinance— Consider amendments to Section 3A.3(a) of the Tiburon Municipal Code 3A.10—Inlroduclion and firs/ reading of ordinance Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes said the proposed ordinance corrects an inconsistency in the ']'own's Municipal Code relating to the Town Manager's increased contract signature authority for public works contracts. Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. There was none. MOTION: To introduce the ordinance and read by title only, waiving further reading and schedule for adoption at the next regular meeting. Moved: Thier, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous Mayor Kulik read "An Ordinance ofthe Town Council of the Town ofTiburon Amending Chapter 3A of the Town's Municipal Code Regarding Contract Award Procedures". ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Fraser, Fredericks, Kulik, Thier, Welner TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS None. TOWN MANAGER REPORT None. WEEKLY DIGESTS Received. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of T1bUrOn, Mayor Kulik adjourned the meeting at 1 1 :22 p.m. DAVID KULIK, MAYOR ATTEST: LEA STEFANI_ TOWN CLERK Page 8 of8 Toren Council Alinaiie.s x'08--?019 DRAFT Mai- 1. 2019 Mayor Kulik:Then, on to the storage shed; I've heard a couple opinions that aren't comfortable moving forward; I've heard that we need a little more clarity; my opinion was that at a minimum I think we should continue this into the 2019-2020 budget that we have already allocated in previous CIPS so if you could help me out— Councilmember Welner: How much is left? Do we know? Town Manager Chanis: I'm going to make a guess—I think it is$5-6000. We had the designer stop at the preliminary stage because ... and frankly, we were trying to save that money an CM their brought it up; one of t he things we needed to hear from Council is—the bike repair station,which is a relatively small item,which has already been approved, it is kind of being held up by this because we felt it made sense to look at it as a package; it certainly could be—the design for that could be finished and it could be constructed regardless of whether you decide to do shed now, never, or sometime in the future;so I don't think they are not tied together that way; we would like a little bit of clarity on whether you would like us to move forward with that; relatively small number Kulik: so there's that, and; if hypothetically we approved the$200[k], it would still have to go through a public process;would there be a point where it could be modified or changed through that public process, or appealed to the TC, after that review;that it would facilitate the progress of finding a solution for all the problems we have heard tonight Chanis:that is a loaded question I think—hard to answer; but I think I heard you say;that is one of our struggles on this side of the table—if you; and I am all for more public input,that is a great idea; but to get to the point of for instance, a PC meeting;we took it to PC because you all allocated money to do a preliminary design; and it requires a CUP if you ever want to move forward; so I'm not sure what the trigger is to say go to the PC again; Fraser: what if we were to challenge POST to take on the project of coming up with a recommendation for how do we provide storage for the equipment that is going to be needed for McKegney green—and maybe the recommendation is going to be the left hand corner of the Corp yard; maybe the recommendation is we are going to store it in a parking lot in the PD; ....;that process is innovative, it will involve the public works department; it will involve the POST;there will be a recommendation that will come out of that; at that time, then that recommendation maybe gets percolated up and we decide we are going to need some money to bring it to life; and then you can come back and ask for budget amendment or by that time it will be the next year and we can go to the next FY and put something in the budget;we should be careful to not put the cart in front of the horse; we have no idea right now what we are going to do. Councilmember Thier: right, I like that idea. I also think that I don't know if this is possible but I would love to see that$5-6000 actually go to the bike repair project because I feel like that's gotten held up a bit with all of this and it would be nice to see; since everyone's already approved that, the public's already on board; it would be nice to see that move forward as well; and I also think that sending it back to POST...that is, as Fraser's idea;that's exactly what the PC said to do in Sept. 2018; that it should be sent back to POST. And that post could look at it and figure out what to do. EXHIBIT 2 Kulik: my only thought on that would be it went to POST, and a long hearing and what came out of that was the recommendation/quote we saw for a temporary structure until we could do more research on this; eventually we are going to have to decide how to solve a couple of these problems and— Weiner: I do like Jim's suggestion; we are;the key thing to me is I don't mind allocating some funds to figure this out; but I think it's how we define it and I think we should define it carefully; I don't think the funds are to investigate this shed or to do any more work on this shed; I like the way that Fraser described it which is w have a storage problem; POST what do you recommend? Thier: Yeah I think that makes a lot of sense. Weiner:they can describe this building, they can come up with other ideas that make sense;they can hear from every body about these alternative concepts and then when its right it can come back to us for funding; but I think 200k as if we were going forward with this shed is not consistent with the idea of asking POST what to do Vice Mayor Fredericks: but of course staff would be providing some alternatives and all we really need richt nmol is Pnpllah rririnpLi to hake a public d thematerialsd present—on h.. L...me, ..1— `^b" Y pu'�"�' pro Lr,L�.Sj and L— I1LC1101J and a 1LQLIVII Uy VVIIVIIICVCr we meed. Kulik: does a continuation of the previous CIP allocation into the 19-20 satisfy that requirement? Chanis:just to go to POST certainly does not cost us very much;just staff time. Weiner: but anything shared with them you might have to spend some money. Chanis: perhaps, we would spend a little bit;just getting back to councilmember Their the bike repair station we are going to spend a little bit of money finalizing the construction drawings for the bike repair station; it's not a huge deal but it does need to be finished so we can get a contractor to understand what they are building. Fredericks: I have a question about that I thought the money for the bicycle repair station is not in any way dependent on the money for the shed right? Isn't it an independent project that you are just suggesting be considered— Chanis: no, my point is that $20k for this year was to do a preliminary design that included the storage building as well as that whole area;so we took that money and have a whole design for both of those areas; Fredericks: but it is not going to be waiting behind a decision on what to do about storage- Chanis: no; what I'm saying is we would like to move forward with the bike repair station if council wishes us to; there is about$5-6k left in that allocation; we will need to spend a little bit of that this year to finish the bike repair station design, I don't know how much that is; we would have to work with our designer to nail that down; but in terms of allocating something in next year for this project; if all you are asking staff to do is to return to a lower board of commission to discuss, I'm not sure an allocation is necessary; any minor material costs as 1W said probably could be absorbed in operating budget; I expect it is pretty minor; but if you envision hire an unbiased facilitator of public meetings,that's a different story;talking about bringing people in to facilitate that process; but for staff to try to work something out with POST,there is not a lot of money involved and I'm not sure an allocation is necessary Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes: I think if we wanted to provide site plans for four different locations that is going to start getting expensive so it depends what we want to actually do at those meetings; how detailed we want to be; if we want a thorough process it could be much more than the 20k we've spent so far. Chanis: sure, but what I'm hearing from Council is more of a bottom-up process and if that process starts with brainstorming with the public in our commissions in "Hey,we have a problem; are there solutions we can all agree on?" and then say "hey these are potentials...";we can come back to council and say we want to look into this more just as Barnes said, it would cost some money to hire someone to kind of deep dive a bit more into preliminary design. Kulik: So all that being said, is there any benefit to rolling over like I said the previous CIP allocation into 19-20? Chanis:frankly from what I'm hearing from council, I don't see a benefit at this point; because if the direction is to work with POST again then the bar is not very high for money and I think we can find the money we need for the prelim talk and any material necessary in our operating budget Kulik: alright so, I do have one question. So in the interim, where do we store all of the materials we have described tonight? Chanis:great question. as everybody knows, we installed a temporary fence with green mesh in the area and ostensibly it was to show you the size and what it would look like with story poles;we took the story poles down but left the fence up;we have been using it to essentially store the equipment that we have showed you would be in the shed;frankly that would be our; we would prefer to continue doing that moving forward; I think it's a benefit; I'll simply say since that fence has been up, until this evening, I have not heard one comment about it; no complaints about it; nobody's really brought it up;we certainly aren't going to be storing fuel or any material other than equipment there; but that would be what we would do. Kulik: okay, so I think what I'm hearing- I will voice the second complaint on the green fence;we need to fix that. So I think the direction is we are all saying is to send this back to POST, with the plans that we have, and the direction that everything that has been described tonight needs a solution, and start deliberating as a POST and coming up with an idea for that. Does that accurately reflect where we are? Thier: I think so. I think it does. Fredericks: What are the alternatives that we are asking them? Fraser: We need to redefine what the need is. So,this is the need How do we solve it?Open-ended. We want to make sure there is a public process and a good Q&A in that public process. Questions come up and everyone that participates has the ability to—POST Commissioners to answer the questions with the public. Thier: Okay. Kulik: Alright, do you have what you need from us on this item? Chanis: .....We will make it work. Kulik: Alright, so that item is closed. Moving on... Town Council Transcript May 1, 2019 2:37—3:21 -Transcript begins after public comment on item - Mayor Kulik: Okay,we are back in session and where we are is back at deliberations at the Council level. So if anyone would like to make comment—we have- I'll remind everyone we have three decisions to make: 1 regarding the letter of intent for the solar and the carport, Number 2 regarding course of action on the Corp yard and we heard things like a lesser option; another option we could explore now or should we start planning for one of the above; and finally we have the presentation we just had regarding the structure at blackie's pasture; so if anyone would like to start— Vice Mayor Fredericks: So I would just have a question for the staff about the issue we just looked at- Kulik: Sure. Fredericks: So,there was a lot of talk about traffic on the ORT and I was a little confused—it sounded like sometimes people were talking about how many people were using it recreationally and sometimes they were talking about actual vehicles. How much of the vehicle traffic on the ORT can be attributed to public works needing to access something, and how do you time that? Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes: Great questions—Richardson Bay Sanitation District— that is their access road. So it is a road as well as the beginning of the ORT. Fredericks: Because they have some kind of rights to use it, don't they? Barnes:Absolutely. And there is a certain point beyond which, beyond their property,which only public works and police and city vehicles or people with permission—we sometimes grant people permission to go out there—are allowed to go. When you get beyond Richardson Bay Sanitation District, it's largely us. And yes, everybody knows maintenance on McKegney Green has gone up. So our vehicles are out there more—we are probably small still compared to Richardson Bay in that area and the concept, you know ...there's two ways for us to get equipment out there. One is to drive our full truck,with a trailer, out on the ORT, out to south of knoll and beyond and McKegney Green or the other is we store that equipment locally, not on a trailer; we drive our truck and park it before we get on the ORT while we are still by Richardson bay and we get on our equipment and we take our small pieces of equipment—it's been called heavy equipment, it's legally not heavy equipment—our small pieces of equipment to the site and reduce traffic that way. So this building actually will reduce traffic—granted there is more traffic because McKegney is more popular than ever and because we are maintaining it more than ever. And yes, bikes,traffic has gone up. Town Manager Chanis: ...and if I might add to that before you ask another question, one of the things that Council—you may recall, in this year's budget, you provided us I believe$30,000 to purchase an electric utility vehicle and ... someone mentioned it, [he] would prefer us to buy electric vehicles to transport equipment. We have ordered and are waiting for delivery of what's called a small electric EXHIBIT 3 utility vehicle which is sort of a glorified golf cart—s I ightly bigger—that was road legal, but what we are hoping is that we would be able to experiment with having staff leave the Corp yard in that vehicle, cross Tiburon boulevard and perhaps use the ORT to get to McKegney Green in this area as opposed to driving a pickup truck around Tiburon Boulevard,through the parking lot, and down the ORT. So we are experimenting with ways to try to minimize the large vehicle traffic because we recognize, as everybody has mentioned,the activity level is going up. We are also spending more time— I've authorized the Police Chief to use overtime money to have occasional shifts on weekends to have police out there. And for the past few months,they have been doing it with their police cars, which people don't like because the cars are driving on the road, but we have an electric bicycle now and this past weekend was the first weekend where one of our police officers did a 4 hour shift on an electric bicycle riding up and down the ORT and we are hoping to increase that type of activity and experimentation in the coming year. Fredericks: ...just a follow up on that, do you expect that the needed maintenance on McKegney Green will taper off when the grass is established? Or is this the level that will continue? Barnes:This is the level that will continue. Yes, it is established. So it will continue at this rate. If I could put kind of the global vision together that Greg started to put there—if we have our equipment stored locally, and we only drive our trucks to the equipment; if we access the ORT most of the time on electric vehicle for ORT maintenance, we can begin to take out our trucks that we have traditionally used on the ORT off of it. That is what we are trying to do here. Fredericks:Thank you. Councilmember Fraser: Greg,just a quick question on the access road. I got the impression, but maybe incorrectly,that there may be public use of this roadway to get to McKegney Green. And I don't know what the ordinance is, or what the traffic laws are, but I would suggest if it's a private road for the use of Richardson bay sanitation district and/or public works, we ought to post it if it's not posted. And I'm happy to hear you have the chief and his team doing some additional police work there. I would encourage you to continue that. And then .. you know, it's not safe to have cars going up and down that road because you've got moms and dads and prams and bicycles and skaters and ... and there's not enough room for all of us and a vehicle. Chanis:Absolutely. We share your concern. As Pat mentioned, it is a road that RBSD has the right to use and so their employees drive in every day with their vehicles to go to their Corp yard, which is the sanitary district. They have—once they get there,they are jumping in their work vehicles and going in and out. They periodically get deliveries from large trucks for various things at their facility. We really huVo _ �. no control vvci we can't IImII that UJc IUI them. We car, only illlllt VUI own UJC and that's what we are trying to do. Now occasionally when you come into the parking lot at Blackie's - it is posted, to answer that question -the problem is if there is no physical barrier to turning on to what we call Brunini Way, and going aCr G55'Lille bridge,there IJ not a gate for IIIDtanCe. You KfIGW we've talked and brainstormed .. should we be installing some sort of automatic gate that Richardson Bay can activate to get in and out that would physically block any unwanted traffic. I don't think that people are—most of the folks that I've encountered in a vehicle there just don't understand—it looks like a road, so they drive down there.They are like"oh gosh—I can't believe I drove down there." ...and they drive out. I don't think people are purposely driving there to access anything. I think it's generally by mistake, but it is kind of a natural mistake to make because it looks like a road when you turn there. Kulik: Any other questions? Fredericks: I just want to ask this because people are asking this. Is there any more efficient way to meet your needs so the building could be smaller in the present location? Barnes: 600 square feet is pretty small. I think you saw the layout. If we were to make it smaller,you know,take out Harvey's garden does not seem like a good option to me personally. I'm sorry I have feelings for Harvey. I just...no... Fredericks:And it seems to me if you did stack the equipment,then you'd have move one piece to get at another. Barnes: Oh yes, and if you look at that there was—there was a corridor, a tight corridor, and we had one piece of equipment in the front of that corridor. And the rest was just for us to move around, do our maintenance—it was pretty tight. Kulik: Same question—could you address the volume of it? I think 14 foot roof is what I saw proposed. Is Barnes:That's—basically when you—with the type of building we selected—again we were trying to get something to match, there's a pitch. So you've got a certain pitch set, and then you come out to your eaves, and then you've got to get a garage door in that. And that's what set the height. And it's just—it's about what the adjoining, neighborhood buildings are,just a scooch higher. Kulik:Any other questions? Fredericks: Yes, and so remind me, I know we don't have a plan for the area, but I think we did study it back in 2011-2012 in a whole more holistic park and recreation needs study. Barnes: And again, I wasn't here for that but we, you know,we've had individual plans for things in this area such as the bathrooms. We saw those actually appear over the last few years on those slides,the Blackie's picnic area, and Trestle Trail have all been built in the last few years. Plans ... and then McKegney Green. So that we have really built this area up quite a bit—all planned. Fredericks:And so if there is a decision to go forward and have all the public input that the staff is suggesting, that wouldn't forego an opportunity to actually have a longer term plan for the area? Barnes: No, no—we would continue to invite a longer term plan for the area. Fredericks: Yeah. Kulik: Any other questions of staff? Ok, will open the floor for deliberations. Please,Jon. Weiner: Okay, so we have three items that we've been asked about, and so I'm going to dispatch with the first two quickly. In my opinion, and I felt like there was a consensus on this issue,the question regarding the solar panels on the police—well, on the carport—you know, it's my strong feeling that we should not pursue that anymore. With regard to the Corp yard, I say I am going to dispatch with that quickly because I don't have an answer. That is a really big complicated question. And my prediction is we are not going to achieve any consensus about it tonight. I feel like we've started a conversation about it that is important to have and we should continue to have but I, you know ... it's one of our big nuts to crack here. And so, I have no opinion right now. With regard to the shed...just not to keep anyone in suspense, I'm going to start with my conclusion and then go back. You know I don't think we should go forward with it, and I don't think it should come back to the Council until it's been addressed at the Commission level. And I say this because—it's kind of an unusual analysis that I have on it which is —Pat,your presentation on it was really thorough, very well thought out. I actually think that the shed is probably a good idea—I may be a minority in that regard in this room, but I think it's a well thought out plan. However,what I would say is that you know, we are in a democracy,thank god, we have no power other than to do what residents want.And I guess what I would say is, democracy requires doing the hard work of convincing the public that something is the right thing to do and then bringing it to the Council. And I don't think that's really happened here. My view is that when there are outside applications that come in and either POST or the Planning Commission—well, really it's the Planning Commission—makes a decision and it gets appealed to us, sometimes it's okay for us to overrule the commissions because that's our job but I think that when there is a proposal that comes from staff, that is not something that a lower commission approve, I don't think it's a good practice to then bring it to the Council because staff is thinking the Council might make a decision that is different than the commission. I think that—if it's a proposal about using town land, I think for better or worse it's important to do the hard work of convincing those commissions that it's the right thing and getting a recommendation from them to the Council that is one of a positive decision to go forward. So, you know, my overall take on this is that I don't think that ultimately in the future a shed is out of the question as I said based on what I've—based on the evidence I've heard on all the issues tonight—I actually think that it's being proposed with the best of intentions and for all the right reasons. 1 think the idea behind it is to clean up the area and to put the equipment where it belongs and to make it as tidy and contained a space as possible. And I would note that,you know, national parks have sheds because equipment has to be stored. So I think it's a good proposal, but I don't think it's ready for the Council to look at or approve. And I think I heard some ideas about workshops, which I think might be a good idea, but I think there needs to be buy-in about a plan like this before it's something that I, as a councilmember, could vote for.And I just don't see that here. Fredericks: So I have a slightly different view of democracy than my colleague, and that is that you represent all of the people. Not just the people in front of you talking. In this particular time, I'm sensitive to the people who supported McKegney Green, put a lot of money into it, and left us with something that we have to maintain not just for them but for all the people in the city— in Tiburon— who make use of the area because the area includes McKegney Green. I think we also have a commitment to maintain it long term as efficiently and inexpensively as possible. I don't see the shed as being in Blackie's Pasture. It's with like kinds of buildings. And I think that's a sensitivity to the fact that we don't want it to look industrial, and I really don't believe the bathrooms look industrial. However, I do agree that there really needs to be more public input and more understanding because a lot of the letters that we got opposing it were based on misinformation and misunderstanding. I think what you have proposed is that this will go back to the Planning Commission,which has had considerable turnover, also to the DRB and then back to the Council. What is missing in that piece that people have asked for because I do respond to the people before me, is an opportunity to ask questions. And if someone can give me an idea of how that opportunity would come about, so that they have a better chance of making a decision—taking a position—based on collective understanding of the issues, that would be terrific. It's my bent to continue with this with more public input, with more information available to the public and then take it maybe as part of more of the public process through the boards again and then back to us with their recommendation based on more information. It was my understanding looking at the previous board that it was really very preliminary and I think more process is definitely warranted. Weiner: I just want to add one quick thing—in light of your comment and that is that I think what is being asked of us, if I'm not mistaken, is whether or not we think this should come back to us as a budget item. Right?This was all about whether to include it in the budget. And the sequence that was being proposed was given direction whether to include it in the budget: if it's yes, then they would go to DRB and the Planning Commission— Fredericks:And so I'll add to my thoughts that you need to put in the budget whatever you need to carry through the process that people need. Weiner: But what I was going to say is that process, maybe along with some kind of workshop, is fine for me but I'm not prepared to give direction to include it in the budget. I don't think it's going to happen this year. I think that—what I was saying is, I think the homework of the workshop and the DRB and the Planning Commission should be done before the money is asked for to build the building. So we've already allocated the $20,000 to do the research on it, which I believe was spent in order to design it, isn't that ...? Chanis: We haven't—we used a portion of the money to do a preliminary design. We did not want to go any further until it was understood— Weiner: All I'm saying is the direction—and everyone has their own—this is a recommendation so we are not going to vote but, the direction that I would personally give is those other steps should happen before I'm willing to vote for any additional money for this project. Fredericks: So can I ask a question of staff? ..... I just want—when we talk about the costs of the project and what we need to budget, do we budget staff soft costs? Barnes: No we don't but we are using a consultant on this. And you know like any person proposing a building to planning, you kind of need to bring your consultant to the table. Fredericks: So you would need a budget item to bring the consultant to the table? Councilmember Thier: Actually, I don't believe we are voting on a budget item tonight. I believe it's for staff direction on whether the Council wishes to continue the design of the storage building or only to proceed with the bike repair station. So this is not a budget decision, there is no money being allocated tonight.And it is just direction. Town Attorney Stock: Let me jump in. So this is part of the CIP budget— Fredericks:Yes. Stock: -which is going to be before you on June [5]. So i think getting back to councilmember Welner's comment, if the direction is "use existing funds you have" ,you still have to take that existing balance and put it into next year's budget. Because everything has to have a budgeted item. So I think what staff is looking for is:should this design move forward in next year's CIP program, which will then be budgeted, and you can provide direction tonight on what that budget amount would be if you want to go in that direction. But if you don't put it in the CIP, and you don't have it as a budget item, you will have to do a budget amendment as some point in the year if you want to pick this up and use what we think of as the existing balance that we haven't spent of that $20,000. K'uh : t' + I' + 1, LI C 'I L L' r 11 1 Lunn. Let's do ibis—1 ill going iG give isle IIGGr to�.GianCinmenluer Tnier ailu then CGuiiCiiilleiiluer i=rase r and myself just so we can have everybody air their thoughts at this point. Thier: Ok,thank you. I think I have a little different viewpoint here—I am strongly, strongly—I think that what came out of tonight is something very different than I was expecting. I do believe that we should go forward with the bike repair station. I don't think that project should be held up with what we are hearing tonight. I also heard a lot of concern about traffic on the ORT. I think that is something that we do need to take up. I am not in favor of moving forward with putting this back into the CIP. I don't believe there has been enough public input. I don't believe there has been really any public input. Meetings were noticed,the public didn't really know about them. Since the last meeting, which was the Planning Commission,they were set to vote 5-0 against a conditional use permit before the application was withdrawn. That was in I believe September 2018. There has not been one public meeting since then, and somehow this is back on our agenda. Now, I don't believe that this particular project merits leapfrogging over every other capital project that's on page 6 of that chart. I also believe that we have to look at capital projects based on our very strict capital budget ranking criteria and this project does not rank any where under any of the criteria which, I'm not going to go through each one because it's really late, and I see much greater priorities for us. Let's try to reduce traffic on the ORT. Lets' try and lool< at a different access route for vehicles that public works needs. Now, public works staff right now—they go to the public works Corp yard, they clock in,they fill their truck and they take those Trucks to wherever they need to go. And then at the end of the day they have to go back to the Corp yard anyway to clock out. So I don't see this as saving vehicle trips although I very much appreciate that concern Pat, I appreciate your looking towards that and i think there is another alternative that probably doesn't require us to build another building. Now, I want to talk for one minute about the public works Corp yard. Because that was a very exciting presentation. I am so much in favor of moving forward with that project. I do believe that the whole town council would benefit from a whole presentation just on that where we could -through the mayor, and town manager, I'd like to ask for that and Pat of course.You know, so that we can look at all the alternatives so that we can really dig deep into that. I, like my compatriot here, don't feel like I could actually make a decision on that today. Id like to have the consultants come and give us a presentation. But, you know, when I look at something like Blackie's Pasture, I mean it really defines Tiburon, it defines our community. And you know I have this vision,that I think everyone knows about,which is to make the park less industrial. You know we are working very hard to try to acquire the ponds from Richardson bay sanitation district. Someday I would like to acquire Richardson bay sanitation district if they're willing to let us. And that is all in an effort to provide more recreational spaces for the town and less industrial uses for the town. When I look at all of the items you are looking at storing there Pat, I think there's a few items that probably do need to be used on a weekly or biweekly basis - mostly likely the mower.There are spaces that don't require us to build a 600 or 650 square foot$200,000 building and I would be in favor of exploring those. And I did reach out you know to our Town Manager and I said "hey let's walk the park with Pat and look at where—what the alternatives are." You know, I don't think there's been enough process for the public. I think that much like what Jerry Riessen was saying,that there should be whole plan for our park. And I know that POST was trying to do that, and maybe that's a task that they will take on in the future. But at this time, I don't believe that there is any public support for this. I actually have not received one letter in favor of this building, and I don't feel comfortable having this go forward any longer. I think that if the Town believes it's a big priority then getting the public on board is going to be required and also showing us how this leapfrogs over every other capital project. I don't see how it does. I don't see how staff convenience, which is important,very important, is though more important than, say, fixing the slide as Vistazo West or working on the storm drains at Beach and Tiburon Boulevard. And you know I think that tonight as so valuable because there are so many great ideas of things that are real issues that really need to be worked on—traffic on Tiburon boulevard, looking at our IPM policy; also, trying to figure out what is the right place, what is the right space? Is it necessary? I mean if everything we have now fits in the public works Corp yard,then for me to spend $200,000 that could be going to ten other projects that have been on our list, some of them since I started on the Town Council,you know I would have to really see the need for it. Fredericks: Can I ask staff another question? Kulik: If it's brief, sure. Fredericks: It's very brief. So this budget—this item,the storage shed, came up without ever being in the capital improvement program? Chanis: No. You all included an allocation in this year's budget of$20,000 in the CIP to do a preliminary design and that's what we have spent the money on. Fredericks: And is that on the basis of the kind of assessment that the other projects were given?Was it tiered?Tier 1, 2, 3? Chanis: I think at the time it wasn't, but we've been very clear—It does not,you know, it is not a tier 1 project. I would absolutely echo everybody who said that. When we rank it—and frankly it's staff ranking projects-we have 8-9 people try to independently rank the projects- it lands in tier 2. Fredericks:And you rank it according to the criteria that the council— Chanis: Correct. Kulik: Councilmember Fraser. Councilmember Fraser:Thank you. I will try to be a little bit briefer thane my previous colleagues. I would agree with a little bit of everything that my fellow council members said. I don't think this is ready for prime time, being the shed. And I do think it needs more work, more public input. But let's not forget —and not everybody was here when we discussed McKegney Green way back when— Fredericks:That's right. Fraser: -that we talked about the fact that if we have a natural grass soccer field, it's going to require a lot of attention and way back when in those meetings we talked about having the need for equipment and 'having the need for storage. And so this isn't a late breaking news item. This has been around for you know 18 months or more. Maybe 2 years. And the Council was supportive of at least considering it. As a matter of fact,the Council gave direction to the staff to put a design together and gave them money to do it. So this again is not late breaking news. We were engaged in the process all along the way. POST held public meetings.Just like they notice everything else,they noticed that public meeting. And I don't know how many meetings they had on it, but it was all property noticed,just as we notice our Council meetings. We noticed the Planning Commission meetings. So I think it's unfair-and maybe it's just me the way I'm listening but -unfair to somehow think that staff created this thing in the darkness of night and this was a surprise to everybody. It wasn't. I understand how we don't agree with it. I understand the public input. It makes sense to have a workshop where there can be questions and answers because there are good questions. But staff did what we asked them to do. And so I don't want to,you know,take them out behind the woodshed because I don't think they deserve to be out behind the woodshed. But let me go back to item number 1:solar. I agree with Councilmember Weiner. We ought to just send that off into never-ever land. On the Corp yard, I have a different way that I would approach that. Sure, we'd like to build something ideal, and we'd like to make sure it hits all of our wanted uses, but in life you don't always get to do that. You say this is all we can do. So I would take the, and I will just use it as an arbitrary number, the$6.5 million, and I'd say"that's all we got. What do we need to do?" With the 6.5 million to make it right. Because anything more than that - S15 million for a Corp yard ... oh my goodness.There are so many other needs in our community. For our kids, for our families, for our parks. So I would say let's do it through a different perspective. We've got 6.5 million dollars, figure out what you're going to do with it to make the Corp yard work. End of story. Now it's an interim fix, but maybe that interim fix morphs into something else later on. Back to the shed, we need a public process. We need a Q&A. We do need to do something because I don't believe that the plan we have in place today—be it the Corp yard there or a storage facility somewhere else, and councilmember Weiner made a good point. Our public parks all around the US have places for equipment. And thank goodness we have Harvey's garden because I didn't realize that the tools were stored in the gentleman's' house. We have no place for that now. Well,we need some sort of, if you will, holistic approach to how do we look after one of the most precious areas in our community: Blackie's pasture and the ORT. So I would like to challenge, if you will, staff to work with maybe it's POST, maybe it's the Council, I'm not sure, we probably need to dialogue about this on how we solve the problem or how we solve the issue of'where do we put the equipmentT And maybe it's McKegney Green, maybe it's somewhere else, I don't know, but you need some help—we ought to try to figure that out. And is it $200,000? 1 don't know- maybe it's less, maybe it's more. But we don't have an answer right now and we need some input to do that.That's all I got. Kulik: Okay, thank you. Alright, so just going down the list: I agree with my colleagues about the solar. I think that is no longer on our list. The Corp Yard ... I also agree with a little bit of what's been said a couple times. That that needs a deeper study. A couple ways to do that: a presentation at the council, perhaps an ad hoc committee looking at all the financial implications of that because this is going to change some long standing traditions in Tiburon if we start incurring any kind of cost beyond our means at this point. So perhaps doing a deep study in that might be a good place to start and then bring it back to council for a full comprehensive presentation just so we can start getting our heads around that because one thing that stuck out to me in the staff report and in the report that we have from the consultant, is that in the event of a seismic event, when we need the Corp yard the most, it's going to be the least functional. So that rings out to me as something that—I think that can has been kicked as far down the road as it can be.At this point, given the information we have in front of us, we really need to take some specific action on that. I might suggest throwing it to an ad hoc committee to look at that in a deep dive sense and then bring it back to Council for a full comprehensive presentation or perhaps we invert the order of that so that there can be uniform knowledge amongst us and then a deeper dive into the mechanics and the finances of it. And go forth from there. So then on to the shed. One of the things that strikes me, and I saw this and I guess [Ms.] McInerney said that this should weigh heavily on our minds and this has certainly weighed heavily on my mind. And not in the way you might think but,the longer I'm on this dais and in this chair, I recognize the need to balance the needs and the desires of all constituents in town. And that is a heavy burden. I look at this through the lens of several things: environmental concerns on the pristineness of blackie's pasture or the surrounding area, however one wishes to define it, but I also look at things like safety and traffic, and efficiency of our maintenance, and efficiency of economics we have of providing that maintenance, the efficiency of staff time,traffic not just on Tiburon boulevard—well most specifically on Tiburon Blvd. but also now as we are hearing on the old rail trail. Carbon emissions are also in play here. And all of these kind of overlap into a tricky situation that we have to navigate in terms of balancing the interest and doing what I think each of us in our gut feel is the right thing to do for the biggest and highest benefit of the town. One thing that I will say, and Councilmember Fraser touched on this a little bit but I'll expand just a little bit—1 won't say that staff was accused or indicted of anything, but there was a bit of a scent of that. And one might think that, as the Mayor, I would defend my staff no matter what, but through experience I can say the altruism level of the staff that we have is something that I think is beyond reproach and I've seen it demonstrated through action and word. They are making recommendations to those of us that are making the decisions in their professional and highly highly highly experienced opinion, is in the best interest of the Town. So regardless of how we got here, the one thing I don't question is staff's recommendation of the need to be here. And that they haven't just come up with this on a whim or to make it more convenient for them or to make it easier for them to do theirjobs.They have balanced that specific need with the higher needs of the town, and I just want to make sure I make that point very clear. We've heard that McKegney Green has come with a lot of maintenance attached to it and that's absolutely true. But what I do know is that the status quo doesn't work. We saw a picture there of a fence with green wraparound it, we've seen time lapse picture so gravel pits and different maintenance storage facilities. We need to do something, it's all been concentrated there and we need to do something to improve that. And also all the other ancillary issues that come along with that—traffic, safety, etc. Kulik(cont'd):So I do agree that it should go through a process that has more public input; it's also my opinion that we've spent some money on this, and it was worthy money that we spent—whatever portion of the$20,000 that we've spent so far. I would be in favor of at a minimum rolling that into our capital budget for next year to continue the study of this. We've heard some great ideas tonight and I think through a POST commission hearing, Planning Commission hearing and Design Review hearing, whatever l.vUrJe it takes, we %VUIU 11CQ1 111111gJ that area VCIICU— IIRC IUCdJ 111\C VVIIQI IVIJ. IVILLCVU said— per haps the gravel could go on the other side of the pit. Perhaps the hours of maintenance that we do that—so when kids are taking their bikes to school they are not impacted in any way. All of that can be made part of a public process. I would even be in favor of allocating this as part of our capital budget for all the reasons that I've mentioned—the need that's been demonstrated and articulated by our staff, the need that I also see to balance all of those elements for our community. Not just for the people in the room tonight, not just for the people that aren't in the room tonight, but for the entire town of Tiburon. And that's what's so heavy about these decisions. But at a minimum I would like to include the balance of our money in the capital improvement plan for next year. Councilmember Fredericks? Fredericks:So to keep you in suspense, I would like to reiterate that I agree with what seems to be the consensus of sending the solar project to the moon if you'll pardon the metaphor. I would also have the same reservations-although it just sounds wonderful- about spending$15 million for the Corp yard. However, like the rest of my council, I do have concerns for safety. And I think to spend whatever we need to spend to make that area safe—fire safe, earthquake safe, termite safe, we should go ahead and do that. I'm not thinking we are being asked to add a specific amount to the budget, but just generally include that in the budget for the next fiscal year. And coming to the storage shed, what's important to me at this point is what I think is important for the rest of the Council—which is getting public input. I'm not sure we can do that without including it in the next fiscal year budget, and so I do support including it in the next fiscal year budget. That's it. Kulik: Okay. So can I then ask for some specifics from my colleagues on those three points? I think we are all in agreement on the solar project, unless ... Fredericks: Yes. Kulik: And then in terms of the Corp yard, pursuing another option now. I don't think there is an appetite for$15 million. But one suggestion I could throw out is—the budget subcommittee is going to look at—we are doing a lot of work on the budget in advance of[June] 5. Perhaps as a part of that, or another meeting,we could look at specific financial implications of the different proposal and then come back to Council. And I do like the idea of having a presentation by a consultant of all the different options that we could do. Thier: Yeah I think that would be really helpful. And I also just wanted to note for the record that I—a $15 million Corp yard is not anything that I could support, and much like what Jim was saying that was echoed by my other colleagues,you know, I think sometimes you do have to make due with what you have but safety is paramount. I toured that Corp yard—it really needs to be redone. But I know that we don't have that kind of budget to do it as well as we would have liked. Also, on the storage— Kulik: Can we hammer down the Corp yard? Thier: Yeah. I think a presentation. Barnes: May I do an ask on the Corp yard just to fill out some of the—the initial study, which you have all received basically—initial study is an environmental document—but the document you have all received on the Corp yard went into the kind of planning and estimating mode and detail on three options, all of which were$15 million, which I am hearing clearly, none of you support. We would need a little—hate to say this—but a little bit of money to flush out the lower options and bring a presentation back to you that's valuable in the budget. I just thought I'd say that since we're at this point. I hope that's useful. Kulik: Sure. Could you have that number ready for next Tuesday, when the budget committee is going to meet? Chanis: Yeah, I think we could probably chat with the consultant. Yes. Kulik: Great. Weiner: I only have one thing to add to that—I do want—I do like the idea of a presentation where we focus with some real time on the options and allocating some funds for that. But what I would add to it is something that Jerry Riessen said earlier which is—included in that analysis, there should be a discussion,you know, of options relating to other land that could be used. And I'm sure you've looked at that question, I just—instead of hearing that it's been looked at, it would be useful to have some kind of discussion about what the options were. Chanis: We'd be happy to do that. Kulik: Okay, so that's where we are on the Corp yard. We'll have numbers at the finance subcommittee meeting next week, and then we'll bring that back—we can do a Town Council update on what we have at the May 15 meeting and then perhaps look toward scheduling a consultant to come in and do sort of a comprehensive presentation once we have a little more clarity on what we are discussing there.Then, on to the storage shed.. -Transcript continues in Exhibit 2- CC-2 TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETINGS DRAFT MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING —6:15 P.M. On May 15, 2019, the Council held a special meeting as follows: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Fraser. Councilmember ,7'hier, Councilmember WeJoer,Vice Mayor'Fre.derj,,cics, Mayor Kulik CLOSED SESSION 1. CONFERENCE WITH PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8) Property: 500 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon California; APN's 055-093-06. 07. 08, 09 Agency Negotiators: Greg Chants, Beiij�rntn_Stock Negotiating Parties: Town of Tibition and Rb�,Nrdson Bay Salltfation District Under Negotiation: Price and terrils for possible pro eny,,acquIs tion. 2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE RE"VIEW (Pursuant to Government Code Section 5�4957) Title: Town Manager z 3. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Pul'S"Limit to Government Code Section 54957) Agency�designated representatives: Md r,Kulik and Vice Mayor Fredericks UnrepresentedEmployee: ToNvii Manag6� INTERVIEWS FOR VACANCIES ON TOWN BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS • Ser-e Martial ADJOURNMENT—`to re--lar meetin REGULAR MEETING —7:30 P.M. Mayor Ktilil: called the 1-e21-11ar meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, May 15. 2019. in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Tiburon. California. ROLL CALL, Pine I of 8 Toii,rn C'ozunci1:11irniNes =OBJ-2019 DRAFT ;hour 15, 2019 PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Fraser, Fredericks, Kulik. Thier, Wehner ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager Chanis, Town Attorney Stock, Director of Community Development kwon. Chief of Police Cronin, Town Clerk Stefan-i,. ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION IF ANY None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Natalie Patrizio. Reed Ranch Road, said there had been an incident at Blackie's Pasture with two: . off-leash dogs chasing and attacking wildlife. She asked the Council to consider putting up fences to protect wildlife from large dogs or putting Lip;additional signage that states the applicable leash law fines. PRESENTATIONS Art Educator Award- Heritage & Arts CorriI,"ss do-,_ The Herita-e & Arts Commission ptesentd Flla"Ste,xt6'erg ti'om Del Mar School the award for outstanding-, achievement in education and", reness in'herita e and arts education. Recognition of Town Services-Gordon Consols Design Review Board The Mayor presented Gordo�a Cousins a plaque to eon­i-nemorate his time on the Design Review Board and many years of service to"'the Town of,Tiburon. CONSENT CALENDAR CGL Municipal,Code Airiendments,- Adopf mendments to Chapter 3A of the Tibw-on Municipal Code relating to the Town Manager minor contract signing authority for public lyorks projects(Department of Public Works) CC-2. Local Enhergency ." dopt Resolution continuing the declaration ofa local emergency related to damage caused bFebruary 2019 storms (Office ofthe Town Manager) MOTION: To adopt,Consent Calendar Items 1-2, as written. Moved: Thier, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: ' Unanimous ACTION ITEMS AI-I. Appointments to Town Boards and Commissions-Consider making appointment to the Planning Commission (Department of Administrative Services) Pure 2(?1'8 Torn Ct�trrn;I A1inu�es #09-201) DRAFT 11Iuv 1 j, 2019 Town Clerk Stefani said there had been a vacancy on the Planning Commission since March 28, 2019, and the Council had interviewed 6 qualified applicants for the position. She recommended the Council consider malting an appointment to the Planning Commission. Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. There was none. MOTION: To appoint Eric Woodward to the Planning Commission. Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Kulik VOTE: AYES: Unanimous AI-2. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles ("UAV") Regulations—Provide direction on potential UAV, or drone, regulations and ordinance (Office of tie`Town Manager) Town Manager Chanis said the Town had received a request from the Reed Union School District to consider adoption of an ordinance prohibit! j;the ,,use of UAVs; or drones. over school campuses during the horns ofoperation and school sponsoted'_events� Chanis said several agencies in California have adopted local i`egulatlons, and any adopted by the Town would need to comply with complex regulations already rn plaeat the state and federal level. Chanis said staff is requesting direction fr6m," be Counet o4t the school board's request for an ordinance, and if the Council wishes to prusb"e n ordrnnee, hetherfar not any additional regulations should be included, Mayor KI-111k opened the floor for public comment AJ Brady, President of Reed Union School District,' .oard, said the District is concerned for the safety and privacy Of student~ during school hours Natalie Patrizio said drones hose a privacy and noise issue in residential areas as well. and asked the COudlell to consider incorporating other regulations into the ordinance. "I'Ile Council discussed the complexities of regulating drone operations, including, the issue of enforcement. Councilmember Thier',spoke in support of adopting a basic ordinance that prohibits drone activity over the local school. and said it could be amended later-as other issues arise. ]fat all. Vice Mayor Fredericks said she WOUld like to see the ordinance be a bit broader than only referencin- the'local schools. She said adopting an ordinance that was too narrowly-focused would pose enforcement issues. Councilmember Fraser recommended the staff engage with a professional drone operator-to better understand the actual capability of drones before adopting regulations. Ile said he would Page 3 of 8 Torr» Council 1limrtes '109-201') DRAFT illav 15, 2019 support an ordinance, but would like to see one that thoughtfully tits into the Tiburon community's needs. COunciln1ember Welner said it would be useful to have a professional present to the C,6 incil to better understand the complexities. Ile felt it was premature for a comprehensive�6,dir ance, but would be useful to have a quick turnaround on a simple ordinance that wouldfpr&eht drones from flying over schools during the designated hours. k, Mayor Kulik recommended the staff craft an ordinance that fulfills the school dish tct's quest but noted that the school year is nearly over. He suggested the staff seek the advice of a professional and develop a comprehensive ordinance appropriate Tor'this community that yft be ready for a publicity campaign and consideration by the Cou1Ior to the beginning at the j� next school year. w:. The COnncil supported the Mayor's recommendation Rn AI-3. Mill Valley Refuse Service Rate Increase Present'' 4, Receive report from Mill Valley Refuse Service on two proposed rate increase appjcgtions and direct staff to hold a Public Hearing on the prefeue ate uicrease application { e �tment of Administrative �j Services) Town Manager Chanis said Mill Valley Re use Sc i vice'" NIVRS) will be 6 questing a base rate increase, but is seeking direction from the Qdbcil oi,2`6 h a}�pltcM1,61h the Council would like to consider. He said the diff ►pence between tN ''ications rel, s to the type of recycling program that will be utttz, tp thfuture: smttam or dual stream. Chanis said the Council // .:. will hold a Public II � b and�czEder approvgt the preferred base rate application at their next meeting. � � r i` s Jim Iavaionc, 1 Valley Refu e� etvec said the cost of processing single-stream recycling has increased dramttca �y He td,d�t1 stretxt recycg has three mayor benefits: lower and more , . stable tipping fees�,1"J" i r fi�aterials collectecl`and a reduccd carbon footprint. He said MVRS had cmducted a piloI for dual-stream recycling and the feedback was mixed. He noted tlaf ,the c€�st cLttference between single-stream and dual-stream was not as dramatic as expected. N,tieless, 1 §4,td absenf� ong public opinion. lie would recommend all cities served by a MVRS switch to dt stream recycling programs. The Council and Mruarone discussed the merits of switching to dual-stream recycling. including the lowerbade rate application cost. and less contaminated recycling. They also di,Scussed the to(listtcsQfgarbage hauling: recycling contamination orcompostin(_� of c'otnpc�stable bio-,P]&fics could depend on what is accepted at the local processing facility. Mayos tt �k ripened the floor for public comment. '!here was none. Vice Mayor Fredericks commented that increases in garbage rates are likely inevitable, and spoke in support of the lower percentage increase dual-stream application. Pine 4 of 8 7'ou,i7 C'ouf7cil119inules #09-2019 DRAFT A/iii 15, 2019 COunelimembel- Thier agreed, and said there was potential for cost savings in the future. and hoped this decision would help Tiburon reach some of its climate and GHG goals. COunclImembei-s Fraser and Wehner agreed, and both recommendcd Mr. lavarone ijif i the other cities served by MVRS that the "Town of Tiburon was supportive of dual strJm'iecycling. Mayor Kulik agreed, and said there was apparent consensus to direct the stafto`btice a Public Hearing on the dual-stream application for a base rate increase at the ne x droll C`ota� it meetin-. PUBLIC HEARINGS PH-1. Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion Project Cafilsidel-revision to Condition of Approval 45, as approved in Resolution No. 55-2011 tejuJring the Belvedee -Tiburon Library to contribute to traffic impact fees of a certain amount Ive the amp�znf'in its entirety, and the timing of any such contribution related to the pr0ject` 1,11u11tt7 velopment Department) Director of Community Development Kwon said the Council , viously directed staff to hold a Public Hearin to consider revise sit Condition #5 of Re frau No. 55-201 1. related to the approval of the Belvedere-Tibuio � h � � nsion id the condition is ME related to traffic mitigation, and proposedrve�ai at�tygsfor revisions:--�> � IRA The Council discussed how to measureG G a idusonable r Ii tai 1ttYbtttion"toward traffic mitigation in the Mar West It intersection, as otm�l a1 '1 11 in the condition. Councilmembei } iaseir 8i<ed ifatential trafetxcle in that intersection would utilize City of Belvedere lands. Manager finis said thatl not been definitively determined and only prel in inaiy std Iy c a traffic cii-6.1billhad been comp ed. r} LT Glen Isaacson.jstoj"ect manaet, �aiElhe ttatyfluld prefer to have the condition waived entirely. He said itwc}�1ldt ' fficult to dete�mr►e a "reasonable monetary contribution" or establish,and ap-ce on`a ppicentage of a future cost without any design or cost estimate at all. Cotincilmein er Welnei asls tl Mr. Isaacson to comment on the option to defer-the discussion on a reasonable contrihittion unttf the f��tersection is being actively planned. Mr. Isaacson said the Town and the libiary-`pould agieR6 split the cost based on actual traffic counts post- construction. Ma}pr Kulik opcnedjfie floor for public comment. There was none. Counciltnembe%Th!er and Vice Mayor Fredericks spoke in support of waivin(,) the requirement. Councilnietnb' I l�raser noted that the library expansion will likely be a ��reat success and may cause an increase in traffic. I'ag 5 0/8 Toirn Council il-1iniacs =109-2019 DRAFT AluY I5, 2019 COuncilmember Wehner believed both the overall increase in traffic and the associated fees would likely be incremental in the big picture of this project. He recommended the Council waive the requirement. Mayor Kulik said the library project is a large contributor to the revitalization anization of the town and agreed with Weiner's point. He supported waiving the requnetj,;,S—° r Connellmember Fraser said he was on board. MOTION: To direct staff to bring a Resolution back to the Council eliminating of Approval Number 5 set forth in Town Council 456l6tion No. 55-2011, ► ttttg a contribution to a firture intersection improveepfby the Belvedere Tibu►olt�� �� Library. E Moved: Thier, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous 01 PH-2. 2000 Paradise Drive—Consider encroachment peri 40, 0 tion by Caprice Restaurant for the use of a portion of the public parking lot at the intersect►cert Paradise Drive and Mar West Street as a drop off and pick up valet s ►u,ice location ITEM CONTINUED TO A DATE UNCERTAIN � ,� ACTION ITEMS AI4. Belvedere-Tiburon Library Expansion,Pa,"'T", —Consrder'the request for a financial contribution toward th/e 1[bratpansion p►olfCoi1imunity Development Department) Town Manager Ch";"s said the T©vu� had ►ece►v�d a request for a financial contribution toward the shared publj,dsp"ace between tb `'iiew Belvedere Tiburon Library and Town Hall, including the public parIg lot, public sees betwce►a the twa-facilities and the redesigned Zelinsky Park area. ; �- Cha► s lsq noted tha tlt�IT`own is supporting the project in other significant ways, including the cCl €vergl heal property aa�d waiving all lees associated with the approval and permitting r , pro �p cess of theolgct Fie esU0igted the value of this support at $1.03 -- 1.06 million. He said the Town had previ`ottsly ente-ed",nto a� agreement to share capital costs of construction when the original library was b(diilt in 1997-98. but staff was unable to confirm any previous indication the Town intended to c"bute financially to the new project. `l'imCromwell, Cly tt f the Belvedere-Tibrn-on Library Agency, spoke in support of the positive ►p acts ofthe lib►40,on the community, and said the library is feeling a sense of urgency to begnxt Iolee "construction costs are continuin�� to rise. He said approximately 80% of the total cosl t�fte=project had been privately fundraised. Glen Isaacson, project manager. showed the site and floor plans of the new library, including the new parking lot and redesigned Zelinksy Park. He said the design creates a `'civic plaza'' between the new library and existing Town I lall. Page 6 o f 8 Town Council Minutes 409-2019 DRAFT Men- 1j. 2019 Mayor Kulik opened the floor for public comment. Torn Gram asked the Council to instead consider the Town's financial contributioil,.>; ,r rd the new public areas being created. He said this area now is an empty space that will. e eoiwerted into a public use. He asked the Council to approve the request. Mayo►• Kulik closed the floor. Vice Mayor Fredericks and Councilmember Fraser both hoped theC,ouricil would agieet make a contribution toward the shared space. Councilmember Thier said she was in favor of contributntl requested amount. ` y: ps Councilmember Welner did not feel comfortable Supp tag the funding t�fthe full request Without seeing the requested funds in the context of the fttI un►ctp;31 budget and capital improvement program. He said the Council should make sure the Tt n is not prioritizing this request over other projects urgently needed. Mayor Kulik agreed that the Town shoit � e1y tae a contribution,brut -reed that the Council should review this request in the context ��� e tutil b d e to�bcttei analyze1he prioritization of spending. He also suggested the Council cl'n,'dei makrhga contr>bution over a period of several ��. 40 years. r Fraser and Fredericksc- itF►edericks nt� the importance of making an expeditious decision so as to now,"pt,t`�r del ye. nstruction" '5 Welner rerteiat d,�fKtt it would be J poi tall to understand the tradeoffs for making a contribution ov a period of ti, Ie card he would also like staff to return with an analysis on whether the proposed piolecsts vttl, eprtpriately shared, and inquire if the City of Belvedere would belcttig 'contribution :Dorn Cromw65 said pay`jge,,pj over time would be acceptable.. and said there has been no PT0111Ised confiribttt on fioirr tie pity of Belvedere, and the agency has not inquired. "hovwn Manager Chartx <„said the Council could consider this item a(iain after the FY 2019-20 Municipal Budget ane Capital Improvement Program presentation on June 5. 2019. TOWN COUNCIL..REPORTS Nene. TO'VAN_MAN:AGER REPORT None. WEEKLY DIGESTS Received. Page 7 of 8 Town Council Alinutes 409-2019 DRAFT Nluy 15, 2019 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor KLllil< adjourned the meeting at 1005 p.m. DAVID KULIK �� OR z ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Affil20,11 �. r MM An No YY €£; L F E g ii AM t lr N'0 ' rr Ell Now L i. Pclge 8 (?1'8 Town Council Awes 90 ?019 DRAFT AAA 5, 2019 Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Agenda Item: CC - 3 Tiburon, CA 94920 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Manager Subject: Declaration Continuing Local Emergency Related to February 2019 Storms d Reviewed By: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY As required by state law,the Council is asked to approve a Resolution continuing the declaration of a local emergency related to the damage caused by the storm of February 12-14,2019. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Approve a Resolution continuing the declaration of a local emergency related to damage caused by the storm of February 12-14, 2019. BACKGROUND A storm system beginning on February 12, 2019, arrived on the Tiburon Peninsula, resulting in rainfall totaling over 7 inches in a short time period. Several landslides occurred during this timeframe, near 1435 Vistazo West and 2032 Paradise Drive. and the Council adopted Resolution No. 02-2019 on February 20, 2019 proclaiming a local emergency in the Town of'Tiburon related to the landslides. 1435 Vistazo West Slide Update The geotechnical report on the landslide is complete and has been submitted to the town for review. An engineering consultant hired by the 'Town is in the process of designing a permanent repair for the landslide which will consist of a series of drilled piers. tiebacks. and a concrete retaining wall. Additionally. as part of this project_ Public Works staff have been coordinating with Sanitary District 5 to include a planned replacement of the sanitary sewer main that was damaged during the landslide. It is expected that the design component of this project will be completed by the end of June so that the repair project can be put out for competitive bids and constructed this summer. 2032 Paradise Drive Slide Update A contractor hired by the property owner at 10 Toy,N-cr- Point Lane has mohilized and started to clear the hillside to expose the full extent of repairs that are needed. The geotechnical engineer. TOWN or TtBURON PAGE I of 3 structural engineer. as well as surveyor for the project have visited the site and will be updating their recommenclations. design. and scope of work based upon updated field conditions. Alternating one-way traffic control is in effect with flaggers during the normal workday. Construction to stabilize the slope will be ongoing and is expected to run through the summer. Local Emergency Status Update On May I, 2019. President Trump approved a Major Disaster Declaration for the State of California relating to the severe winter storms and landslides that occurred on February 13-15, 2019 and approved public assistance for hazard mitigation for 1 l counties statewide, including Marin County. Next steps are still pending further FEMA investigation. The Marin County Office of Emergency Services remains involved and will inform the Town of next steps. Representatives from Tiburon Public Works attended an applicants' briefing held at the County of Marin, where CalOES and FEMA gave presentations and provided information on the process that would be required to apply for public assistance and reimbUrsement. An initial request for public funds was subsequently submitted to the respective agencies and the town is beginning the process to request reimbursement. Although reimbursement is not guaranteed, town staff are taking all necessary steps to submit a competitive request. A phone call between staff and FEMP. is scheduled for Monday. .11-111C 15. Tonight, the Council will also take separate action to authorize the Town Manager to act as signing authority on a California Office of Emergency Services document. This required form is the beginning stages of requesting reimbursement. ANALYSIS Due to the ongoing nature of the landslides and associated emergency conditions, the Council is asked tonight to adopt a Resolution (Exhibit 1) continuing the declaration of a local emergency. The Council will continue to review the need for continuing the local emergency within 30 days. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct f-Inancial impact to the Town through approval of this Resolution. It is not known at this time what the final cost of repairing the damage caused by the storm will be, nor is it known whether fundin- will be available from State and/or Federal SOUrces as a result of this storm. However. adoption of this Resolution will preserve the Town's ability to seek reimbursement iffundinu) becomes available. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statUtoriiy exempt from the requirements ofthe California Environmental Qualit} Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA, and if it were found to constitute a project. it would be exempt pursuant to the general rule set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3). TowN0[ T1iLROoN P:� 2 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Approve a Resolution continuing the declaration of a local emergency related to damage caused by a storm which occurred between February 12, 2019 and February l 4, 2019. Exhibit(s): DRAFT Resolution Prepared By: Greg Chanis;Town Manager Tow", of T113tR0\ 1-1:vc1�. 3 of 3 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. xx-2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON CONTINUING THE DECLARATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO RECENT STORMS BEGINNING ON FEBRUARY 12 2019 WHEREAS. the California Emergency Services Act, Chapter 7, of tile California Government Code. commencing with § 8550 confers upon the governing bodies of the political subdivisions ofthis state emergency powers necessary to protect health and safety and preserve lives and property; and WHEREAS. § 8630 of the California Government Code, states that "a local emergency may be proclaimed only by the governing body of a county, city and county, or city or by an official so designated by ordinance adopted by such governing body;" and WHEREAS, Section 21-5 of the Tiburon Municipal Code (TMC) appoints the 'Town Manager- as the Director of Emergency Services and TMC Section 21.6(a)(1) empowers the Director of Emergency Services to request that the Town Council proclaim the existence of a local emergency; and WHEREAS, on February 20, 2019, in accordance with California Government Code S 8630 and Tiburon Municipal Code Section 21.6(a)(1), the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 02-2019 proclaiming a local emergency; and WHEREAS, California Government Code § 8630 requires that the Council review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every 30 days; and WHEREAS, on March 20, 2019. the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 09-2019 and continued the declaration of local emergency; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 2019, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 12-2019 and again continued the declaration of local emergency; and WHEREAS. on May 15, 2019. the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 16-2019 and again continued the declaration of local emergency; and WHEREAS. additional earth movement has occurred in the Town of Tiburon as a result of' the storm system that caused landslides in February 2019; and WHEREAS. the landslides and associated emergency conditions are of an ongoing nature and the emergency should not be terminated at this time; and WHEREAS. the Town Council does hereby find: That conditions ofextreme peril to the safety of persons and property have arisen within this `Town. caused by a series of severe storm systems with significant wind-driven rainfall Page ] of 3 Town Council RcSOIution No. xx-2019 06/19/2019 EXHIBIT 1 resultin(I in localized flooding. landslide and road closure, commencing on or about February 13. 2019, and a local emergency is deemed to exist in the Town of Tiburon in accordance with Town Council Resolution Nos. 02-2019, 09-2019, 12-2019, and 16-2019; and That these conditions resulted in landslides on Vistazo West and Paradise Drive damaging those public streets and depositing debris causing the closure of local roadways and damaging public infrastructure and facilities; and That these conditions are likely to be beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the Town; and That the aforesaid conditions of extreme peril warrant and necessitate the continuance of the proclamation of the existence ofa local emergency. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the Town Council has reviewed the need for continuing the declaration of local emergency and finds based on substantial evidence that the public interest and necessity require the continuance of the declaration of local emergency. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council shall review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every 30 days until the Town Council terminates the local emergency. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that during the existence of said local emergency the powers, functions. and duties of the Director of Emergency Services and the emergency organization of the Town shall be those prescribed by state law, and by ordinance and resolutions of this Town approved by the Town COnnell, and by the Town of Tiburon/City of Belvedere Emergent))Oherotions Plan, as approved by the Town Council. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this proclamation be forwarded to the Director of the Governor's Office of Emergency Services. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this declaration be forwarded to the Governor of California with the request for assistance though California Disaster Assistance Act (CDAA) funding; a Presidential Declaration of an Emergency or Major Disaster and any and all recover assistance the State of California can provide is requested. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on June 19, 2019. by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Paye 2 of 3 Town Council Resolution No. xx-2019 06/19/2019 DAVID KULIK, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Pay—,e 3 of-3 TMv11 Council Resolution No. xx-2019 06/19/2019 ti TOWN OF Z IBURON Town Council"Mccting y 1.505 Tiburon Boulevard June 19, 2019 Agenda Item: Tiburon,CA 94920 m: CC - 4 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of Administrative Services Subject: Recommendation to Adopt Resolutions Establishing the Municipal Budget Plan and Appropriations Limit (Gann Limit) for FY 2019-20 i Reviewecl By: ' 16'4 c._ _ N/A Greg Chanis,Town Manager Beuiamin Stock,Town Attorne DISCUSSION Municipal Budget At the regular meeting of June 5, 2019, the Town Council received a presentation and held a public hearing on the proposed Municipal Budget for FY 2019-20. At the conclusion of the Public Hearing, staff was directed to return to Council on June 19 for-adoption of the proposed Fiscal year 2019-20 budget and associated Resolutions. Recapping the presentation at the June 6, 2018 meeting, the total Town budget appropriates $17.024.516 in expenditures. The total budget includes $12,610,252 in operating expenditures, $320,445 in capital equipment and IT outlay, $2,759,150 in capital improvements. and $1.334.669 in debt service. The operating budget is balanced and provides a $127.436 Surplus. Adoption of the budget will include any amendments as previously discussed and approved by the Council. Appropriation Limits (Gann) FY 2019-20 Proposition 4. approved by California voters in November 1979. established and defined annual expenditure appropriation limits on all government entities. Proposition 4 became effective in Fiscal Year 1980-81: however the calculations to determine the annual limit are carried from a Fiscal Year 1978-79 base. Proposition 4 was modified in 1990 with the passage of Proposition I 11. which slightly changes the annual adjustment factors, further identification of the types of expenditures which are excluded fi-om the limit, and provisions for the exclusion of emergency expenditures from the limit. Implementation legislation provides that the TOwll Council shall. at a regularly scheduled meeting, establish by resolution the amount of appropriation subject to limitation. The State is to be provided with informational forms with the filing of the Annual Statement of Financial Transactions no later than ninety days after the start ofthe fiscal year. TOWN or TIBURON PAGE 1 or 33 The appropriations limit is the calculated dollar amount which limits the Town's ability to receive and expend proceeds of taxes. Such revenues include: Property Taxes, ERAF rebates, Sales Taxes, Real Property Transfer Taxes, Transient Occupancy Taxes, Business License Taxes, State Motor Vehicle Fees, Off-Highway Taxes, certain rental income, other revenues and rebates, a share of Investment Earnings, and transfer of funds from other bunds into reserves of the General Fund. The limit is calculated by adjusting the previously adopted limit by factors which include: (l) the State of California Per Capita Income Growth. and (2) the "Down's Population Growth. Both these figures are provided by the State Department of Finance. The limit is further adjusted if cities bear the costs of legislated fees for the transfer of responsibility. The County, through SB 2335, established fees for the collection of property taxes, which are not subject to the limit. ANALYSIS The calculation for the Town of Tiburon"s Appropriations Limitation for FY 2019-20 is illustrated below: Gann Limit Calculation—FY 2019-20 A111OL111t 1. Previously established limit, July 1, 2017 $9,708,333 2. Adjustment Factors Per capital personal income 3.85% Population growth -0.04% 3. Multiplier, for adjustment to unlit (1 .0385 x 0.9996) 1.03808 4. Annal Adjustment Amount (I) x (3) $369,738 u 5. Add: legislated pass-through fees County property tax collection $64.818 6. Revised limit, July 1. 2020 $10,142,889 Once the Appropriations Limitation has been determined for the upcoming Fiscal year, Staff i11L►s1 then determine the amount of revenues that the Down expects to receive that are subject to the limit. The table below illustrates revenues that are subject to the Ginn Limit. 2019-20 Appropriations Subject to Gann Limit Amount A. Proceeds of Taxes $ 8.292,950 B. Exclusions -0- C. Appropriations subject to Limitation $ 8.292,950 D. Current Year Limit (from above) $10,142,889 E. Over(Under) Gann Limit ($1.849,939) F. Percent Over (Under) Limit (22.31%) Any additional revenues received during FY 2019-20 that are considered "proceeds of taxes" will reduce the amount the Town is currently under the Gann Lim it. FINANCIAL IMPACT By approving the Resolution as presented, the Council is authorizing the level of expenses, within fiunds, for the 2019-20 fiscal year. There is no financial impact in adopted the Appropriations Limitation resolution. RECOMMENDATION Staffrecommends that the Town Council: 1. 1. Adopt, and authorize the Mayor to sign. the attached resolution (Exhibit I ) approving the ?Municipal Budget Plan for the Town of Tiburon for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2020. with any approved modifications as previously discussed at tonight's meeting. 2. Move to approve a Resolution Establishing the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2019-20. Exhibits i. Resolution Adopting the Municipal Budget Plan for FY 2019-20 2. Resolution Establishing the Town's Appropriation Limit for FY 2019-20 Prcpared By: Suzanne Sweitzer, Director or Administrative Services RESOLUTION NO. -2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADOPTING A MUNICIPAL BUDGET PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF TIBURON FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING .LUNE 30. 2020 WHEREAS, the Town Council conducted a Public Hearing concerning the proposed Municipal Budget Plan for fiscal year 2020 at its regularly scheduled meetino on Wednesday. ILlne 5, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Town Council now finds that the proposed Municipal Budget Plan. as estimated, provides for all appropriate municipal purposes and services with current fund(s) and resources and estimated revenues for fiscal year 2020; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED; that the proposed Municipal Budget Plan appropriates revenues and other sources of funds for expenditures associated with operations, capital outlays, capital improvements, and debt service, in the following anlOUntS: Section 1. Operating Budget Program - The proposed Plan has sufficient resources to finance the planned expenditures: Revenues and Funding Sources $12,737.688 Ex enditureS 12.610.252 Total Operating Net: $ 127,436 Section 1 a. Operating Revenue Appropriation—Estimated Revenues and Sources of Funds for fiscal year 2020: GENERAL FUND Pro crty Taxes $6.042.474 Other Taxes 1.684.397 Franchise Fees 712.652 Fines & ForfeitUres 1 10.000 Investment Earnings 260.050 Inter(-,overnmental & Agency 286.994 Licenses & Permits 917.943 Char-es for Services 424.211 Other- Revenues 139.846 Subtotal General Fund Revenues $10.578.568 OTHER FUNDING SOURCES Low/Moderate Housing Fund 23.32_4 Town Ov-vned Housing Fund — ------ 102,340 Page I of4 EXHIBIT 1 Peninsula Library Agency 1.716.415 Long Range Planning Fund 165,000 Gas Tax 40,000 Measure "A" Sales Tax Parks 75.541 Park Development & ORT 20.000 Cypress Hollow Fund 16,500 Total Revenues & Sources $2,159,120 Section 1 b. Operating Expenditures Appropriation Planned Department expenditures for fiscal year 2020: AMOUNT ADMINISTRATION "Town Administration $1,262,434 Town Attorney 356,500 Legislative 83,550 Administration Building 236,776 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning & Design Review $565,357 Building Inspection 741,286 Advanced Planning 165,000 POLICE Police Department $3,595,287 Police Building 72,502 PUBLIC WORKS Administration $694,437 Streets Maintenance 562.189 Parks Maintenance 783.263 Street & Signal Light Maintenance 36,000 Corporation Yard 113,030 Cypress Hollow 16.500 NON-DEPARTMENTAL ]nsurances & JPAs 1.484.061 Low-Moderate Income Hollsll1<- 23.324 Town Owned Housing 102.340 Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency 1,716..415 Total Expenditures: S12,610,252 Pa(-,e 2 of 4 Section 2. Capital Improvement Program —Sources of Funding for Planned Streets, Drainage and Community Development Improvements in fiscal year 2020: SOURCES PRO.IECTS General Fund GF Streets & Drainage Reserve _ $1,000.000 _ Gas Tax Fund 1.100.455 GF Park Development Fund 73.000 Street Impact Fund 281.955 Drainage Impact Fund 30,000 GF Unallocated 158.740 GF Corporation Yard 115.000 STREETS _ Annual Pavement Management Program $200.000 Paving Hawthorne Undergrounding District 31.385 Slurry Seal Virginia 5,570 I Vistazo/Paradise Slide Repairs 510.700 Contingrency Provision 45.000_ 2020 Paradise Drive 140,000 Subtotal Streets Improvements $932.655 DRAINAGE CAnnual Drainage Improvements $1.000,000 Culvert on Old Rail Trail c San Rafael Avenue 30,000 Subtotal Drainage Improvements $1.030.000 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS Hawthorne Undergr•ounding General Benefit $104.740 Public Works Corporation Yard Design 1 15.000 ORT Path Repairs 400.000 ORT Bike Station 33.000 ORT Fixture Maintenance 40.000 Main Street Bollards 54.000 Street Frontage Improvements 49.755 _ Subtoial C01111111,111ity Development Projects $796.495 Total Capital Improvements 52,759,150 52,759,150 Section 3. Debt Service Program —Planned Debt Service and related expenses for special assessment. community facilities districts, and general obligation bond issues ole the Town are as previously planned: Page 3 of 4 BOND ISSUE AMOUNT 2016 Consolidated Reassessment District $644,382 TPFA 2016 Refimding Revenue Bonds 645.616 Virginia Underground District, Series A 10,600 Virginia Underground District, Series B 34,071 Total Debt Service $1,334,669 IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager may make adjustments and activities within the budget provided that no increase or diminishment in salaries result other than that provided by the Town's Personnel System and Master Salary Program, or as authorized by the Town Council; and provided that no expenditure or encumbrance contingent on contract agreement, or other engagement requiring approval of the Town Council shall be made until such contract is first approved by the Town Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on June 19, 2019. by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: DAVID KULIK, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFAN], TOWN CLERK Paae 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. -2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ESTABLISHING AN APPROPRIATION LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019-20 PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIII B. OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, Article XIII B. of the Constitution of the State of California requires -overnmental jurisdictions to establish appropriations limits each year. and WHEREAS, the previously established limit for Fiscal Year 2018-19 was $9,708,333 and the State Department of Finance has determined that the 2019-20 Per Capita Personal Income Factor is 3.85%, and the Population Change Factor is -0.04%; the Director of Administrative Services estimates that legislated pass-tlu-ough fees of the County will be $64,818; the Director of Administrative Services of the Town of Tiburon has determined that the appropriations limit in the amount of$10.142.889 shall be established for Fiscal Year 2019-20. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon that an appropriations limit in the amount of$10,142,889 is established for Fiscal Year 2019-20 pursuant to Article XIII B of the Constitution of the State of California. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular mecting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on June 19, 2019 by the following vote: ;AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: DAVID KUI_IK. MAYOR ATTEST: HEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK EXHIBIT 2 Town Council Meetin0 TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 1505 Tiburon 1301,11evard Agenda Item: CC -5 Tiburon. CA 94920 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Public Works Subject: CalOES Form 130 Resolution Authorizing Signatures I Reviewed By: Gree Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY The Council will consider a Resolution authorizing the Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies, California Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) Form 130, as required to pursue ftund reimbursement related to the local emergency. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Adopt the Resolution that designates the Town Manager as signing authority for CalOES Form 130. BACKGROUND The storm events earlier this year resulted in damages to Town property and infi-astructure that may be eligible for reimbursement for repairs via the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the California Office of Emergency Services (CaIOES). A number of required documentation steps to meet the FEMA/CalOES mandate procedures for reimbursement must be completed by Town staff. Staff has been working with the FEMA/CaIOES representatives to complete these requirements. ANALYSIS Staff recently completed the FEMA documentation required for reimbursement of expenditures that occurred during the storm events. These include the cost of debris removal. materials. tree services.. and staff overtime. CaIOES is the distributing agency for reimbursement. To apply for reimbursement, the 'l own is required to have in place a CalOES Form 130 Resolution that designates signing authority. There is a three-year expiration on such documents and the Town does not currently, have a valid form on tile. Upon Council approv<d. the signing authority is authorized by the "Down Council to engage with FEMA and the Governor's Office of Emergency Services regarding grants applied for by the Town. Staff recommends the Council authorize the Town Manager as the signing authority. TOWN or T1BURON PAGE I or 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT Reimbursement from CalOES for storm related expenses requires execution oil' CalOES Form 130. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA, and if it were found to constitute a project, it would be exempt pursuant to the general rule set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council adopt the Resolution that designates the Town Manager as signing authority for CalOES Form 130. Exhibit(s): 1.Draft Resolution 2. CaIOES Form 130 Prepared By: David O. Eshoo,Associate Engineer TO\N,A OF TI131 RO\ i�:�GE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. XX-2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AUTHORIZING THE CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES (CAL OES) FORM 130 (DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES) WHEREAS, on February 20, 2019, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 02-2019 proclaiming a local emergency related to local storm events that be(�an on February 12. 2019; and WHEREAS, the Town incurred expenses during the 2019 storm events: and WHEREAS, the Town has worked continuously throughout the year with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the California Office of Emergency services representatives to complete the necessary documentation of the storm events: and WHEREAS, the Town is applying for reimbursement for expenses incurred during the 2019 storm events; and WHEREAS, the Town is required to have a CalOES Form 130 on file to designate signing authority for any reimbursements; and WHEREAS,the Town does not have a current CalOES form 130 on file to designate signing authority for any reimbursements; and WHEREAS,the Town wishes to apply for approved reimbursements through CalOES. NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the Town COuncil of the Town of Tiburon, State of California the Town of Tiburon approves a Resolution authorizing the signing of the California Office of Emergency Services Form 130 (Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution for Non-State Agenccs)_ attached as Exhibit 1. 11 IS FURTHER RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUNT) that the '1-0vN n Council of the Town of-Tiburon authorizes the Town Manager to be the authorized si-111110 agent. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of TibLu-on. State of California this 19'x' day of June, 2019, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSEN'l COUNCILMEMBERS: EXHIBIT l Page 1 of 2 7-Own C'omwil Resolution No. xv-2019 DRAFT 06/1912019 DAVID KULIK. MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST-': LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Page 2 of 2 Torn Council Resolzz/iozz No. xx-2019 DRAFT 0611912019 S'I ATFOF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR-S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Cal OES ID No: Cal OGS 130 DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES BE IT RESOLVED BY"THE_ OF THE (Governing Body) (Name of Applicant) TIIAT _ OR (Title of Authorized Agent) OR (Title of Authorized Agent) (Title of Authorized Agent) is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the a public entity (Name of Applicant) established under the laws of the State of California,this application and to iilc it with the California Governor's Office of'Emergency Services for the purpose of'obtaining certain federal financial assistance under Public L.a\\ 93-288 as amended by the Robert T.Stafford Disaster Reliefand Emergency Assistance Act of 1988.and/or state financial assistance under the California I)isaster Assistance Act. TI IAT the a public entity established under the Taws of the State of California. (Name of Applicant) hereby authorizes its agent(s)to provide to the Governor's Office of Emergel7Cy Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required. Please check the appropriate box below: ❑fhis is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and suture disaster,up to three(3)years following the date of approval below. El This is a disaster specific resolution and is effective for only disaster number(s) Passed and approved this day of ,20 (Name and Title of Governing Bode Representam e) (Name and Mille of Governing Body Representatke) (Name and Titic of(imemmg Rock Representative) CERTIFICATION duly appointed and of (Name) (fitic) do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a (Name of Applicant) R�solution passed and approved by the_ of the (Goy ernine l3od\') (Name of Applicant) on the--- day of 20 (Si�naWm) ITitic) 01'S 13o(Rev 9/13) Page I EXHIBIT 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Cal OGS 130- Instructions Cal OGS Form 130 Instructions A Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies is required of all Applicants to be eligible to receive funding. A new resolution must be submitted if a previously submitted Resolution is older than three(3)years f►•om the last date of approval,is invalid or has not been submitted. When completing the Cal OES Form 130. Applicants should fill in the blanks on page 1. The blanks are to be filled in as follows: Resolution Section: Governing Body: This is the group responsible for appointing and approving the Authorized Agents. Examples include: Board of Directors. Cite Council. Board of Supervisors. Board of Education,etc. Name of Applicant: ']'he public entity established under the laws of the State of California. Examples include: School District,Office of Education, Cite. County or Non-profit agency that has applied for the grant,such as: City of San Diego, Sacramento County, Burbank Unified School District, Napa County Office of Education. University Southern California. Authorized Agent: These are the individuals that are authorized by the Governing Body to engage with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Governor's Office of Emergency Services regarding grants applied for by the Applicant. There are two ways of completing this section: 1. Titles Only: If the Governing Bodv so chooses, the titles of the Authorized Agents would be entered here, not their names.This allows the document to remain valid (for 3 years) if an Authorized Agent leaves the position and is replaced by another individual in the same title. If"Titles Only" is the chosen method,this document must be accompanied by a cover letter naming the Authorized Agents by name and title.This cover letter can be completed by any authorized person within the agency and does not require the Governing Body's signature. 2. Names and Titles: If the Governing Rod} so chooses. the names and titles of the Authorized Agents would be listed. A new Cal OES Form 130 will be required if any of the Authorized Agents are replaced, leave the position listed on the document or their title Chan->es. Governing Body Representative: These are the names and titles of the approving Board Members. Examples include: Chairman of the Board. Director. Superintendent.etc. The names and titles cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents. and a minimum of two or more approving board members need to be listed. Certification Section: Name and Title: This is the indi\°idual that vvas in attendance and recorded the Resolution creation and approval. Examples include: Cite Clerk. Secretar% to the Board of Directors. County Clerk,etc.This person cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents or Approving Board Member(if a person holds two positions such as Cite Nlanager and Secretary to the Board and the Citv Manager is to be listed as an Authorized Agent. then the same person holding the Secretary position would sign the document as Secretary to the Board (not City Manager)to eliminate--Self Certification." Cil OGS 130(Rey 9/13) pasc Town Council Meetin« TOWN OF TIBURON June 19. 2019 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Agenda Item: CC - 6 Tiburon. CA 94920 REPORTSTAFF To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Administrative Services Subject: Adopt Resolution Updating References and Establishing a New Location for Safe Deposit Box Contents Reviewed By: Gre,Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Anorne SUMMARY Due to staffing changes and the upcoming closure of the bank branch housing the Town's four safe deposit boxes, an updated Resolution should be adopted. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Adopt the Resolution. BACKGROUND The Town Council adopts by Resolution those officials and employees who shall have authority to sign and endorse checks, and retrieve contents from the Town's safe deposit box(es). The Council frequently updates this Resolution due to staff changes or changes in Council composition to establish check-signing authority. Check signing authority was updated most recently in .January ofthis year due to the retirement of Community Development Director Scott Anderson. It is timely again to revise the signature authority section(s) of this Resolution (Exhibit 1) to reflect the retirement of Heidi Bigall and the title of the new Director of Administrative Services. who had been previously authorized as a signatory as Management Analyst. No additional signatories have been added. The Resolution is also being revised to update the location of the Town's rive safe deposit boxes to the Tiburon branch of Bank of Marin. The Towns safe deposit boxes have been housed at the Tiburon branch of Bank of America for many years. but the branch is expected to close later this year. and the contents must be moved to a new location. The resolution also authorizes Accounting and Finance Manager Elena Kurakina to place. extract or review items held in the boxes. Town or TIBURon PAGE I or 2 The safe deposit boxes hold Town deeds; easements and other agreements. ANALYSIS No further analysis provided. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff anticipates no direct fiscal impact to the Town. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town COLHIeil adopt the ResolUtin11 (Fvllihit 11 Exhihit(s): 1. DRAFT Resolution Prepared By: Lea Stelani,Town Clerk T0',l. y 0 FTIfitRO N 2 o1 2 DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. xx-2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING AND ENDORSING OF CHECKS AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF PAYMENT & ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS RETAINED IN SAFEKEEPING WHEREAS. the Town of Tiburon has, by resolution, adopted a policy which identities the employees and officials who may sign and endorse checks and other instruments of payment on behalf of the Town. and which employees may have authorization for access to Town doCLmlentS held in safekeeping: and WHEREAS, fi-om time to time as employees or Councilmembers authorized to sign and endorse checks and other instruments of payment on behalf of the Town leave the Town's service it becomes necessary to add an authorized signer, and NOW THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED THAT: I. The Bank oi'Marin, Tiburon Branch, shall be the depository for all funds of the Town of Tiburon. Commercial accounts shall be established and maintained by and in the name of the Town of Tiburon at the designated bank upon and subject to such terms as may be agreed to from time to time. 2. All checks. drafts and other instruments for payment from the Town's commercial account in the amount of$2,500.00 or less, or relating to the "Town's state and federal payroll tax obligations, PERS retirement. or health insurance obligations in any amount shall be signed on behalf ofthe Town by any two (2) of the following people: Town Manager Gregory Chanis. Director of Administrative Services Suzanne Sweitzer, Town Clerk Lea Stcfani, or any member of the current Town Council (Jim Fraser, David Kulik, Alice Fredericks, Holli Thier. or Jon Wehner). 3. All payroll. payroll payable, and payroll benefit checks shall be signed by the Town Manager and Director of Administrative Services, and in the case of either's absence. any member of the Town Council. 4. All other checks, drafts and instruments for payment shall be signed on behalf of the Tovv n by either the Town Manager. Director of Administrative Services. Town Clerl< and b\- any yany member of the 'hown Council. 5. All checks. drafts or other instruments for payment made payable to the Town of Tiburon may be endorsed for deposit b\ written or stamped endorsement in the name of the Town of"Fiburon without individual siunatures. 6. Staff is directed to provide a certified copy ofthis resolution to the Ban]< of Marin along v\ith signature authorization forms which include signatures ofthe individuals currently Page 1 ol2 7-01V/7 Colll?C'il Re,mliltion No. x.v-2019 DRAFT June 19, 2019 EXHIBIT I holding the following positions: Town Manager, Director of Administrative Services, Town Clerk, and Town Council members. The Town Clerk shall inform the Bank of Marin of any changes in these positions and provide new signature cards when necessary. 7. The Bank of Marin is requested and authorized to honor, receive, certify or pay any instrument signed or endorsed in accordance with this Resolution. This Resolution and signature authorization forms submitted by the Town Clerk shall remain in full force and effect, and the Bank is authorized and requested to rely and act thereon. until such time as the Bank receives written notice of any changes fi-om the Town Clerk. 8. The Bank of Marin, Tiburon Branch is the location of five Safe Deposit Boxes that the Town rents fi-om the Bank. The following employees of the Town are authorized by signature to place, extract, or review items held in safekeeping: Town Manager(Greg Chanis), Town Clerk, (Lea Stefani), Director-of Administrative Services (Suzanne Sweitzer), and Accounting and Finance Manager(Elena Kurakina). PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on lune 195 20195 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: DAVID KULIK. MAYOR Town of Tiburon ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Page 2 of 2 Totirn Council Resoluuion No. -u-2019 DR41-7 June 19, 2019 Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON lune 19, 2019 1505 Tiburon Boulevard A0enda Iteni: CC - 7 Tiburon, CA 94920 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members ofthe Town Council From: Community Development Department Subject: S132 Funding Options Reviewed By: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney_ SUMMARY Under the first year of funding provided by S132, a one-time non-competitive grant of up to$160,000 is available to Tiburon for Planning activities related to housing production. For this item, Council is considering adoption of a Resolution authorizing staff to apply for grant funding and enter into participation agreements with the County of Marin for certain aspects of the program. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Adopt Resolution authorizing staff to apply for grant funding under SB 2,and enter into participation agreements with the County of Marin (Exhibit 1). BACKGROUND On September 29, 2017 the Governor of California approved Senate Bill 2 (Atkins. Building Homes and .Jobs Act). This Bill was enacted to help fund the construction of affordable housing, with funding split into two phases. Phase 1 (Year 1) is for planning activities. and Phase 2 (Year 2 and beyond) will for implementation. The Notice of Funding Availability for Phase l is attached as Exhibit 2. The State has determined Tiburon is eligible for $160.000 of Phase 1 funding. with applications for the finding due November 30, 2019. The California Department of Housing and Commtu1ity Development. in coordination with the Governors Office of Planning and Research (OPR), will work with a team led by Placeworks (Consulting Firm) to provide technical assistance to applicants tluroughout the application period. ANALYSIS SB2 prov ides a rare opportunity for non-competitive grants for planning, work to help facilitate development of affordable housing. The principal goal of this orant program is to make funding available to all local governments in California for the preparation. adoption and implementation TOWN Or TiBURON � � PAGE I OF 6 of plans that streamline housing approvals & accelerate housing production. The grant program is meant to facilitate planning activities that will foster an adequate supply of homes affordable to Californians at all income levels. It is designed to help local governments meet the challenge of preparing and adopting land use plans & integrating strategies to promote housing development. Funded activities are intended to achieve the following program objectives: • Accelerate housing production • Streamline the approval of housing development • Facilitate housing affordability, particularly for lower & moderate-income households • Promote development consistent with the State Planning Priorities Under SB 2, there are specific projects that would automatically quality for Phase 1 funding. These project types are listed below: (a) Rezone to Permit By-right: Rezoning for significant additional housing capacity without, or lesser, discretionary review, or establishing zoning to permit residential development by-right, particularly multifamily, without discretionary action pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h) and (i). (b) Objective Design and Development Standards: Developing objective design standards of- pre-approved rpre-approved site and architectural plans that facilitate non-discretionary permitting. (c) Specific Plans or Form based Codes Coupled with CEQA Streamlining: Designating and rezoning for additional housing capacity or preparing specific plans or form codes that include zoning and development standards and plan level environmental analysis that can be used to streamline fixture housing projects and facilitate affordability. (d) Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) or Other Low-Cost Building Strategies: Encouraging ADUs and other low-cost building types through actions above state law such as, outreach, fee waivers, pre-approved plans, website zoning clearance assistance, and other homeowner tools or finance tools. Also, establishing other approaches to intensify existing lower- density residential areas and "missing model" typologies to encourage significantly more residential development (e.g.. duplexes. triplexes) in lower density residential areas. (c) Expedited Processing: Speeding up approvals and permit processing. including instituting programs that streamline or consolidate the revie\y process or create a separate process for expedited review of housing projects. (f) Housing Related Infrastructure Financing and Fee Reduction Strategies: Develop and implement approaches to local, regional or sub-regional housing related infrastructure financing. Create plans and programs to finance and increase infrastructure with accompanying enhanced housing capacity. such as enhanced infrastructure financing districts. Fee reduction and rationalization approaches. such as reassessing, tees to adhere to best practices in reducing costs. deferrals. sliding scales or proportionate impacts fees (e.g.. ADUs. transit oriented. and infill development. special needs housing) , or fee transparency meaSUres including publicly available fee calculators. Any of these projects would automatically qualify for SB2 grant funding. I,here are other projects that could qualify for this grant fundin,,: however. any other project would have to show a nexus between the proposed project and housing production. TmN\ ,3tTim lZoN — Ilm;t.- 2 or 6 Staff recommendations for SB 2 Phase 1 fundino, in collaboration with Marin County and other local jurisdictions. The County of Marin Housing and Federal Grants Division has identified three planning projects they believe would benefit from a collaborative effort between the County other eligible local agencies in Marin. Marin County would like local agencies to sign an agreement for each project, and recently provided a draft to the Torun. The Town will be providing edits to the County, subject to the approval of the Town Attorney. Staff has reviewed these projects with County staff and staff from other jurisdictions and is recommending that the Town of Tiburon participate in these efforts. Project descriptions provided by the County are listed below: 1) Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS): $41,667 - $62,500 (Depending on participating jurisdictions) Goal: Use SB-2 .funding to create ODDS to increase certainly in the reviely process. Participating Marin County jurisdictions will work together to hire and manage a consultant who produces a general toolkit that will use existing zoning codes to create ODDS. The responsibilities of ollr locality include contributing to the multi-jurisdiction planning process and adopting specific portions of the toolkit that apply to our jurisdiction. h1 addition, public outreach ($30.000-40,000) regarding the proposed ODDS specific to Tiburon can also be provided by the consultant. Staff notes that creating objective standards could assist with the Housing Element Update and may be potentially required by State Legislation. (AB 1279. SB50, and others.) 2) Inclusionary Fee, Residential and Commercial Nexus Study: $13,000- $18,571 Residential Nexus Stutlp (Depending on particip(iting.iurisdietions) $2,000- $3,500 Commercial Ne_rus Stud).7 (Depending on participating jurisdictions) Goad: Update inclusionary fees to continue to flrnd Tarin County's Housing Trust.. Participating Marin County jurisdictions will hire and manage a consultant who will analyze and recommend improved inclusionary policies and studies regarding affordable housing impact fees,jobs-housing linka«e fees and commercial linkage impact fees. Under TMC Section 16-70.030. The Town of Tiburon has an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee calculation; however, that calculation is from 2013. Under California Government Code Section 65583(a) an analysis is required to update these fees. 3) Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Website and Workbook: $6,250 - $9,375 (Depending on participating juris(lictions) Goal: Provide hands-on resotn•ces that u!ill lnolh,ole homeowners to develop second units. Participating Marin County jurisdictions will work toaeiher to hire and manage a consultant to upgrade the existing countywide ADU website. The website will summarize all ADU and JADU standards for participating jurisdictions and provide cost estimates, example floor plans. and conunLill ity outreach materials for each jurisdiction. ToN\ \ or T1131 aoN P. t. 3 oto 6 The Town of Tiburon receives approximately 1-2 ADU projects a year. This website could be a valuable resource for property owners to help facilitate the development accessory dwelling units. The County has provided draft scopes of work for these 3 efforts, which are attached as Exhibits 3, 4and 5. Other recommended proieet option (Not in conjunction with the County) 4) Fund General Plan Housing Element Update Staff from Placeworks have indicated up to 10% of the SB2 finding ($16,000) could be used to fund the upcoming update to the Housing Element of the Town's General Plan, without the need to provide a nexus analysis. For amounts over the 10%, a nexus analysis would be required for funding approval and allocation by the State. This analysis would need to demonstrate how the Housing Element update would result in the acceleration of housing production. The State of California has prepared a form for local agencies to fill out in terms of meeting the nexus requirements to accelerated housing production. Ways to create a nexus include: • Reduction in processing times • Development costs • Approval Certainty and Reduction of Discretionary Review • Entitlement Streamlining • Feasibility of Development • Infrastructure Capacity (Number of Units) • Impact on Housing Supply According to staff at Placeworks, the State has not received any applications with defined nexus examples to date. As noted above. specific numbers of housin(I production would need to be provided in order to qualify for funds. Based on this information. staff is recommending Out- Grant urgrant application include a request for 10% of the grant amount he allocated to the Housing Element update. In addition to the projects listed above. the grant would allow the Town to retain up to 5% of the grant funds as an Administrative expense. ToNN N or TI 13t rzo� 1).pct: 4 ot.6 SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDED USAGE OF S132 FUNDING SB2 Recommended Allocation Project Approximate Cost Joint Marin County Project Objective Standards $62,500 Yes Public Outreach for Objective Standards $40,000 Yes (Optional) Inclusionary Housing Fee (Residential) Nexus Study $18,571 Yes Inclusionary Housing Fee (Commercial) Nexus $3,500 Yes Stud ADU Website $9,375 Yes 10% Allowance (Housing Element) $16,000 No Subtotal $149,946 Admin fee up to 5% $7,497 Total S 157,443 Funds Available $160,000 FINANCIAL IMPACT The State of California has made available $160,000 in grant funding to the Town of Tiburon for SB2 Year I Planning Grant Program. This is one-time non-completive grant for planning studies. Applications are due on or before November 30, 2019. Grant funding needs to be used by June 30, 2022. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA, and if it were found to constitute a project. it would be exempt pursuant to the general rule set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3). RECOMMENDATION Staffrecommends that the Town COunCll: 1. Adopt Resolution authorizing staff to apply for grant fuming rider SB 2, and enter into participation agreements XV1111 the COMM, of Marin (Exhibit 1) Exhibit(s): To\N N of ht lit Ro\ of 6 I. Draft Resolution directing the Town Manager to apply for SB2 grant funding and enter into a participation w-'reement with the County of Nlarin. 2. SB 2 Notice ofFunding, Availability 3. Scope of work for Objective Standards 4. Scope of work for Inclusionary Housing Fee Study 5. Scope of work for ADU N-vebsite Prepared By: Sung H. Kwon, Director of Community Development 'I'o\N\ of T]13t RO.N Ulm"v 6 Oi 6 RESOLUTION NO. DRAFT-2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, SB 2 PLANNING GRANTS PROGRAM FUNDS WHEREAS, the State of California. Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) has issued a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) dated March 29, 2019, for its Planning Grants Program (PGP); and WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon desires to submit a project application for the PGP program to accelerate the production of housing and will submit a 2019 PGP grant application as described in the Planning Grants Program NOFA and SB 2 Planning Grants Program Guidelines released by the Department for the PGP Program; and WHEREAS, the Department is authorized to provide up to $1.2 million under the SB 2 Planning Grants Program fi•om the Building Homes and .lobs Trust Fund for assistance to Counties (as described in Health and Safety Code section 50470 et seq. (Chapter 364, Statutes of 2017 (SB 2)) related to the PGP Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to apply for and submit to the Department the 2019 Planning Grants Program application released March 29, 2019 in the amount of up to $160,000. Section 2. In connection with the PGP grant, if the application is approved by the Department, the Town Manager is authorized to enter into. execute, and deliver a State of California Standard Agreement (Standard Agreement) for the amount of up to $160,000, and any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to e\ idence and secure the PGP grant, the Town's obligations related thereto. and all amendments thereto (collectively, the "PGP Grant Documents"). Section 3. The Town shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the Standard Agreement, the SB 2 Planning Grants Pro-ram Guidelines. and any applicable PGP "Llidelines published by the Department. Funds are to be used for allowable expenditures as specifically identified in the Standard Agreement. The application in full is incorporated as part of the Standard Agreement. Any and all activities funded. information provided. and timelines represented in the application will be enforceable throu1�h the executed Standard Agreement. The Town Council hereby agrees to use the funds for eligible uses in the manner presented in the application as approved by the Department and in accordance with the Planning Grants NOFA, the Planning Grants Program Guidelines_ and 2019 Planning Grants Program Application. Section 4. The Town Manager is authorized and directed to execute the Town of Tiburon Planning Grants Program application. the PGP Grant Documents. and any amendments Page I (?1'2 Town Council Resolution No. Draft-2019 06 19,2019 EXHIBIT 1 thereto, on behalf of the Town of Tiburon as required by the Department for receipt of the PGI3 Grant. Section 5. The Town Manager is authorized and directed to enter into a participation agreement with Marin County, as approved by the Town Attorney, for the SB2 Objective Design Standards (with public outreach). Inclusionary Fee Studies, and Accessory Dwelling Unit Webpage. The foregoing Resolution was adopted at the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council held on June 19, 2019 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: DAVID KULIK, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFANI. TOWN CLERK PQc' 7 of J Town Council Resolzaion .Vo. Dra i-2019 06/19/2019 STATE OF CALIFORNIA- BUSINESS. CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY Gavin Newsom, Governor DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE , 2020 W.EI Camino Avenue,Suite 500 Sacramento,CA 95833 (916)263-2771 /FAX(916)263-2763 G www,hcd.ca.gov March 28, 2019 MEMORANDUM FOR: All Potential Applicants FROM: Zachary Olmstead, Deputy Director Division of Housing Policy Development SUBJECT: NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY - SB 2 PLANNING GRANTS PROGRAM The Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) is pleased to announce the release of this Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for approximately $123 million under the Senate Bill 2 (SB 2, 2017) Planning Grants Program (PGP). SB 2 established a permanent source of funding intended to increase the affordable housing stock in California. The legislation directs the Department to use 50 percent of the first year's revenue to establish a program that provides financial and technical assistance to local governments to update planning documents and land-use ordinances. The PGP is intended for the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. In order to be eligible for grant funding, an applicant must submit a complete, signed original application and an electronic copy on CD or USB flash drive. OTC applications will be accepted for an eight-month period ending on November 30, 2019. The Department will only accept applications through a postal carrier service that provides date stamp verification confirming delivery to the Department's office, such as the U.S. Postal Service, UPS, FedEx, or other carrier services. No facsimiles, late applications, incomplete applications, application revisions, electronic submittals, or walk-in application packages will be accepted. All applications must be submitted to the Department at the following address: Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy Development 2020 West EI Camino Ave, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 PGP applications and forms are available on the Department's website. Please refer to the Planning Grants Program Guidelines for detailed information on eligible activities, applicants, and awards. If you have questions regarding this NOFA, please email the Department at sb2planninggrant(o-)hcd.ca.gov. Attachment EXHIBIT 2 PLANNING GRANTS PROGRAM (SB 2, 2017) 2019 NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY r u State of California Governor Gavin Newsom Alexis Podesta, Secretary Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency Ben Metcalf, Director Department of Housing and Community Development Zachary Olmstead, Deputy Director Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy Development 2020 West EI Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 Telephone: (916) 263-2771 Website: http://www.hcd.ca.cov/grants-funding/active-funding/planning-grants.shtml Email sb2planninggrant(c�hcd.ca.gov March 29, 2019 Table of Contents I. Introduction .............................................................................................................1 II. Program Summary..................................................................................................1 III. Program Timeline ...................................................................................................2 IV. Funding Available ...................................................................................................2 V. Eligible Applicants...................................................................................................3 VI. Eligible Activities .....................................................................................................3 VII. Eligible Uses...........................................................................................................4 VIII. Threshold Requirements.........................................................................................5 IX. NOFA Application Workshops ................................................................................7 X. Application Submission Requirements....................................................................7 XI. Application Review Process....................................................................................7 XII. Applicant Notification ..............................................................................................8 XIII. Award Letter and Standard Agreement...................................................................8 XIV. Appeals...................................................................................................................8 XV. Right to Modify or Suspend.....................................................................................9 2019 NOTICE OF FUNDING AVAILABILITY SB 2 PLANNING GRANTS PROGRAM I. Introduction The Department is releasing this Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for approximately $123 million to make funding available to all local governments in California under the Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) Planning Grants Program (PGP). The PGP program is intended for the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production. The PGP is authorized by Health and Safety Code sections 50470 et seq. (Chapter 364, Statutes of 2017, (SB 2)). Funding is subject to the December 2018 Planning Grants Program Guidelines (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines"), which includes detailed information on eligibility requirements, conditions, and procedures for awarding funds. II. Program Summary SB 2 (2017) is part of a 15 bill housing package aimed at addressing the state's housing shortage and high housing costs. Specifically, SB 2 established a permanent source of revenue intended to increase the affordable housing stock in California. PGP grants are funded through 50 percent of the revenues collected during the first calendar year (January through December, 2018). The PGP program is a one-time component of SB 2 that, among other provisions, provides financial and technical assistance to local governments to update planning documents in order to: • Accelerate housing production; • Streamline the approval of housing development affordable to owner and renter households at all income levels; • Facilitate housing affordability, particularly for all income groups; • Promote development consistent with the State Planning Priorities; and • Ensure geographic equity in the distribution and expenditure of allocated funds The Department, in conjunction with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, will provide technical assistance to localities pursuant to the provisions set forth in Article VII, Section 700(a) through (e) of the Guidelines. For further information, contact the Department at sb2olanninggrant hcd.ca.gov for details regarding local technical assistance. Please refer to the Guidelines for other administrative provisions not summarized in this NOFA. CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 1 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 III. Program Timeline Pursuant to Section 500(x) of the Guidelines, funds will be initially available to eligible applicants on a noncompetitive, over-the-counter (OTC) basis. Applications will be accepted over an eight-month period, commencing from the date of the release of this NOFA (Section 500(b) of the Guidelines). See Table 1 below for the projected timeline for awards for the initial OTC period. Table 1: Projected Timelin_e_forAwards for OTC Applications Event Date(s) NOFA release March 28, 2019 NOFA-Application Workshops/Webinar Period Aril 1 - May 1, 2019 Final due date for OTC applications November 30, 2019 Supplemental round TBD Anticipated end of grant term June 30, 2022 The Department anticipates awards in 2-3 month intervals, depending on the volume of applications, and reserves the right to make adjustments to the projected timeline at any time. If OTC funds are not fully awarded at the end of the eight-month period, the Department may extend the final OTC application due date or consider a supplemental funding round (Section 500(g) of the Guidelines). During any supplemental round, top priority will be given to localities that have not submitted a previous request for funding. All other applicants may be subject to competitive scoring criteria during any supplemental round (Section 500(g)(2) of the Guidelines). IV. Funding Available The Department determined maximum award amounts for large, medium, and small localities, based on population estimates from the Department of Finance (DOF). Table 2 below shows the minimum and maximum awards available pursuant to Article IV, Section 400 of the Guidelines. Applicants can view maximum award amounts for all jurisdictions here. Table 2: Minimum and Maximum Award Amounts Large Localities— Medium Localities— Small Localities— AII Localities Defined as Defined as 60,000 to Defined as >_ 200,000 people 200,000 people <_ 60,000 people Minimum award Maximum award Maximum award Maximum award amount: amount: amount: amount: $25,000 $625,000 $310,000 $160,000 For a link to the 2018 DOF Population Estimates; E-5; see: http.11www.dof.ca.gov/Forecastinq!Demograph,�s/Estimates/E-5/ Applicants seeking partnerships with other local governments will be additive. For example, two large localities could submit a proposal for up to $1.25 million; three small localities up to $480,000, etc. Note: All applicants, including those who are forming partnerships, must submit separate. complete and signed application packages, pursuant to section X of this NOFA to the Department in order to be awarded funds. CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 2 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 V. Eligible Applicants Pursuant to Article II, Section 200 of the Guidelines, eligible applicants are limited to local governments, i.e., cities and counties. However, local governments may partner through legally binding agreements with other forms of governments or entities where the proposal will have a direct effect on land-use or development within the locality. This includes, but is not limited to, partnerships with other localities, regional governments, housing authorities, school districts, special districts, community based organizations, or any duly constituted governing body of an Indian Reservation or Rancheria. Multi-jurisdictional partnerships between local governments are encouraged in order to coordinate with regional governments, leverage regional and state investment, promote consistency with the sustainable communities strategy, and affirmatively further fair housing. Note: All localities must pass the Threshold Criteria as stated in section VIII of this NOFA. To ensure compliance with section VIII, all applicants, including those who are forming partnerships, must submit separate, complete and signed application packages including resolutions, to the Department in order to be awarded funds. VI. Eligible Activities Applicants proposing Priority Policy Areas, as defined in section VIII of this NOFA, are automatically deemed to accelerate housing production without any documentation or demonstration to the Department. Pursuant to Article III, Section 300 of the Guidelines, a variety of planning documents, planning activities and strategies, are considered eligible activities and must demonstrate a nexus to accelerating housing production, which may include: (1) Updates to general plans, community plans, specific plans, local planning related to implementation of sustainable communities strategies, or local coastal plans; (2) Updates to zoning ordinances; (3) Environmental analyses that eliminate the need for project-specific review; (4) Local process improvements that improve and expedite local planning; (5) A smaller geography with a significant impact on housing production including an overlay district, project level specific plan, or development standards modifications proposed for significant areas of a locality, such as corridors, downtown or priority growth areas; (6) The creation or enhancement of a housing sustainability district pursuant to AB 73 (Chapter 371, Statutes of 2017); (7) Workforce housing opportunity zone pursuant to SB 540 (Chapter 369, Statutes of 2017); CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 3 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 (8) Zoning for by-right supportive housing, pursuant to Government Code section 65651 (Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018); (9) Zoning incentives for housing for persons with special needs, including persons with developmental disabilities; (10) Rezoning to meet requirements pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c) and other rezoning efforts to facilitate supply and affordability; (11) Rezoning for multifamily housing in high resource areas (according to Tax Credit Allocation Committee/Housing Community Development Opportunity Area Maps); (12) Pre-approved architectural and site plans; (13) Regional housing trust fund plans; (14) SB 2 funding plans: (15) Infrastructure financing plans; (16) Environmental hazard assessments; data collection on permit tracking; feasibility studies, site analysis, or other background studies that are ancillary and part of a proposed activity with a nexus to accelerating housing production; and (17) Other planning activities demonstrating a nexus to accelerating housing production. Eligible activities may be part of a larger planning effort (e.g., a comprehensive zoning code update) if proposed activities have not been completed prior to the NOFA date, are distinct, and demonstrate a nexus to accelerating housing production. As part of the PGP program, HCD, in coordination with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR), will work with a team led by Placeworks to provide technical assistance (TA) to applicants throughout the application period. The TA team will work closely with regions, sub-regions, and counties to help jurisdictions identify activities and provide tools that will accelerate housing production. For further information, contact the Department at sb2plann nggrant(a�hcd.ca.gov for details regarding local technical assistance. VII. Eligible Uses Pursuant to Article III, Section 302 of the Guidelines, grant funds shall be used for the costs of preparing and adopting the proposed activity. Subcontracting is allowable under conditions set forth in Section 302(c) of the Guidelines. Pursuant to Section 302(b) of the Guidelines, grant funds may not be used for administrative costs of persons employed by the grantee for activities not directly related to the proposed activity. No more than 5 percent of the grant amount may be used for administrative costs for any proposed use, to be approved by the Department upon disbursement. Only approved and eligible costs incurred for work after the NOFA date, continued past the date of the Standard Agreement, and completed during the grant term, will be reimbursable. Approved and eligible costs incurred prior to the NOFA date are ineligible CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 4 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 (Section 601(c) of the Guidelines). Refer to Section 301 of the Guidelines for a list of all ineligible activities. VIII. Threshold Requirements In accordance with Article II, Section 201 of the Guidelines, all applicants must meet the following threshold requirements: (1) Housing element compliance: The applicant must have a housing element that has been adopted by the jurisdiction's governing body by the date the applicant submits the application package, and is subsequently determined to be in substantial compliance with state housing element law pursuant to Gov. Code Section 65585 by the time of award. A jurisdiction's current housing element compliance status can be obtained by referencing the Department's website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml or emailing the Department at sb2planninggrant(o)hcd.ca.gov. For more information on housing element requirements, please contact Paul McDougall at paul.mcdougall(c�hcd.ca.gov. Pursuant to Section 201(a)(2) of the Guidelines, applicants not meeting housing element requirements may be considered to meet this threshold requirement at the discretion of the Department on a case by case basis by applying factors such as significant progress in meeting housing element requirements (e.g., a draft found to meet statute, rezoning near completion), proposing activities to meet housing element requirements (e.g., rezoning to accommodate housing needs pursuant to Gov. Code Section 65583(c)(1)) and adoption of a compliant element prior to the award of funds. (2) Annual Progress Report (APR) on the housing element: The applicant must submit the APR to the Department, as required by Gov. Code section 65400, for the current or prior year by the date the applicant submits the application package. (3) Nexus to accelerating housing production: The applicant must propose and document plans or processes that accelerate housing production. The application must demonstrate a significant positive effect on accelerating housing production through timing, cost, approval certainty, entitlement streamlining, feasibility, infrastructure capacity, or impact on housing supply and affordability. An application not utilizing Priority Policy Areas must include an explanation and documentation of the nexus plans or processes impact on accelerating housing production based on a reasonable and verifiable methodology and must utilize the Department's form (see Attachment 2 in the Application). A verifiable methodology may include a statement of support from a non-profit or for-profit developer that is active in the locality. Applicants proposing Priority Policy Areas do not require a nexus demonstration and are automatically deemed to accelerate housing production without any documentation. Pursuant to Section 102(q) of the Guidelines, Priority Policy Areas means any of the following.- CA ollowing:CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 5 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 (a) Rezone to Permit By-right: Rezoning for significant additional housing capacity without, or lesser, discretionary review, or establishing zoning to permit residential development by-right, particularly multifamily, without discretionary action pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h) and (i). (b) Objective Design and Development Standards: Developing objective design standards or pre-approved site and architectural plans that facilitate non-discretionary permitting. (c) Specific Plans or Form based Codes Coupled with CEQA Streamlining: Designating and rezoning for additional housing capacity or preparing specific plans or form codes that include zoning and development standards and plan- level environmental analysis that can be used to streamline future housing projects and facilitate affordability. (d) Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) or Other Low-Cost Building Strategies: Encouraging ADUs and other low-cost building types through actions above state law such as, outreach, fee waivers, pre-approved plans, website zoning clearance assistance, and other homeowner tools or finance tools. Also, establishing other approaches to intensify existing lower density residential areas and "missing model" typologies to encourage significantly more residential development (e.g., duplexes, triplexes) in lower density residential areas. (e) Expedited Processing: Speeding up approvals and permit processing, including instituting programs that streamline or consolidate the review process or create a separate process for expedited review of housing projects. (f) Housing Related Infrastructure Financing and Fee Reduction Strategies: Develop and implement approaches to local, regional or sub-regional housing related infrastructure financing. Create plans and programs to finance and increase infrastructure with accompanying enhanced housing capacity, such as enhanced infrastructure financing districts. Fee reduction and rationalization approaches, such as reassessing fees to adhere to best practices in reducing costs, deferrals, sliding scales or proportionate impacts fees (e.g., ADUs, transit oriented, and infill development, special needs housing), or fee transparency measures including publically available fee calculators. Note: HCD will be rolling out best practice toolkits and technical assistance in these topic areas over the course of 2019. Note: If the applicant is proposing only Priority Policy Areas ((PPA), as defined in section VIII, subsection (3) of the NOFA), do not fill out Attachment 2. However, if the applicant is proposing to fund PPAs AND other activities that are not considered PPAs, the application must demonstrate how these other activities have a nexus to accelerating housing production by filling out Attachment 2 of the application. (4) State Planning and Other Planning Priorities: Applicants must demonstrate that the locality is consistent with State Planning or Other Planning Priorities. CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 6 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 Consistency may be demonstrated through activities (not necessarily proposed for SB 2 funding) that were completed within the last five years. Applicants must self- certify utilizing the Department's form (see Attachment 1 in the Application). IX. NOFA Application Workshops The Department will hold workshops and a webinar to review the PGP NOFA and application, and will be conducting technical assistance to aid applicants throughout the OTC period. For a list of dates, times, and locations for the workshops as well as information on technical assistance, please visit the Department's SB 2 Planning Grants webpage, or register here. X. Application Submission Requirements In order to be eligible for grant funding, an applicant must submit a complete, signed original application and an electronic copy on CD or USB flash drive. Applications will be accepted on an OTC basis for an eight-month period anticipated to end November 30, 2019. Note: All localities must pass the threshold criteria as stated in section VIII of this NOFA. To ensure compliance with section VIII, all applicants, including those who are forming or have formed partnerships, must submit separate, complete and signed application packages including resolutions to the Department in order to be awarded funds. The Department will only accept applications through a postal carrier service that provides date stamp verification confirming delivery to the Department's office, such as the U.S. Postal Service, UPS, FedEx, or other carrier services. No facsimiles, late applications, incomplete applications, application revisions, electronically submitted, or walk-in application packages will be accepted. All applications must be submitted to the Department at the following address: Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy Development/ Land Use Planning Unit 2020 West EI Camino Ave, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 Applications must be on Department forms and cannot be altered or modified by the applicant. Program applications and forms are available on the Department's website located at http://www.hcd,ca.gov/grants-funding/active-funding/planning- grants.shtm!#forms. XI. Application Review Process Each application will first be reviewed for completeness, threshold eligibility requirements, and accuracy. In order to be considered complete, an application must contain all requested information and supporting documentation. All applications must also meet the eligibility and threshold requirements as specified in this NOFA and the CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 7 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 Guidelines. If the application is ineligible, it will not be considered for funding. Applicants may resubmit their applications prior to the November 30, 2019 deadline. All applicants not meeting the eligibility and threshold requirements will be informed within 60 days from the date the Department receives the application. XII. Applicant Notification Applicants will be notified within 60 days of the Department's receipt of their application regarding the status of their application and/or if any additional information is required (Section 500(e)) of the Guidelines). Applicants will receive an official letter of award after the Department approves funding recommendations (Section 500(f) of the Guidelines). XIII. Award Letter and Standard Agreement Successful applicants will receive an Award Letter from the Department and will be awarded funds through the Standard Agreement process that will specify, among other things, the amount of funds granted, timeline for expenditure of funds, and the approved use of funds. Expenditure report dates and other requirements will also be identified in the SB 2 Planning Grants Program Standard Agreement. XIV. Appeals (1) Basis of Appeals: (a) Upon receipt of the Department's notice deeming an application incomplete or ineligible, applicants under this NOFA may appeal such decision(s) to the Director pursuant to this Section. (b) No applicant shall have the right to appeal a decision of the Department relating to another applicant's eligibility, point score, award, denial of award, or any other related matter. (2) Appeals Process and Deadlines: (a) Process. In order to lodge an appeal, applicants must submit to the Director by the deadline set forth in subsection (b) below; a written appeal which states all relevant facts, arguments, and evidence upon which the appeal is based. No new or additional information will be accepted. Once the written appeal is submitted to the Director, no further information or materials will be accepted or considered thereafter. Appeals are to be submitted to the Director at following address.- Department ddress:Department of Housing and Community Development Division of Housing Policy Development 2020 W. EI Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, California 95833 sb2planninggrant6a�hcd.ca.gov The Director will accept appeals delivered through a carrier service such as CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 8 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 the U.S. Postal Service, UPS, Fed Ex, or other carrier services that provide date stamp verification of delivery. Deliveries must be received during the Department's weekday (non-state holiday) business hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. Additionally, emails to the email address listed above will be accepted if the email time stamp is prior to the appeal deadline. (b) Filing Deadline. Appeals must be received by the Director no later than (5) five business days from the date of the Department's determination. (3) Decision: Any request to amend the Department's decision shall be reviewed for compliance with the December 2018 Guidelines and the March 29, 2019 NOFA. The Director shall render his/her decision in writing within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of the applicant's written appeal. The decision of the Director shall be the Department's final decision, and shall not be appealable to any court or tribunal. (4) Effectiveness: In the event that the statute and/or guidelines governing the PGP program contain an existing process for appealing decisions of the Department with respect to NOFA awards made under such programs, this Section shall be inapplicable and all appeals shall be governed by such existing authority. XV. Right to Modify or Suspend The Department reserves the right, at is sole discretion, to suspend, amend, or modify the provisions of this NOFA at any time, including, without limitation, the amount of funds available hereunder. If such an action occurs, the Department will notify all interested parties and will post the revisions to the Department's website. You may subscribe to the Department's email list here: http://www.hcd.ca.gov/HCD SSI/subscribe-form.html. CA HCD Notice of Funding Availability 9 SB 2 Planning Grants NOFA Year-1 Objective Design and Development Standards: Gs� S,&y rnl endmewts+n riurrpnt hn o n4e C-� S'm'og-A6643H+��A6ts (AB 67-&-SB167-AB!G1 G)and SB35increase qn c+a4`[dGr4-G# proof to defend 1 or decrease of r salon+a riij-of^,-.-mhousing pr^^'^-t whaL?-th4a proposed prej;eGt a4s sbjestia+estandards-*,Loluding #or t to des gh- S uuEntly-}ta�+sd+st+a+l s-i+�-AAar-i+�-�e�ty-rets..ori-d+s6ret}oaa+ vie��-{�+ae-es sec-t-0-+��ad+l tairl-t lie JuRsdiGtieRs in the GGLIRty to have streamlined,OffiGi@l approval ee+ia+launity�-ae.�.,a"ri.tis-staff}dafd s€er-+a}a>at+-�+nit-residelatfal-deuels{�+a�etnt-tt...i s-il�+�erati ve-#oF acesves-te-adc#fe�.-rt 9-nrd-futufe-heus4ng-legislation. Marin r ^ .+„r^ est&-te-use SR 2 fu;d; . eate rebust-. 4bjective4)e PS) ,, order to increase r+n ,+„in.+fir, t-lecat-hGus+ng-pred uGtiGn--goats-are-n e. General Gear SP-3 at;+ryr,., nor hjo m+ er-criterion-ava+table and kable by b and-the-ptrblioof#ficial prior to submitt4,11�he primary,geal for this pre,;ed is Bate-©bje-+i-P dpi-9r:and developi�aent-standaFKds that can be applied in eack}..ju+&dict aroer..t.e._streann6+ne-approval proms ee and-cfnhl h fn nfn ndatiesfs far f�+ti s�regulatieas-axrd...state-;roti,,ing laws— M2RR unty JURS #+oras vv+ll�vvarkogetheY+" ^ g �e Paann rg Es ass-k ets+ g-l4'ork-}ag adapt exist Rg zening Godes and and ai ds-into-object ve stn nr#2rds anel-gujde4ie-s--Th+s took twill be o c+o„ ed for each url' .f. t t i+rtua!-j+i�+sd+cFi„+T,-�.�ulty::,�,�t;�gti..c-�apters� outline @rGh teGtUr@l standards buildIn patterns.-arch" ju4seia4+en gfG .Ste^' feasibility &pe61-fF6 -F-tti prE3ee§�;-E-aat7-Off-?^.'4?''c-I?--2-f�-9§�tl+Red-Iia-thL? I scope-below- Scope Items Standard Toolkit(Assume for All Participating Jurisdictions): The standard toolkit will include an initial data gathering phase,_vetting of development zones and building typologies. All participating jurisdictions will have a standard toolkit of Objective Design and Development Formatted:Font:11 pt Standards t0/"I10difV for their SJJecIfiC needs. Formatted:Numbered+Level:1 i Numbering Style 1,2,3-.....+Start at:1 +Alignment:Left+Aligned at: *-----f:�aGtli"nent- Eekd�c6+ -will-Febie,'..4eF�-tOft+ aE-F elatAES-t© !`0.25"+ Indent at: 0.5",Pattern:Clear(Background 1) zoning acid develo{�Fi ent- They r�4f ev e a as 3 sfaee+f+c a�- f sign ste n#a d= Formatted:Font:11 of ^ ^ n, --raccduFes an . d devels __eM-c�'e P _TfeE.'.:�. oc #_fi ori gr t+c! have-a-I+St-et-dac-ti+�aeF�l+3afti6+{3atFR Formatted.Font 11 pt Formatted:Font:11 pt Formatted:Normal, No bullets or numbering EXHIBIT 3 ' '-- _-- Formatted:Normal,Indent:Left: 0.25", No bullets or i numbering __.S+te V+sFts anc!W©+k Sess,c ns Gonsutta+t-.,v;lf-t rake site-W+sits iaea­Gh}u++stJ st+eRfe — - - ---- -- Formatted Font 11 pt eapt44Fe a ��aal-+nye+r a of a st+a�j�o acid+e x d+ eE+ss ex+sk req sencJ+f o "`"^ ; —_ r __-- Formatted Font:11 pt g-lart+a+n . st .._ ory-afros a{....:._ThP asti_Itafit:,414iave-a{araeted-work-sesser} +mag +�a_aaae•,���^arc#+r+a?�t!�e s}te-v_ists-arad na>��^�+tf+-paras-based-on-t#e ea+asWta^' mmailabi1 T,.nce�slte� -...�. Formatted:Font:11 pt --�e�t+n�--l�i6k 8#�tb'}eet+r '+tw-�1ir>+t to-€2stazlt+r,sdi6ti9�1--a+ad-F-Oltovv-ll � Se &fon-with-PDV G.- n�-�-r„�..,bJe=f=,�'T;,"�v,astittcaF+�Mas2ai ' Formatted Normal, No bulletso r numbering • Document Review and Kick Off:Consultant will attend a kick off meetinq with the ............. PDHWG to discuss expectations and general goals for the project.Consultant will review - Commented 1TL1]:Font size he11 re j documeleVv available design standards.guidelines and procedures and development code The Planning Director Housing Working Group(PDI iWG)project manager will have a list of documents from all rtici atingjurisclictions for the consultant to review. Meetings_. Kick Off Me lit --Formatted Formatted Indent Left 0.5”, No bullets of Site Visits and Work_Sessions__The consultant will make site visits to each jurisdiction to ca ture a visual inveu ory_and discuss existin conditions with the Planning Director and staff. The consultant hili have a-targeted work session with the PDHWG after all of the site visits.The PDI_iV,,G project fit ager_will_coordinate_the site visits and meetings with urisdictions based on,the consultant's availability.The site visits will take place over a consolidated_2_5 d_qy period Meetings. Kick: Off Meeting.Site Visit to Each Jurisdiction.and Follow Up Work Session with I DHVVG uDeliverable Existing Conditions Memorandum — Formatted Formatted Indent:Left 0 5, No bullets o • Develop Base Map and Objective Design Standard"Zones"and"Building Types": ,Consultant will develop standard zones for the ODDS that would include allowable Formatted:Font:11 pt building types,allowable uses, and intenit.The zones and builoing types should be grounded in existilid,,,l-;cations._within t#&-Couniy_of-Mari.n. _jurisdictions and should corresaond with eaisi-,c z_onrr�code. _. o Zones may include:, Commented[TL2]:Would examples of these be Transit Center helpful? • Commercial Center Formatted:Font 11 pt • 4 �.,n.- �.t E srs.idvr Main Street(Commercial Corridor Formatted Font:11 at Neighborhood Center • Multi-Family Neighborhood • Mixed. Small-Scale Multi-Family o Building types=.ay-include: • Residential, Multi-family,"Downtown".-(Larger Scale 5±units {spec4fy Formatted Font:11 pt `Formatted Font 11 pt • Mixed Use: Multi-family Residential,Commercial --- --- ---- - - • Small Lot Mixed Use: Multi-family Residential.Commercial(historic downtowns) • Small Lot Multi-Family(Triplex.Fourplex,etc. in existing single family/duplex, etc. neighborhoods). o Specific needs for each building type may include: • Building placement • Access • Drainage • Equipment/Service Areas • Flood Zone Requirements_ • Lot coverage • Lot size • Setback • Slope • Views. Formatted Font 11 pt -.... ..... _...._.-.........................._.......................................................................... l •—_Qef_bask ----L--ot-size • Building form • Articulation of Open Srace • Building hF eight Formatted:Font:11 pt • Encroachment Formatted:Font:11 pt -...:F.a..ga...d...E._f C.t c...u..lati.o..n ------- ......... __.- -__ ..............._.._......_......................_._.............._. • • Flood Zone Reguirements • Footprint • Frontage Types .::::::::::Fapad: ,t.c�_alniiv_€? • Massing • Orientation • Shadows • Ste)backs r _ - ---- Formatted:Font:11 pt Formatted:Font:11 pt � + t Formatted:Bulleted+Level:4+Aligned at 1 7S'+ G Indent at: 2" , -wtd ng he;gk# Formatted:Font:11 pt - ........---- -- ----- Formatted:Font:11 pt Formatted Font 11 pt !. • AaF'rEt-fs!oantage Fr(®nta F;=. Formatted • Allowed-frontage-types-VVmdow Placement Formatted:Font:11 pt • Parking -- Bicycle Park..ft,a, • LOCafIOn +lfl _ Formatted:Font:11 pt Desitin \Formatted:Font 11 pt '.. _���i c _Layout, - - - ---- - - - Formatted:Font 11 pt -0++veways�nd-Gt�rbe-uts '._Parking_on Hillsides • Transit Amenities • Required Spaces . Setbacks —Screening and Landscape Buffers °.—.... _.... _. _ -. _. Formatted:Font:11 pt !. P-OdtH+FI- & E+ff 6e P2Fk 3e Formatted:Indent:Left 2", No bullets or numbeiing �- -,Formatted:Font:11 pt Present Draft Objective Design Standards to 1--4GUSing IA orkiRg GrGupPDHWG:The Formatted consultant will present a draft of the above scope item to the PDHWG and allow a - Formatted:Font 11 pt comment period so that individual jurisdictions can vet-discuss with planning staff,etc. One set of compiled and vetted conlnlents will be delivered to the consultant via the I Formatted:Font 11 pt p Oject manager. Meetings: Present Draft of Zones and Building Types to PDHWG Deliverables: Draft Zones and Building Types " -- Formatted:Indent:Left. 1", No bullets or numbering _.. .......... ___ ........ ____. ..._....__......._ Formatted:Normal,Indent:Left: 0.75", No bullets or numbering ....... _. ..._ Deve )p Precedural Lrhariges:eFhe-coR&M Ifant-.;tll-work-wltli-tlie PDHWG-t&develep ;Formatted:Font:11 pt proe€ usr na:lc}e. -.for..ex:rarple-:...by-righ4-z©n.,.:g }n order--tatost car+�ll pprsval ___ __.. �resesses_ ---------------- Formatted: } i---- �guss-F Fpoecl+ral-s#l2±? s::_ }E YR 6 --- Formatted:Normal,Indent Left: 0.75 No bullets or numbering Administrative Draft:The consultant will present an administrative draft that includes a -" .......... graphic p p Formatted:Font 11 pt table of contents, ra hic standard. and sample chapter.Consultant will receive cons:.;dated commentsfrom_the_PDHWG lbasg__1_on the Administrative Draft. IJ1rjg:�L_Present_Administrative Draft o PDHWG Deliverable.Administrative Draft Formatted:Indent.Left I", No bullets of numbering • Develop Procedural Changes. The consultant will work with the PDHVVG to develop procedural chances.for exannpleby right zoning,to streamline approval processes. Meetina: Discuss procedural chars with PDHWG(Conferenceall �DeliverablemmPiocedu.ral Chanq_ts.Char ter ® Formatted:Indent:Left: I", No bullets or numbering • Develop Architectural Styles`Pattern Book":The consultant will develop aa-one -Ir Formatted:Font 11 at architectural styles chapter G4. t-for each jurisdiction.Content may-should include (Formatted Font'11 pt descriptions of inter-cad-_Illustrations.and checklists of materials and finishes, Formatted:Font 11 pt hiMor4G-agy-sg11+#+Gaal-a4ce4iaec4u+-a4-sf¢tcs lighting standards. siding, a .In ,,, srooflines,fenestrations,eaves. color.etc. Consultant should-ex ect to receive ;Formatted:Font-11 pt one set of comments from each jurisdiction for the architectural styles chapter. Formatted Font 11 pt —Deliverable Architectural Styles Ins -i- Chapter Formatted Four.11 pt Formatted Indent:Left 1', No bullets or numbering =Final Draft:Consultant will circulate a final draft to the PDHWG for comment.Consultant Formatted:Font 11 pt will receive one set of compiled comments from the PDHVVG project manager. --- I Formatted Font 11 pt - --Deliverable: Final Dr st.(Cigital) - -- — Formatted:Indent:Left V, No bullets or numbering -- - • Public Hearings:Planning Director will present(with consultant help if necessary)to City Formatted Font-11 pt Council/BOS for approval. -- -- _. F--Meetinqs: If needed, consultant will attend one meeting(counci or planning —. conunlssion)per.lu_riscictionand_support for dip tot additional meetings conference calls. Formatted:Indent:Left: V, No bullets or numbering ` Final Submission: Based on specific feedback from each jurisdiction's council,COmplled Formatted:Font:11 pt by the PDHWG project_manoger,consultant will make targeted edits and submit final Formatted:Font:11 pt documentation to the PDHWG. ` Deliverable Final Dia:al Copy of ODDS toolkit including PDF and InDesign Document. Formatted:Indent:Left: 1 No bullets or numberinc Project Management Biweel. y conference calls with Oouf VPDHVVG F'roiect Manager. Formatted:List Paragraph,Bulleted 4 Level:1 + plus 3 additional phone calls vith PDHWG as needed lkss+sl-with_SK=eooftnl Aligned at: 0.25"+Indent at: 0.5" 'Formatted:List Paragraph,Bulleted+Level 1 + The-fellcAjv4ig-tJ:-o-scare-+ter?;--.arc-..ef;t};+,al-cad-a::r+ll...c}>er>te 4aulsi-de-(4--',e-P;D14104", Aligned at: 0.25"+Indent at: 0.5" _t based ADn Formatted:list Paragraph P-l�'"}1fG..P�.c{r6,f?2,.-,C-r�--�''C�.£'6L• „F Faekrti'z:S+Sf GGPSGRSUq r,,P f91,r,gg1' :e's,,GG1,1 s e �f,a d G. Gr tv eEl+ffL—_ye3s,4 }t;r?-�+6�+3�?-1?2-G£:l-E3r�&!!�::..g.f�.<;y{L?_t}`'�}�,`<✓_i33F�1e ;8:?-'., T. Formatted:Indent:Left: 0.5", No bullets or Formatted:list Paragraph Site eE tlx-QDDS—.Tl,r��k+l; hG,t,i de hpagG� feasg�,;y analysis-tel-a:SS&ss-tho devel®)��abil+#yGn-ths i4e e#tlae site-�le 1,5��4e*4--4)y eeas4}44Sdistier� - -AA4tsdiet+en - Formatted:Indent:Left M",, No bullets or l ........ ____. .._. ..............._I -_.._..-E;f�ate Sr"'e-Mafia _... ..._............_....Present-4 Design-Opt+ons �...................._Develop-Deli verables-(Site-P4a+},..Sections,--3d-Model) �....................Fir+arncial-Feasibility-Analysis l�eeop..APpandixlSt+pp4e- e+ataxy-0ec +Rent-ta-lne-0perate nto Trolk; Formatted tont:10 pt --- -------------- Marin County Inclusionary Zoning Study, Including Calculation of Housing Mitigation and Commercial Linkage Fees Background The San Francisco Bay Area, including Marin County, is experiencing a severe housing affordability crisis. While the economy and employment levels continue to expand, the lack of affordable housing has resulted in high housing payments for both new renters and homeowners. There are a number of initiatives now underway to address this affordability crisis including new legislation that has passed or has been proposed at the state level, as well as new regional initiatives. addressing funding as well as zoning and land use changes. Individual cities and counties are also passing measures to increase the amount of funding available for affordable housing. The recently authorized Measures O and P in the City of Berkeley reflect the commitment of local jurisdictions in expanding resources for affordable housing. Measure W in West Marin, which increased transit occupancy tax to fund affordable housing, is another example of local support for funding affordable housing, These measures required approval by two-thirds of voters. There are also very successful local tools that cities and counties can adopt that do not require voter approval. One of these is inclusionary zoning which requires that a specified percentage of new units be affordable in new residential projects. These requirements can be imposed on both rental and ownership housing. Some ordinances specify that fees can be paid in-lieu of providing affordable units. Others specify that these fees are allowed only if a project is below a specified size (number of units). Still other jurisdictions charge a housing mitigation fee which relates the development of new housing to the need for affordable housing that is generated by residential growth. Finally. since new commercial development often results in growth in the number of employed households in a jurisdiction, a commercial linkage fee may be adopted to help the community handle a potential increase in the need for affordable housing created by commercial development. To adopt new policies and feen. it is necessary for California jurisdictions to undertake nexus and fee studies that support inclusionary policies and fees. These studies can be quite complex, and many include an assessment of financial feasibility to insure that the imposition of new requirements do not stop new construction. Finally, a public process is often needed and provides many benefits: (1) Commissions. city counciln and the Board of Supervisors learn about the fees and how they operate. (2) Consultants and staff developing the studies receive critical lied-back. (3) Members of the public understand the fees better and can provided support in their adoption. 1 EXHIBIT 4 If jurisdictions within a wider area are able to collaborate on the studies required to support proposed fees and inclusionary requirements, there can be economies of scale, since some of the information is obtained at the county level data and models that are developed can be very similar. A good example of this collaborative approach was the Grand Nexus Study in San Mateo County, in which most of the 21 Elements jurisdictions cooperated in a fee/inclusionary study.t The proposed study has three goals: 1) Propose parameters for inclusionary programs; 2) Assist local leaders to decide whether enacting affordable housing impact fees and/or commercial linkage fees are viable options, and 3) Ensure that— if enacted —the impact fees would be legally defensible. Fee Methodology To ensure that the fees can be implemented, economists have developed a methodology that can be legally defensible under the Mitigation Fee Act. Adoption of an affordable housing impact fee for new development requires the establishment of a nexus (or connection) between market rate residential development or commercial development and the need for affordable housing. in general, a nexus study for impact fees should show: • A reasonable relationship between the fee's use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed. • A reasonable relationship between the need for the facility or program to be funded by the fee and the type of development on which the fee is imposed. • A reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of thehublic facility or pro,remi attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. The nexus between new development and affordable housin() need is based on orowth in employment associated with new development. Some of the new employees will require affordable housing. This relationship establishes the basis for housing impact fee and commercial linkaoe fee studies. For this proposed study, in order-to establish this nexus it is necessary to define residential and commercial prototypes that are currently being developed or in the approval process in each jurisdiction. Since some cities, e.g., Ross and Belvedere, have very limited commercial development. there may not be prototypes that can be used for a commercial linkage study. While all cities have some residential development. there are some that have no muitifitmily housing. Theretore, tailoring the impact fee studies to actual development in each jurisdiction is (For more mfommation, (o to: nttt). ������ I lcm�nt�nom �locument� m:nn Wena ���n:.�t it ho �m 799 1. ,d ne.xuS->tLIdv_>li_IlIIIIny:;and tiimI-rcp��rt.-mii�h "_'f)10 hle 2 very important. While a nexus study defines the maximum fee that is defensible under the Mitigation Fee Act. the actual fee that is adopted is typically based on a public process that occurs at the jurisdictional level. This proposed scope of work includes nexus studies for all participating jurisdictions. However, the consultant work required for the public process at the jurisdictional level is included as optional tasks in the scope of work. Proposed Scope of Work Task One: Project Initiation 1.1. Review of Background Materials Review back-1-01-Ind information provided by staff on the demographics and housing conditions in Marin County. In addition, a review of any existing nexus studies, for example those prepared for Marin County. would be included. 1.2. Kickoff Meeting with all Participating Jurisdictions The purpose of this meeting is to finalize the scope of work and schedule, review the proposed methodologies, and obtain any additional background materials or key information. An agenda would be provided in advance of the meeting. It is assumed that Marin County staff would convene the meeting. One important issue will be to discuss whether the inclusionary program study will be a separate document from the nexus studies. Deliverable: Revised scope (if necessary), and project schedule with milestones. Task Two: Housing Affordability Gap Calculation The Housing Affordability Gap is an important first step since it is used in the calculation of in- lieu fees for inclusionary programs and for both housing mitigation and commercial linka<uc fees The methodology routinely used for the gap calculation is as follows: • Calculate affordable rents and sales prices for income �(Iroups to be served under proposed programs for participating jurisdictions. • Calculate housing affordability gap for ownership housing. based on the difference between the cost of developing a new modest. residential unit (of the appropriate size for the household) and the amount a household can afford to pay at various income levels and household sizes. • Calculate the housing affordability gap for rental housing based on the difference between the annual capitalized value of the net affordable rent and the annual amortized mortgage payment needed to fund the new rental unit. Again, separate calculations are made for each income group and household size included in the gap analysis. Affordable rents and sales prices would be calculated using standard methods used by state or local programs. Deliverable: Concise technical mernorandull? containing draft tables S!!!11r11ar'rZrllg the affordable housing gap for renters and owners. Task Three: Inclusionary Program Study Marin County and several cities in Marin County currently have inclusionary Zoning Ordinances. As part of the initial review during project initiation, these ordinances would be reviewed. It is possible that jurisdictions within Marin County will want to retain their current policies or update them. Also, some jurisdictions that do not currently have inclusionary programs may wish to consider adopting one. The purpose of this task is to review existing ordinances and reconlnlend an\ potential changes to reflect the current"state of the art' for inclusionary zoning. for those jurisdictions without inclusionary ordinances, sample ordinances will be recommended that fit these jurisdictions' housing markets. An updated in-lieu fee will be included based on the affordability gap analysis described in "bask Two. Deliverable: Concise memorandum addressing potential changes in existinL, ordinances for later legal review. Task Four: Residential Nexus Study The purpose of this task is to estimate the increase in demand for affordable housing associated with growth in new residential development. The primary driver for this increase 4 in demand for affordable housing is the growth in expenditures for goods and services attributable to buyers and renters of new market rate housing units in Marin County jurisdictions. Task 4.1. Residential Market Overview I'rior to beginning this task, the consultant would distribute a data request throuOh Marin County staffto all the participating jurisdictions regarding what types of housing developments are Currently being built or in the pipeline in each jurisdiction. This information allows the consultant to define the residential prototypes to include in the study. Since prototypes vary by size, rents and sales prices, it is important to estimate separate housing impact fees for each housing prototype. While there a►-e similarities in these prototypes across jurisdictions (including sales prices and rents), it is important that these prototypes reflect actual market conditions in each jurisdiction. This scope covers selection of up to four residential prototypes covering both rental and ownership housing in each jurisdiction. Task 4.2. Nexus Analysis It is assumed that an increase in household expenditures associated with new housing units results in employment growth. Some of these new employees can afford market rate housing (based on household income), and some will earn incomes below the level needed to afford market rate housing. It is this second g►-oup of employee-households that will experience negative housing impacts, if they want to work and live in the same city. The analytical steps required for this computation at-e the same for both rental and ownership housing with one exception. Annual gross rents are used to estimate household incomes of future renters moving into new rental properties, whereas sales prices are used to estimate household incomes of'firture buyers of new units. The list below provides a walk-through of the analytic steps involved to move from estimatiM-1 nevv residential development to estimating the demand for affordable housing. ']'his analysis answers the question. "What is the maximum impact fee that can be charged?" This analysis does not address "At what level should the housing impact fee be set?" This second question i,, addressed in Task 4.3. Analytical Steps to Estimate Affordable Housing Impacts fi-om New Ownership and Rental HOUs1112 Developments 1. Create a list of-sales prices of newly built housing units that were sold in 2016. 2017. 5 2018, and 2019 (if data are available) for each of the ownership prototypes. Determine rents charged in new rental developments built between 2016 and 2019 for all unit sizes. 2. Estimate household income distribution of new buyers of each housing prototype in each jurisdiction by calculating incomes required to purchase new housing, based on conventional lending standards. For new rental housing, gross annual rents provide the information needed to estimate renters' income distribution. 3. Compute total consumer expenditures on goods and services of the new households in eachjurisdiction. This figure is derived from inputting household incomes calculated in Step 2 into the IMPLAN economic analysis model. Separate models will be developed for each prototype. 4. Through the use of zip code level information from the IMPLAN model for Marin County, it is possible to estimate the number of new employees in each jurisdiction that are needed to accommodate the increase in economic activity defined in Step 3. 5. Adjust growth in employment by the percentagc of new employees who would want to work and live in the same jurisdiction. Selecting the percentage of new employees who would want to live and work in each_jurisdiction is a policy decision and not a strictly analytical one. For example, each jurisdiction could continue with the status quo (only a percentage of new employees in each city will also live in the same city), or it could decide to provide for all affordable housing needs generated by new employment within its boundaries, or it could take a mid-position between these two options. This is another issue to discuss at project initiation. 6. Calculate the number of households represented by these new employees. This adjustment is based on the average number ofwage earners per household in each jurisdiction provided by the most recent census. 7. Estimate employee incomes by using the average wage by occupation for all occupations comprising each detailed industry sector analyzed. This information can be obtained fi-om the California Labor Market Information Division. 8. Convert employee income to household income in order to adjust for multiple wage earners in households. 9. The next step provides a count by income level of new employee households that will move to each jurisdiction to provide goods and services to new homeowners and renters. Only some of these households will require affordable 110using. The income cut-off can be based on policy priorities for each jurisdiction. For example, one city could select a level of 50 percent area median income (AMI) as the cut-off, another could select 80 percent AML and yet another could select up to 120 percent AM1. The selected income cut-off should be consistent with the income cut-off used in the Affordability Gap Analysis (Task 2). 10. For each prototype, the number of iIouseholds requiring affordable housing is then multiplied by the average housing affordability gap (calculated separately for renters and owners in Task 2). This total amount is then divided by the number of units in each prototype to derive a maximum housing( impact fee per unit. 6 Task 4.3. Policy Considerations The fee calculated under Task 4.2 represents the maximum fee that can be levied on new residential units. Selecting the actual fee requires sensitivity to local conditions. Factors to consider when selecting the actual fee level are presented below. 4.3.1. Fees Charged in Neighboring Jurisdictions. It is standard practice to consider the fee levels and requirements of neighboring jurisdictions. This analysis would compare recommended fees in Marin County with those charged in neighboring jurisdictions (to be identified in conjunction with staff). As part of this analysis, the consultant will also note how the fees are calculated and how recently a fee study had been completed in each jurisdiction. 4.3.2. Financial Feasibility of Potential Fee Levels. There are multiple ways to assess financial feasibility of potential fee levels: • Assess how much a jurisdiction's total residential impact fees will increase under the new fee requirements. Is there a significant increase? What will be the impact on profitability of adopting the maxi►num justified fee? What if the fees were less than the maximum that is justified through the nexus study? To answer these questions, the consultant would create a development cost pro forma model for each prototype, based on general cost category assumptions and assess results. • Interviews/focus groups with local developers are helpful in understanding how developers view the imposition of new fees, or if they prefer inclusionary requirements. Again, several fee levels will be considered. including both the maximUmn and lesser amounts. This task is included in the optional task list presented below. 4.3.3. Other Policy Considerations. In addition to the nexus findings. this subtask will also examine the following three policy considerations for inclusion in the draft and final reports: • Establishing Inclusionar))Percenlages Beised on Next/.s Analysis. A residential nexus study can also be used to establish the percentage of inclusionary units. if inclusionary zoning is still a preferred option for jurisdictions included in this study. The number of employee households that require affordable housin1-1 (for each prototype) is divided by the number of units in the prototype to generate a percentage ofaffordable housing units required in a market rate development. This number may be higher or lower than the current inclusionary percentage assessed by each jurisdiction. • Benefits ofProvi(ling Affi)rdable Hozrsing. This discussion can be included in the fee recommendation section or later in the summary report. The main advantage to new market rate residential development fi-om a housing impact fee is to increase the number of local workers who can afford to live in the same jurisdiction as their jobs. This is particularly important for public sector employees. such as teachers and public 7 safety workers. 1 lighlighting the advantages of increasing the supply of affordable housing to the general community can help gain support for a new residential impact fee. • Unit Sizes aml Lxclusion.s. Additional policy issues to consider for the residential housing impact fee include whether to exclude units below a certain size (on the asstm1ptio11 that smaller market rate units are more affordable), charging a lower fee per square foot for smaller units and the full fee for larger units, o►-starting with a lower fee amount and phasing in the fee over a period of time, if there is concern about current market conditions. Task 4.4. Fee Recommendation Based on Tasks 4.2 and 4.3. information on recommended fee levels foe all jurisdictions included in the study will be provided. Then. during the public pi-ocess described in the optional task section below, these fees will be presented to stakeholders and public officials to elicit feedback. Included in the fee ►-ecommendation will be an estimate of the number of affordable housing units that can be built (based on fees from each prototype), and assuming additional sources of financing routinely accessed by affordable housing developers. Task 4.5. Updating the Fees Similar to any impact fee, it will be necessary to adjust impact fees on an annual basis. Adjustments are also needed due to possible changes in the affordability gap. To simplify annual adjustments, it is recommended that a jurisdiction selects a cost index that is routinely published. This can be discussed at project initiation. Deliverables: Technical memorandum on housing fees with summary tables. Information fi-om several subtasks will be used in the draft and final reports. Also, a draft methodology appendix will be provided to staff. Task Five: Commercial Linkage Fee Study The purpose of a Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Study is to quantify the inercase in demand for affordable housing that accompanies new non-residential development. It is assumed that there will be a net gain in employment vvIien new commercial space is built. The ability of new employees to pay for housing costs is linked to their occupations (and hence salaries). Additional housing units will be needed for those employees Nho both work and live in one of the Marin County Elements jurisdictions that are included in the study. Housing units at all price levels are needed. Given anticipated incomes, there may be an affordability "gap" between what some households can afford to pay (to rent or to buy) and the 8 actual costs of new development. This "gap" provides the basis for a fee calculation. Task 5.1. Commercial Market Overview Prior to beginning this task, the consultant will distribute a data request through Marin County staff regarding what types of commercial developments are currently under construction or in the pipeline. This information is useful in defining the commercial proton pes to include in the study. Since prototypes vary by size and intended use. e.g., office, retail, or industrial, it is important to estimate separate commercial linkage fees for each prototype. While there may be similarities in these prototypes across jurisdictions, it is important that these prototypes reflect actual market conditions in each jurisdiction. This scope covers selection of up to three commercial prototypes to be selected in conjunction with staff. Task 5.2. Nexus Analysis The first step of the nexus analysis is to calculate the number of employees that will work in the new space, the number of new households associated with this employment growth, and the number of these new households expected to live in each jurisdiction. The second step is to estimate the incomes of the new employee-households. The third step is to estimate the number Of households that will need affordable housing. These calculations will be undertaken separately for each land use as shown below. Analytical Steps to Estimate Affordable Housing Impacts from New Commercial Developments 1. Select commercial prototypes, such as office, technolo-N. retail, and hotel. The goal is to develop separate linkage fees for each development type for each jurisdiction. Develop a prototype project size for each development type. 2. Select appropriate employment density factors for each prototype.Employment density is defined as the number of square feet of space per employee. 3. Calculate the number of employees who will work in the new space of each development prototype by dividing total project size by the relevant employee density figure. 4. Estimate the number of new employees who will move to the jurisdiction in order to work in the new jobs. The percentage of new employees that will move to one of the jurisdictions would be the same as the percentage defined for the Residential Nexus Study (see above). 5. Calculate the number of households represented by these new employees. This adjustment is based on dividing growth in employment by the average munber of wage earners per household in each jurisdiction provided by the most recent census. 6. Estimate employee incomes by using the average wage by occupation for all employees likely to work in the newly developed commercial space. Since new space will employ workers in a ranee 01'occupations. �111 average income for each commercial development type will be calculated. (Wauye information can 9 be obtained from the California Labor Market Information Division.) 7. Convert employee income to household income in order to adjust for multiple wage earners in households. 8. Determine the number of new employee-households at or below the household income threshold that applies to the program. It should be consistent with the income cut-off used in the Affordability Gap Analysis (and the residential nexus study). 9. The number of households requiring affordable housing is then multiplied by the average affordable housing gap figure. This aggregate sum is then divided by the size of each prototype to generate an impact fee per square foot. This calculation is performed separately for each commercial prototype. For mixed use projects. the fee would be pro-rated based on projected land uses. These fees represent the maximum that can be charged. Task 5.3. Policy Considerations The fee calculated under Task 5.2 represents the maximum fee that can be levied on new commercial developments. Selecting the actual fee requires sensitivity to local conditions. Factors to consider when selecting the actual fee level are presented here. Fees Charged in Neighboring Jurisdictions. It is standard practice to consider the fee levels and requirements of neighboring jurisdictions. To the extent possible, this study will compare proposed fees with commercial linkage fees currently charged in some cities in surrounding areas to be defined in conjunction with staff. Financial Feasibility of Potential Fee Levels. There are several ways to assess financial feasibility of potential fee levels: • Assess how much the imposition Of commercial linkage fee will add to commercial fees currently charged in each jurisdiction. is there a significant increase? What will be the impact on profitability of adopting the fully justified fee? What if the fees were less than the maximum that is justified through the nexus study? To answer these questions. this study v-VIII create development cost pro forma models for each prototype. based on general cost category assumptions and assess results. • Interviews/focus groups with local developers will be helpful in understanding hove they view the imposition of new fees or expanded fees. Again, several fee levels will be considered. including both the maximum and lesser amounts. Other Policy Considerations. In addition to the nexus findings, this task will also examine the following two policy considerations for inclusion in the draft and final reports: • Ewablishim, I-gtrivalencies to Paymew ofFees. A nexus study establishes the amount 10 of funds that are necessary to mitigate impacts on affordable housing demand fi-on new development. if a developer prefers to build the housing or deed land to a developer that will build affordable housing, it is necessary to establish a process for determining the value of in- I<ind payment. Since land values are dynamic, the study can identify how to estimate the equivalency, but not actually provide the equivalency in the body of the report. • Benefits ofProvidirroAffordable Hozrsii�g. This discussion can be included in the fee recommendation section or later in the summary report. The main advantage to new commercial development from a commercial linl<age impact fee is to increase the number of local workers who can afford to live in the same jurisdiction as thei►-jobs. The advantages of increasing the supply of affordable housing to the general community is to reduce concern about displacement of tenants who live in naturally occurring affordable housing. Task 5.4. Fee Recommendation Based on Task Five, fee levels will be recommended for all jurisdictions included in the study. Then, during the public process described in the optional task section below, these fees will be presented to stakeholders and public officials to elicit feedback. Included in the fee recommendation will be an estimate of the number of affordable housing units that can be built (based on fees fi•om each prototype), and also assuming that affordable housing developers vyill access additional sources of financing routinely used, such as LIHTC. Task 5.5. Updating the Fees Similar to any impact fee, it will be necessary to adjust the commercial linkage impact fee on an annual basis. Adjustments are also needed due to possible changes in the affordability gap. It is advisable that the jurisdictions adjust their commercial linkage impact fees by using an annual adjustment mechanism. To simplify annual adjustments, it is recommended that a_jurisdiction selects a cost index that is routinely published. This can be discussed at project initiatiOn. Deliverables: Technical Memorandum on Commercial Linl<age Impact Fees with Summary Tables. Information fi-om several subtasl< will be used in the draft and final reports. Also. a Methodology Appendix Evill be provided to staff. Task Six: Prepare Draft and Final Nexus Study Reports Task 6.1. Sample Report ll The consultant will prepare a sample representative nexus study for both residential and commercial development for one of the cities. The draft report will provide the basis and methodology for establishment of an affordable housing impact fee for both commercial and residential development that is consistent with the requirements of state law. The report will discuss the following: • Current trends in affordable hOUSing finance will be presented. (This section will basically be the same for all jurisdictions.) • Relative merits of expressing the residential impact fee on a per-unit or per-square foot basis for residential development will be discussed. (Note: The primary recommendation for a commercial fee will be on a per square foot basis.) • Information on the maximum fee as well as the recommended fees (rental and ownership housing impact fees and commercial linkage impact fees) will be provided and compared With housing impact and commercial linkage fees in other relevant Bay Area cities and counties. • Discussion of current development trends and expected future development patterns will be presented. Based on this information, estimates of revenue that could be collected will be provided that are based on pipeline projects. • This revenue will be translated to the number of affordable housing units that Could be built, assuming leveraging from other sources. This sample report will be the model for the nexus study reports for all other participating cities and the COunty. Task 6.2. Draft Nexus Reports Once the consultant has received approval on format and structure of the sample report, it will complete drafts for all participating jurisdictions. Upon submission of the draft reports, the Consultant will meet with staff fi-om the participating jurisdictions at County offices to discuss findings. recommendations. and the public process needed to adopt the recommended fees. Task 6.3. Final Reports for Cities and County Upon receipt ofone consolidated set of comments, the Consultant will finalize the reports. Task 6.4. Summary Report "fhC Consultant v,N ill prepare a draft report that summarizes the methodology and results of the study. The summary report will be relatively short, and will distill the information presented in the full nexus reports into a format that is user-fi-iendly and easily understood by a wide audience. Based on one consolidated set of comments the team will finalize the summary report. 12 Deliverables: Sample nexus study report. draft nexus reports and final nexus reports for all participating jurisdictions. Draft and final summary report. All work products to be delivered electronically. Upon submission of the draft reports, the consultant will meet with staff from the participating jurisdictions at County offices to discuss findings, recommendations, and the public process needed to adopt the recommended fees. Task Seven: Optional Tasks At this time, funding has not been allocated for this study. Consequently, this scope identifies additional tasks referred to as "optional,"to distinguish between "necessary" tasks and "recommended tasks" in the event that funding is limited. Due to the uncertainty about which of the jurisdictions will opt to participate in these tasks, the work for these optional items could be provided either on a time and expenses basis, or through a supplemental fixed-fee contract. At this time, these tasks are not included in the budget. Optional Task 7.1. Attend Public Hearings Under this optional task the consultant could present the results of the study at public hearings for specific jurisdictions. Deliverable: PowerPoint presentations for public hearings. Optional Task 7.2. Jurisdiction Specific Recommendations Under this optional task the consultant could provide additional support to specific jurisdictions requesting assistance. This support may include conducting interviews/focus g►-oups with developers and affordable housin<1 stakeholders, and conducting workshops with public officials. The assistance will be provided as needed on a time and materials basis, or through a supplemental contract. Deliverable: As scoped. Optional Task 7.3. Develop Excel Workbook In some situations.jurisdictions request the models that are used for impact fee studies.. so that they can modify assumptions at a later date. Development of these workbooks requires additional effort beyond that needed to undertake calculations. lfany jurisdiction is interested in this possibility. the consultant could provide a separate budget for this work. 13 Deliverable: Excel workbook that can be used by city staff to update lees and examine alternate flee scenarios. 14 Project Description- Provide a description of the project and the scope of work to be performed. Accessory Dwelling Unit Workbook and Website: Context Encouraging the development of second units is one of many ways to boost housing production in Marin County. Several of the county jurisdictions have created second unit programs that include revised ordinances and fee waivers that encourage second unit development. Creating a homeowner tool that gives access to floor plans, process videos, regulation summaries, and a calculator with cost estimates will encourage homeowners in developing ADUs, increase the accessibility of useful materials and the level of information available to the public. General Goals and Objectives Currently, Marin County has a website with basic resources and regulation information. All of the participating jurisdictions will collaborate to upgrade the existing website: www.marincountV.org/makeroomformarin. The County's goal is to provide more information and hands-on resources that will motivate homeowners to develop second units. Marin County jurisdictions will work together through the Planning Director's Housing Working Group (PDHWG) to hire and manage a consultant who will upgrade the existing website and provide additional web and print material to encourage second unit development. The website will summarize all of the ADU standards for participating jurisdictions in Marin County so that homeowners have a better understanding of the planning, permitting and construction process. Scope Items • Select participants and collect photographs, videos and testimonials and produce videos: Using Google Ads, NextDoor, postcards to homeowners (names provided by jurisdictions), and other sources, recruit participants to be spotlighted in the Inspiration Book and videos. Applicants will fill out an online survey and participate in a phone screening interview. Select various homeowners to ensure geographic distribution, type of ADU, homeowner goals, etc. Participants will be financially compensated for their time. • Workbook: Consultant will complete a homeowner manual to guide homeowners from initial interest to construction. It will be tailored to Marin County jurisdictions and will link closely with the ADU Web Portal and other ADU products. Throughout the workbook will be stories from Marin residents that built ADUs with pictures and floorplans. There will be additional information about JADUs contained in the book. • Online Calculator: Improve and customize the interactive calculator allowing homeowners to explore the costs of ADUs and the potential rental income. • Summarize Jurisdiction Rules: Summarize the key ADU standards in all jurisdictions. This matrix will both help homeowners and designers know the rules, but also encourage jurisdictions with overly strict standards to reconsider their policies. Jurisdictions will complete a survey to help gather this information. EXHIBIT 5 TOWN OF TIBURON Toyy,n Council Meeting 1505 Tiburon Boulevard June 19,2019 j Tiburon,CA 94920 Agenda Imn:Al - I STAFF O. To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Manager Subject: Consider Request for a Financial Contribution to the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Expansion Project (Continued from June 15, 2019). 7 Reviewed By: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY Council is considering a request fi-om the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency for a direct financial contribution to the upcoming Library Expansion Project RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Receive the staff',report and presentation by Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency representatives. 2. Hear ani public comment. 3. Determine the amount, if any, of a contribution to the project 4. Continue the item to a future meeting, and direct staff as to what additional information is required beforeCouncil considers the matter again. BACKGROliND The Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency (BTLA) has been planning a library expansion project (Library Project) ,ince 2006, and the Town is currently reviewing a Bujlding Permit application for the proposed Library Project. On May 6, 2019. the Town received a letter from the BTLA requesting a financial contribution from the Town towards the Library Project. (Exhibit 1). The letter includes an attachment which provides an estimate of the cost to construct exterior features, described by the BTLA as 'shared public space. and asks the Town to `confirm its intent to join the Agency by making a contribution to the cost ofthe shared public facilities'. These facilities are depicted in Exhibit 2, and include the public parking lot. public spaces between the two facilities and the redesigned Zelinsky Park area. On May 15, 2019, the Council first discussed the BTLA request. For Councils reference. the Staff Report on this item from the May 15, 2019 meeting is attached as Exhibit 3. At the conclusion Of the May 15 meeting, Council continued the item to the June 5, 2019 Council meeting. At the Council meeting On June 5, Council heard a brief staff-report on this matter, took public comment. and directed staff to continue the item to the June 19 meeting. The Staff Report fi-om the June 5 meeting is attached as Exhibit 4. The primary reason for continuing the item was not all COUncil mennbers were present at the June 5 meeting, and the Councilmembers present felt a decision on this matte.-would be best made with all members participating. In addition, Councilmember Fredericks asked if staff could provide additional information as to the effect malting the full contribution requested by the BTLA ($1.135,537) would have on Town projects either currently planned or being considered in the future. ANALYSIS At their .lune 5 meeting, Council received a detailed presentation on the Towns proposed Fiscal v,,,... vein 2n n..a._,.� --•'-' .'- '---'-'- � � .6. ,• ,• ., __ Y Cay 201 1-20 uuubct, wuiull i iClUded r1110r1maiion regarding the proposed Operating Budget and Capital Irinprovciiicnt Plain for Fiscal Year 217191-20. Staffalso reviewed the Downs various reserve funds. and provided a 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (5Year CIP) that projects potential future capital project expenditures. The projects included in the 5 Year CIP are a Subset of a larger list of potential capital projects that staff maintains, and ranks, on an ongoing basis. Some of these projects can be completed with fundin- from 'Restricted Reserves', and a contribution to the Library would have little or no affect on the Town's ability to complete these projects. However, a large number of the potential projects have no dedicated source of restricted funding (storm drains, Corporation Yard, facility repairs, parks infrastructure etc....). As noted below in the Financial Impact section. these projects are typically funded fi-om Discretionary Reserve accounts. Typically, these discretionary accounts have no regular, dedicated source Of revenue, but rather rely on periodic transfers from Unallocated General Fund Reserves (UGFR) to maintain appropriate balances. Any contribution to the Library Project would come fi-om UGFR funds, and therefore, would displace fiends that would otherwise be available for"Town projects that cannot be funded by a 'Restricted' account. Ultimately It IS tip to Council to determine what capital pro]ects are funded In any 'given year. therefore. it is difficult for staff to identify what specific projects would be affected by a contribution to the Library Project. However, staff would note that Council has expended a siunificant amount ofUGFR over the past two fiscal years, including ftmds used for: the McKegney Field reconSt-uction, storm drain repairs, a $500,000 contribution to the Hawthorne Utility Assessment District, and contributions to trust funds related to the Town's CalPERS and OPEB liability obligations. Largely due to these expenditures, staff is estimating the balance of UGFR at the end of this fiscal year (June 30, 20 19) will be $1.59M. Over the past 15 years, the UGFR has only been less than this amount one time, which was Fiscal Year 201 1-12. as the Town began recovering from the last significant economic recession. Looking ahead, even without a contribution to the Library Project, Council will be faced with making—, difficult decisions regarding the allocation of limited UGFR funds, particularly regarding continued repairs to our storm drain system, potential renovations to Public Works Corporation Yard and uncertainty related to the unfunded liability related to our CalPERS obligations. FINANCIAL IMPACT Any funds allocated by the Town towards the Project would come from Unallocated General Fund Reserves (UGFR). As discussed in the budget presentation, the Town has no traditional debt, and instead has historically relied on UGFR funds to address a variety of needs including: Directly funding all or a portion of capital projects that have no dedicated source of funding, periodically transferring UGFR funds to a variety of discretionary reserve funds when the balances in those funds are depleted, and setting aside funds to address the Towns long term liabilities associated with CAPERS and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An environmental impact report (EIR) for the library expansion project was certified by the Town Council on October 5, 2011. Town staff reviewed the proposed scaled-back project with respect to environmental impacts associated with the originally-approved project, and determined that an addendum (July 2018) to the certified EIR was appropriate under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines section 15164 states that an addendum should be prepared when none of the conditions triggering a subsequent FIR or supplemental FIR has occurred. CEQA Guidelines section 15162 advises that a subsequent or supplemental FIR should be prepared when substantial changes to the project require major revisions to the FIR because ofnew significant environmental effect,. a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified effects. or when new information of substantial importance has been introduced. The reduced-scale project that is currently proposed would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increa,e in the severity of previously-identified effects f-or the approved pro-ject. Nor has new information of a substantial nature been introduced that would materially alter the conclusions of the FIR. As noted in Resolution 35-2018, the Town Council considered an Addendum (July 2018) that identified one mitigation measure (TRANS-6) that warrants revision due to the significant scaling back of the project, in order to improve clarity, and to reflect changes in ownership of adjoinin�21 property since FIR certification. The original mitigation measure had required the applicant to ensure the availability of at least 53 off-site parking spaces for use by Library and Town Hall comply users; that number would be reduced to 33 spaces based on the reduced project size and the ratio ofanticipated vehicles per 1,000 square feet of library proposed to be added. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Receive the staff report and presentation by Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency representatives. 2. Hear any public comment. 3. Determine the amount, if any, of contribution to the project. 4. Continue the item to a ftrture meeting, and direct staff as to what additional information is required before Council considers the matter again. Exhibit(s): 1. Request letter fi•om Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency 2. Common Area Exhibit 3. Staff Report from May 15,2019 Council meeting 4. Staff Report from June 5,2019 Council meeting Prepared by: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Belvedere Tiburon Library Mr. David Kulik, Mayor Tiburon"mown Council 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 May 6,2019 Dear Mayor Kulik and Members of the Tiburon Town Council, As you know,the library Expansion Project includes improvements to our shared exterior areas, namely the public parking lot,the public plaza areas and 7._elinsk,y Dark. when these were created in 1997-1998 the Library and Town worked together,to plan, construct and pay for these community spaces. The current estimate—last updated in February 2019—of the costs to create and improve our shared public space, is approximately$2,271.,000(see attached). The library Agency anticipates that construction, which will commence with the exterior site work,will begin in the next few months. Therefore,we request that the Town confirm its intent to join the Agency by making a contribution to the cost of the shared public facilities. Thank you for your consideration of this request and for your ongoing support of our Library Expansion. Please contact me if you have questions. Respectfuil s Thomas Cromwell, Chair ` Belvedere Tiburon library Agency CC. Deborah Mazzolini, Library Director Greg Chanis,Town Manager EXHIBIT 1 1507 Ti Dinoi�Boulcv�ad, irxiri�n.C;A�3�i920 i�'41.5,%f39.2665 w+r�+rl beltiblibi<ny ur; Belvedere Tiburon Library Estimated Cost of Shared Exterior Public Improvements Environmental Review $375,000 @ 25% $93,750 Design and Professional Civil engineer 168,200 Landscape Arch. 29,000 Signage 2,000 Soils Eng. 20,000 Survey 10,000 Legal, WRA, Tribe 100,000 @ 100% 329,200 Construction Site demolition 90,091 Survey and stake 22,000 Earthwork 339,941 Asphalt paving 103,140 Storm drains 112,500 Habitat fence 16,450 Landscaping 315,971 Pavers 222,224 Site concrete 280,759 Flag, sign, bike racks 17,550 Site lighting 159,800 1,680,426 @100% 1,680,426 Sub-total $2,009,628 General requirements 801,998 @ 10% 80,198 Overhead and profit 609,658 60,000 Insurance 75,217 7,500 Project Management 200,000 20,000 167,698 Total Allocated to Shared Exterior Public Improvement Costs $2,271,074 GI/CMA 05/06/19 Includes elongated left turn lane but not median restoration nor traffic calming devices at the intersection of Mar West and Tiburon Blvd. r3 -, II r'ir"rsalha�n -H, "; ��'•", 'd., - L r^-.0 P,3r_.�an�!_fi6i ,�aaa*ST..Ao�a�flfh•, � _ ,. ..,.,. ,..,..,...., ,, ti l.i.<" v;� OF f Ij a.3 Gryth'� r'cirl .arr...a i a„ carr �' _...,, EXHIBIT 2 �, TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting i,, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard vla)� 15, 2019 Tiburon,CA 94920 Agenda Item AIA STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members ofthe Town Council From: Offlce of the Town Mana< er Subject: Consider Request for a Financial Contribution to the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Expansion Project. Reviewed By: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY Council is considering a request fi•om the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency for a;direct financial contribution to the upcoming Library Expansion Project RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) Staff recommends the Town Council receive Staff Report and, take public comment deliberate and consider the itern and provide direction to staff regarding the item requests. BACKGROUND The Belvedere/Tiburon I..,ibrary Agency (BTLA) has been planning a library expansion project (Project) since 2006, and the Town is currently reviewing a Building Permit application for the proposed Project. On May 6, 2019, the Town received a letter from the BTLA requesting a financial contribution fi-om the Town towards the Project. (Exhibit I). The letter includes an attachment which provides a detailed estimate of the cost to construct exterior features. described by the BTLA as `shared public space', and asks the Town to 'confirm its intent to join the Agency by making a contribution to the cost of the shared public facilities'. For Councils reference, these shared public facilities are depicted in Exhibit 2, and include the public parking lot. public spaces between the two facilities and the redesigned Zelinsky Park area. ANALYSIS Although the request by the BTI-,A is for a direct financial contribution, it is important to note the Town IS supporting the Project in other significant ways including the following. • On July 5, 2007. Town Council approved an 'Agreement To Convey Real Property' (Exhibit 3). Under this agreement. when the BTLA meets certain conditions, the "Town agreed to convey a parcel of land necessary for the project to move forward. An appraisal EXHIBIT 3 of the 16,000 square foot parcel was completed in March 2018, with the market value of the parcel estimated at $880,000 at that time. • Waiving all direct Town fees associated with the approval and permitting process for the project. The total of these waived fees is estimated at $150,000-175.000. In the letter requesting a financial contribution, the BTLA references the Towns contribution to shared capital costs when the original library was constructed in 1997-1998. At that time.the Town contribution was based on an agreement approved by both entities on July 1, 1998 (Exhibit 4). This agreement explicitly stated the Town would share the capital costs of construction along with sharing the ongoing costs of maintenance, utilities and insurance. For the current Project, Council has conducted numerous public hearings, and adopted a number of resolutions containing various Conditions of Approval. After a careful review of the record of these meetings, various resolutions and associated conditions. staff can find no indication the Town intended to contribute financially to the capital costs related to shared facilities constructed as part of the the current Project. FINANCIAL IMPACT Any funds allocated by the Town towards the Project would come from General Fund Reserves. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An environmental impact report (EIR) for the library expansion project was certified by the Town Council on October 5, 201 l. Town staff reviewed the proposed scaled-back project with respect to environmental impacts associated with the originally-approved project. and determined that an addendunn (July 2018) to the certified EIR was appropriate under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines section 15164 states that an addend1_1111 should be prepared when none of the conditions triggering a subsequent FIR or supplemental FIR has occurred. CEQA Guidelines section 15162 advises that a subsequent or supplemental FIR should be prepared when substantial changes to the project require major revisions to the FIR because of new significant environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified effects. or \vhen new information of substantial importance has been introduced. The reduced-scale project that is currently proposed would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified effects for the approved project. Nor has new information of a substantial nature been introduced that would materially alter the conclusions of the FIR. As noted in Resolution 35-2018. the Town Council considered an Addendunn (July 2018) that identified one mitigation measure (TRANS-6) that warrants revision due to the significant scaling back of the project, in order to improve clarity. and to reflect changes in ownership ol'adjoining property since FIR certification. The original mitigation measure had required the applicant to ensure the availability of at least 53 off-site parking spaces for use by Library and Town Hall complex users; that number would be reduced to 33 spaces based on the reduced project size and the ratio of anticipated vehicles per 1.000 square feet of library proposed to be added. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Receive the staff report and presentation by Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency representatives. 2. Hear any public comment. 3. Determine the amotmt, if any. of a contribution to the project 4. Continue the item to a future meeting. and direct staff as to what additional information is required before CoUl1cl) considers the matter again. Exhibit(s): 1. Request letter from Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency 2. Common Area Exhibit 3. Agreement to Convey real property 4. 1998 Agreement. Prepared by: Sung H. Kwon, Director of Community Development _l TOWN OF TIBURON ToN�n Council Meeting 1505 Tiburon Boulevard June 5, 2019 Tiburon,CA 94920Agenda Item: AI-2 j STAFF PO. To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Manager Subject: Consider Request for a Financial Contribution to the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Expansion Project (Continued from May 15, 2019). Reviewed By: Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attorney SUMMARY Councilis considering a request fi-om the Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency for a direct financial contribution to the upcoming`Library Expansion Project RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) "Staff recommends that the Town Counci l: 1. Receive the staff 'report and presentation by Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency' representatives. 2. Hear any public comment. 3. 'Deterinine the amount, if any, of a contribution to the project 4. Continue the item to a future tneeting, and direct staff as to what additional information' is required beforeCouncil-considers the matter again. BACKGROUND The Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency (BTLA) has been planning a library expansion project (Project) since 2006, and the Town is currently revie\ving a Building Permit application for the proposed Project. On May 6, 2019, the Town received a letter from the BTLA requesting a financial contribution fi•om the Town towards the Project (Exhibit 1). The letter includes an attachment which provides an estimate of the cost to construct exterior features.. described by the B"IEA as 'shared public space', and asks the Town to `confirm its intent to join the Agency by making a contribution to the cost of the shared public facilities'. These shared public facilities are depicted in Exhibit 2, and include the public parking lot, public spaces between the two facilities and the redesigned Zelinsky Park area. On May 15, 2019. the Council first discussed the BTLA request. For Councils reference. the Staff Report fi-om that item is attached as Exhibit 3. At the conclusion of their deliberations on May EXHIBIT 4 15. Council directed staff to bring the item back for further discussion at the Jame 5, 2019 Council meeting. In providing this direction, Council indicated they would like the opportunity to review the Towns proposed Fiscal Year 2019-20 Budget prior to making a determination on the BTLA request. In addition. Council asked staff to review the estimate provided by the BTLA related to the cost of constructing the `shared public space', to determine whether staff felt the proposed estimate ofcosts was reasonable. ANALYSIS Prior to this agenda item. Council received a detailed presentation, on the Towns proposed Fiscal Year 2019-20 Budget. which included information and discussion regarding the overall financial condition of the Town. Regarding staff review of the estimate, subsequent to the May 15 Council meeting, staff met with BTLA representatives to review the costs included in the estimate. It is important to note several caveats related to this review: • Town staff are not professional construction cost estimators, as we typically rely on architects/designers to provide estimates as projects progress. • The Project is designed as one set of plans, and the estimate figw•es provided by the BTLA were generated by extrapolating from the overall project estimate provided by their architect, the costs specifically associated with the proposed improvements in the area shown in Exhibit 2. • The true cost of the project will only be known when the project is complete, and even then, it would be difficult to completely isolate the costs for constructing the improvements shown in Exhibit 2. During the review, staff and BTLA identified a number of line items that may warrant adjustments, however, the combined total of these items would not result in a material change to the overall total estimate. In addition, the BTLA representatives pointed out a number of areas where they felt costs could have been attributed to the `shared public space', but were not included in the estimate. Therefore, based on our review, and the caveats noted above, staff believes the estimate provided by the BTLA is a reasonable approximation ofthe costs associated with designing and constructing the improvements depicted in Exhibit 2. FINANCIAL IMPACT Any funds allocated by the Town towards the Project would likely come from Unallocated General Fllnd Reserves (UGFR). As discussed in the budL)et nresentation_the Town has no tradirion;l debt and instead has historically relied on UGFR funds to address a variety of needs including: Directly Funding all or a portion of the cost of capital projects that have no dedicated source of fundin0. periodically transferring UGFR fiords to a variety ofdiscretionary reserve funds when the balances in those funds are depleted, and setting aside funds to address the Towns long term liabilities associated with CalPERS and Other Post Employment Benefits (Retiree Medical). ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An environmental impact report (FIR) for the library expansion project was certified by the Town Council on October 5, 2011. "Town staff reviewed the proposed scaled-back project with respect to environmental impacts associated with the originally-approved project, and determined that an addendum (July 2018) to the certified FIR was appropriate under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CEQA Guidelines section 15164 states that an addendum should be prepared when none of the conditions triggering a subsequent FIR or supplemental FIR has occurred. CEQA Guidelines section 15162 advises that a subsequent or supplemental FIR should be prepared when substantial changes to the project require major revisions to the FIR because of new significant environmental effects, a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified effects, or when new information of substantial importance has been introduced. The reduced-scale project that is currently proposed would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously-identified effects for the approved project. Nor has new information of a substantial nature been introduced that would materially alter the conclusions of the FIR. As noted in Resolution 35-2018, the Town Council considered an Addendum (July 2018) that identified one mitigation measure (TRANS-6) that warrants revision due to the significant scaling back of the project, in order to improve clarity, and to reflect changes in ownership of adjoining property since FIR certification. The original mitigation measure had required the applicant to ensure the availability of at least 53 off-site parking spaces for use by Library and Town Hall complex users; that number would be reduced to 33 spaces based on the reduced project size and the ratio of anticipated vehicles per 1,000 square feet of library proposed to be added. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 5. Receive the staff report and presentation by Belvedere/Tiburon Library Agency representatives. 6. Hear any public comment. 7. Determine the amount, if any, of a contribution to the project 8. Continue the item to a future meeting. and direct staff as to what additional information is required before Council considers the matter again. Exhibit(s): 1. Request letter from Qelvederc7iburon Library Agency 2. Common Area Exhibit 3. Staff Report fi-om May I�. 20 19 Council meeting Prepared by: Greg Chanis.Town Ndanager Tiburon Town Council June 19, 2019 AI - 1 : Belvedere/Tiburon Library Expansion Project Contribution Late Mail Requests for Copies: Lea Stefani, Istefanitownoftiburon.or Lea Stefani From: Nancy Gale <nancymgale@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 10:08 AM To: Lea Stefani Subject: Library Expansion For Tiburon Town Council: I am urging you not to grant this large sum of money requested by the Library for the proposed expansion. We, the taxpayers of Tiburon, have been promised from the beginning that no public funds would be used for this overly large and unnecessary project. I also do not approve, like so many others, of the paving over of precious open space for a parking lot. If public funds are used for this project we, the taxpayers, should at least be allowed to vote on the expansion. There are many infrastructure projects that need to be addressed in Tiburon and our taxes are already too high! Thank you, Nancy Gale, 50 year resident of Belvedere and Tiburon Lea Stefani From: Greg Chanis Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 10:12 AM To: Greg Chanis; Lea Stefani Cc: Benjamin Stock Subject: FW: Library Mayor and Council, Late mail for library item below. Greg Greg Chanis, Town Manager Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920/ (415) 435-7383 -----Original Message----- From: califdell <califdell@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 9:52 AM To: Greg Chanis <gchanis@townoftiburon.org> Subject: Library Dear Mr. Chanis- Were the library expansion put to a public vote in Tiburon and Belvedere it would be defeated. Public funds should be used for all of the infrastructure and maintenance needs of the Town of Tiburon. For how many more high tides and winters will Beach Road at P.O. flood? What about the slide on Paradise Drive? These are just two of many issues. Don't be hood winked by the library group. They do not have a majority of public support. The silent majority thinks the expansion is unnecessary. Waive the traffic condition so that library gets off the hook for commotion it will cause? Not good public relations. Library Fndtn. and staff will argue until they're blue in the face. Many of your citizens are not happy with that group. Trying to be good neighbors keeps many of us silent after years of organized protesting to deaf ears. Dellie Woodring Sent from my Whone until they're blue in the face. Many of your citizens are not happy with that group. Trying to be good neighbors keeps many of us silent after years of organized protesting to deaf ears. Dellie Woodring Sent from my iPhone Lea Stefani From: Lea Stefani Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 2:54 PM To: Lea Stefani Subject: FW: Library Expansion From: Diane Lynch <clianedlynch_@.g_nJai_Lcom> ..... Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 2:20 PM To: David Kulik<dkulik(@townoftiburon_.org>; Alice Fredericks <afre ,e.ricl<s(a>townoftiburon.org>; Jim Fraser .._...._..._.__.._... ........................... .............................._....._.._ <jfra er( townoftiburon.or >; Holli Thier<hthier„@townoftiburon.c rC7>; Jon Welner<jweIn_e_r@townoftiburon.org> . .................. Cc: Greg Chanis <gchanis@townoft_i,biuro_n:_org> Subject: Library Expansion To the Council and Town Manager: First, a comment on the Town of Tiburon website. I have mentioned to council members and staff over the years that it would be so nice to have a link ("email the Council") that would bring up an email to the whole council instead of having to use the clunky cut and paste method to send said email. There are a lot of people in town who do not support the unnecessarily large expansion to the library, but for any number of reasons have chosen to remain silent. Laziness or not wanting to offend friends who might support the addition come to mind. I get emails from people I don't even know when my letters run in The Ark. Sadly the library planners have not seen fit to design multi purpose spaces but rather single use spaces: the teen room is a good example. This space might get an average of 2 hours use a day and sit vacant the other 22 hours. Making the space more flexible (the current Founders' Room is a good example of this) might have garnered more support. I appreciate the work you all do to make our town a better place but I feel very strongly that funding the library to the tune of over a million taxpayer dollars is not right. We the voters should vote to decide on such a large expenditure. And the library needs to work within its means and not be holding its hat out to the town when they have stated repeatedly that the expansion will be funded privately. In case you didn't see my letter to The Ark a few weeks ago I'm pasting it below for you: To think that Tiburon (why not Belvedere also?) should kick in $1.3 toward the library re-build strikes me as disingenuous at best. This new library is, as stated over and over again by library officials, to be built with private funds. The existing park is just fine as is and the parking lot is almost always adequate, so to call it an upgrade is fine, but it's not a necessity by any definition, and it should be funded by the library. Tiburon has an expensive list of infrastructure work that needs to be done before the council makes any donations. The storm drain system is a top priority for an estimated $800,000- $3.4 million repair and upgrade. The bike path (aka Old Rail Trail) needs the decomposed granite side trails renewed for another$400.000. The corporation yard above Reed School dates to about 1939 and looks like it might blow over in a high wind. Estimates to re-build it range from $6.5 million to a jaw dropping$17.9 million. The proposed shed to house equipment to maintain the new McKegney Green field should be built tucked into the hillside behind the bathrooms at the south end of Blackie's before the corporation yard gets re-built so there's a logical place to store that equipment—another$219,000. These estimates do not even include the unknown cost to repair Vistazo West, where the road collapsed during winter rains. The list goes on. Bottom line is that Tiburon has many more important projects than relocating the perfectly serviceable parking lot and park behind the library and I'm thankful and confident that our council will prioritize the important stuff first. Diane Lynch Old Tiburon Lea Stefani From: Lucy Polite <Ijpolite@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:32 PM To: Nancy Gale Cc: Lea Stefani Subject: Re: Library Expansion I agree With you. Lucy On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:08 AM Nancy Gale <nancymgale@Bmail.com>wrote: For Tiburon Town Council: I am urging you not to grant this large sum of money requested by the Library for the proposed expansion. We, the taxpayers of Tiburon, have been promised from the beginning that no public funds would be used for this overly large and unnecessary project. I also do not approve, like so many others, of the paving over of precious open space for a parking lot. If public funds are used for this project we, the taxpayers, should at least be allowed to vote on the expansion. There are many infrastructure projects that need to be addressed in Tiburon and our taxes are already too high! Thank you, Nancy Gale, 50 year resident of Belvedere and Tiburon Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 L 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Agenda Item: PH-1 Tiburon, CA 94920 STAFF REPORT To: Mavor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Administrative Services Subject: Unmanned Aerial System ("UAS"), or Drone, Regulations Introduction and first reading of ordinance Reviewed By: � Gree Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attornev SUMMARY The Town Council will consider first heading of an ordinance that would regulate operation of Unmanned Aerial Systems, commonly known as drones, in the vicinity of local public schools, publicly permitted events, and emergency operations. RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Hold a public hearing and consider any testimony. 2. If appropriate, make any modifications to the ordinance. 3. Make a motion to read by title only and carry the motion: then read the title of the ordinance,and hold a roll call vote to pass the first reading, waiving any additional readings. 4. If pass for the first reading,the ordinance will be scheduled for adoption at the next regular meeting of the Council BACKGROUND On April 19. 2019. the Town received a letter fi-om the Reed Union School District requesting the Town Council consider adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems. commonly known as drones, over school campuses during hours of operation and school sponsored events (Exhibit 1). The Council discussed the matter at their May 15, 2019 meeting, and directed stall-to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration that would satisfy the District's request. The Council also directed staff-to consider other appropriate regulations adopted by other cities in California. ANALYSIS Due to the complex landscape of federal jurisdiction over airspace; the League 01'Califoruia Cities has published guidance for local governments seeking to impose reasonable reoulations on TOWN oi.TiBURON PAGE 1 of 3 the use of drones within their city limits that preserve the ability of cities and towns to address local concerns of safety and privacy without inviting charges of federal or state preemption. Staff has reviewed the League guidance and the regulations adopted by multiple cities. Many of these local ordinances incorporate portions of existing Federal Aviation Administration drone safety regulations into their ordinances. in addition to more specific local regulations. During their discussion, the Council requested staff to prepare a draft ordinance that would satisfy the District's request to regulate drone operation near public schools and to review the additional regulations adopted by other cities that could be appropriate for Tiburon. In addition to regulation near public schools. the proposed draft ordinance also regulates: • Takeoff, landing or operation of any drone while under the influence of intoxicating substances. • Operation of any drone with the intent to record, transmit or capture images of public school grounds during school hours or school events. • Takeoff, landing or operation ofany drone within 500 feet of any publicly permitted events Without the authorization of the Town. TaIrPnFf lan ►inn nr �rn,•�ti n {' a,. ;fl-; G(1!1 L;, ♦ vv(ullii JVV lcct Vl ally el'llel gCa ley vGl11l;1G o neratll'lg .with hgllts 1,.►ndlo►' in'eins. vi- within 5i/v ieet of any active e►11e1-gelll.y res pollse incident in a manner that interferes with the response activity. All "Public UAS" are exempt from the ordinance. meaning any drone operated by a public agency for government related purposes. It is staff's opinion that these additional regulations are appropriate to strike a balance between preserving the safety of the community against hazardous drone operation. while still acknowledging the benefits of drones for both economic reasons and safe hobbyist enjoyment. The Council may desire additional i-egulations to the ordinance that staff identified from other jurisdictions. Some additional provisions found in othel- municipal codes that the Council may wish to include are as follows: • Prohibition against careless and reckless operation that endangers life and property. • Prohibition against operation outside of daylight or twilight hours. • Prohibition against operation outside of the operator's visual line of sight. • Prohibition against operation on private property without the consent of the property owner, or in a manner that would cause extreme mental or emotional distress to a person that has not consented to the activity. • Designated take-off and landing zones within Town limits. • Permissible hours of operation. • Rules for operation in parks or waterfront areas. such as Shoreline Park. • Rules for operation in certain areas of Tiburon. such as the police or fire stations, or busy pedestrian areas or crosswalks. • Requirement of approval of a perm it issued by the Town prior to operation under certain circumstances. ToNN\ m,T►stlzoN 1' 1.1- 2 or 3 Staff recommends the Council consider passing first reading of the proposed or amended draft toni�oht and schedule adoption of ordinance at their next regular meeting in July. This timeline will allow the regulations to be in place in time for the new school year to start in August. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff anticipates no direct fiscal impact to the Town by adoption ofthis ordinance. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project Under CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: I. Hold a public hearing and consider any testimony. 2. If appropriate, make any modifications to the ordinance. 3. Make a motion to read by title only and carry the motion: then read the title of the ordinance, and hold a roll call vote to pass the first reading, \,\,aiving any additional readings. 4. If pass for the first reading, the ordinance will be scheduled for adoption at the next regular meeting Of tile Council. Exhibit(s): 1. DRAFT Ordinance Prepared By: Lea Stefani,Town Clerk T0\N\ Ol ( IBI, RON 11m;r3of3 SCHOOL w DISTRICT REED UNION 277 A Karen Way Tiburon, CA 94920 tel: 415.381.1112 fax: 415.384.0890 (1) www,ree(lschools.org Board of Trustees: A. J. Brady Amy Jacobs Dana Linker Steele sherry wangenheim '�1 C Afsmich lolf ighari Dr. Nancy Lynch S April 19, 2019 uperintendent Carlos Estrella Mr. Greg Chanis and Tiburon Town Council Members Chief Business Official 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon CA 94920 Dear Mr. Chanis and Tiburon Town Council Members, I write today to inform you that on April 16, 2018, the Reed Union School District Board of Trustees unanimously agreed to have District representatives approach the Town of Tiburon to request that Council members consider the passage of a drone ordinance prohibiting the use of drones over school campuses during hours of operation and school sponsored events. The reason for this request is in response to an incident that occurred on March 21, 2018. A drone was observed flying over the front parking lot of Reed School for approximately 20 minutes while students were at lunch recess. The drone flew at various altitudes which means it provided a clear view of the students on the playground. This activity is very concerning for many reasons including but not limited to, we do not know the identity of the person responsible, nor their intent or purpose for flying over the school while in session. As we place a high priority on the safety and security of students and staff, this is perceived as an intrusion and a possible danger to those we are charged to protect. We are seeking a Town Ordinance that would prohibit this type of activity from happening at schools located in the Town of Tiburon. We look forward to engaging with the Town of Tiburon staff and Council members to discuss this possibility and would welcome participation in drafting an ordinance that would benefit the safety and security of our students and staff as well as the community at large. Respectfully, A] Brady, RUSD Board President Nancy Lynch, RUSD superintendent EXHIBIT I RUSD Mission anti vision: Lath student vvill be challenged and inspired to reach her or his fullest intellectual, social-emotional and creative potential to positively impact the world, DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADOPTING CHAPTER 25-4 TO THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE IMPOSING SAFETY REQUIREMENTS ON THE OPERATION OF MODEL AIRCRAFT AND TO IMPOSE RESTRICTIONS CONSISTENT WITH CERTAIN FEDERAL AVIATION RULES ON THE OPERATION OF BOTH MODEL AIRCRAFT AND CIVIL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS), COMMONLY KNOWN AS DRONES. DRONES AND UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS Section 1—Contents 25-4 (a) Purpose 25-4(b) Definitions 25-4(c) Local Regulations of Unmanned Aircraft Systems 25-4(d) Exemptions 25-4(e)Violation; penalties 25-4(a) Purpose The purpose of this chapter is to regulate the operation of Unmanned Aircraft, commonly known as drones, which can at times pose a hazard to full-scale aircraft in flight and to persons on the ground. Imposing community-based safety requirements on the operation of Model UAS and imposing restrictions on the operation of both Model UAS's and Civil UAS's consistent with Federal Aviation Administration rules is necessary to mitigate such risks and to protect the public from the hazards associated with the operation of Unmanned Aircraft. 25-4(b) Definitions "Civil UAS"shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any Person for any purposes other than strictly hobby or recreational purpose, including, but not limited to, commercial purposes or in the furtherance of, or incidental to, any business or media service or agency. "Drone" refers to any UAS. "FAA" means the Federal Aviation Administration. "Model UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any Person strictly for hobby or recreational purposes. "Person" shall mean natural person,joint venture,joint stock company, partnership, association, club, company, corporation, business trust, organization, or the manager, lessee, agent, servant, officer or employee of any of them. Page 1 of 4 Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. XXX N.S. Fffective Date xx/xx/xxxx EXHIBIT 2 "Public UAS" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft or Unmanned Aircraft System operated by any public agency for government related purposes. "Unmanned Aircraft" shall mean an aircraft without a human pilot onboard, that is controlled by an operator on the ground, and is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft. "Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)" shall mean an Unmanned Aircraft and associated elements, including, but not limited to, any communication links and components that control the Unmanned Aircraft. 25-4(c) Regulations The following shall apply to the operation of any Model UAS or Civil UAS within the Town of Tiburon: 1) No person shall operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS within the Town of Tiburon in a manner that is prohibited by any federal statute or regulation. 2) Excluding takeoff and landing, no person shall operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS within the Town of Tiburon closer than 25 feet to any individual, except the operator or the operator's helper(s). 3) No person shall takeoff, land or operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS while under the influence of alcohol or any other drugs, intoxicating compound or any combination thereof. 4) No person shall knowingly and intentionally operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS on the grounds of, or less than 400 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school facility in the Town of Tiburon during school hours or school events,without the written permission of school officials. 5) No person shall knowingly and intentionally operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS to record, transmit or capture images of public school grounds in the Town of Tiburon during school hours or school events, without the written permission of school officials. 6) No person shall takeoff, land or operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS within five hundred (500) feet of any publicly permitted events without prior notification and authorization of the Town of T' i iL.uuron. 7) No person shall takeoff, land or operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS within five hundred (500) feet of any emergency vehicle that is operating with lights arid/or sirens. Page 2 of 4 Town of Tiburon Ordinance No.XXX N.S. Effective Date xx/xx/xxxx 8) No person shall takeoff, land or operate any Model UAS or Civil UAS within five hundred (500) feet of any active law enforcement or emergency response incident in a manner that interferes with firefighting, police activity or other emergency response activity. 25-4(d) Exemptions This chapter shall not apply to any Public UAS, or UAS weighing less than 0.55 pounds. 25-4(e)Violation; penalties In addition to other enforcement means available to the Town, any Person violating this Chapter is subject to fines and confiscation of the UAS by the Tiburon Police Department or other local, state or federal law enforcement agency operating on their behalf. Section 2—Severability Should any section, clause, or provision of this Ordinance be declared by the courts to be invalid,the same shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole, or parts thereof, other than the part so declared to be invalid. Section 3—California Environmental Quality Act The Town hereby determines that that this ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act review under Title 14, section 15061(b)(3) as there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Furthermore, this ordinance will not cause a direct or indirect physical change to the environment and is therefore exempt pursuant to Title 14, Section 15378(b)(2) and (3)of the California Code of Regulations. Section 4—Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council, a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and against it at least once in a newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of Tiburon. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on , and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Page 3 of 4 Town of Tiburon Ordinance No.XXX N.S. Effective Date xx/xx/xxxx DAVID KULIK, MAYOR Town of Tiburon ATTEST: LEA STEFANI,TOWN CLERK Page 4 of 4 Town of Tiburon Ordinance No.XXX N.S. Effective Date xx/xx/xxxx Tiburon Town Council June 19, 2019 PH- 1 : Unmanned Aerial System "UAS" Regulations Late Mail Requests for Copies: Lea Stefani, Istefani@townoftiburon.org Lea Stefani From: Greg Chanis Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 10:25 AM To: Lea Stefani Subject: FW: Drone ordinance FYI Greg Chanis,Town Manager Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920/ (415) 435-7383 From: Nancy Lynch <nlynch@reedschools.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 7:16 AM To: Greg Chanis<gchanis@townoftiburon.org> Cc: Aj Brady<aj_brady@comcast.net>; Dana Steele <dana.steele@autodesk.com>; Nancy Lynch <nlynch@reedschools.org> Subject: Drone ordinance Good morning Greg, I am SO appreciative that the Town Staff are recommending the ordinance to be heard tonight! I was wondering if there is a reason why there is not a prohibition to fly within 500 feet of a school as there is for a publicly permitted event? Please let me know if I have misinterpreted the restriction for schools. I have a concern that allowing drones to fly no less than 400 feet over a school while in session or during a school event leaves a large window where the operator could say that they ARE 400 feet above the school. This restriction does not addresses the concerns of the district that a drone fly over the school or be close to the school. I would strongly suggest that the same rule apply to schools as does it does publicly permitted events. Again, please let me know if I have not clearly understood the school restriction. If I understand the language correctly, I plan to make a comment suggesting the change I note above at the meeting tonight. Many thanks, Nancy Lynch, Ed.D. Superintendent Reed Union School District Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON June 19, 2019 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Agenda Item: PH - 2 Tiburon. CA 94920 STAFF O . To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Manager Subject: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Approving the TTBID Program and Authorize Levying and Collecting Assessments on Lodging Establishments within the Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District(TTBID) for Fiscal Year 2019-20 , Reviewed By: 4..1- Greg Chanis,Town Manager Benjamin Stock,Town Attonie SUMMARY Council will be holding a Public Nearing and considering adoption of a Resolution authorizing the continuation of the assessments related to the Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District(TTBID). RECOMMENDED ACTION(S) 1. Hold a public hearing on the proposed Resolution to Collect and Levy Assessments to fund the TTBID Program for Fiscal Year 2019-2020. 2. Determine whether there are any public protests to the proposed assessments andTTBID Program. 3. If there is no majority protest. adopt the proposed Resolution(Exhibit 1)to Collect and Levy Assessments to fund the TTBID program. BACKGROUND The Town formed the Tiburon Tourism Business lmprovement District ("TTBID") under Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 ("Act"). The Act requires the Town to annually approve the TTBID assessments and the activities funded by those funds. The Town has taken the first two steps in that process: • On May 10. 2019.. the TTBID Advisory Board approved its Annual Report (The Report). Which included information on the TTBID"s past and projected revenues and expenditures and the proposed TTBID Program for the upcoming year. A copy of the Report is attached as Exhibit 2. • On June 5. 2019. the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 17-2019 ("Resolution of Intention ). declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments within the TTBID and TOWN or TIBURON PAGE 1 of 3 to use those assessments to fund the TTBID Program. The Resolution of Intention set these actions for public hearing on June 19, 2019. The Report recommends the Town use the TTBID assessments to continue and expand upon the initiatives started in past year. The Town would use the TTBID assessments to fund a marketing program, in consultation with the TTBID beneficiaries—the Town's lodging establishments— and other interested parties. ANALYSIS As explained in the Report, staff anticipates that the TTBID will begin Fiscal Year 2019-20 with a stn-plus of$265,000 from the prior fiscal year and raise approximately $190,500 in assessment revenue during the current fiscal year. In addition to assessment revenue, the TTBID anticipates receiving $30,000 from the Town of Tiburon, which is a portion of the Transient Occupancy Tax collected by the Town. Staff anticipates expending approximately $225,000 in Fiscal Year 2019- 20, with any surplus funds carried over to the next fiscal year (2020-21). The Act requires the Council to hold a public hearing on the proposed assessments and hear any protests from interested parties. In the absence of a protest from businesses that would pay a majority of the proposed assessments, the Council Call move forward and adopt tl,e Resolrttiot, attached to this staff report as Exhibit 1, continuing the TTBID assessments for the upcoming year. As ofthis date, the Town has received no protests. I would also note, the assessed parties,. the Town's two lodging establishments, have been very supportive of TTBID program and are represented on the TTBID Advisory Board. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff does not expect any new significant financial impact as a result ol"Council approving staff's recommendations. The Town will continue to ftmd the TTBID program from the TTBID assessments and a portion of the Transient Occupancy Tax received by the Town. As before. the Town may retain a 1% allowance to recover its administrative costs. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has preliminarily determined that adoption of this item is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15378 oh the CEQA Guidelines in that it does not constitute a project under CEQA, and if it vVere found to constitute a project. it would be exempt pursuant to the general rule set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3). 1Z F f,nnnnnr.Xrnn-rI"XT Staff recommends that the Town Council: I. Hold a public hearing on the proposed Resolution to Collect and Levy Assessments to fluid the TTBID Program for Fiscal Year 2019-2020. 2. Determine whether there are any public protests to the proposed assessments and TABID Program. 3. Ifthere is no majority protest, adopt the proposed Resolution to Collect and Levy Assessments to fund the_I"I'BID program. TmN, of.T1131 wN 1�:1(;t 2 OF 3 Exhibit(s): 1. Draft Resolution 2. TTBID Advisory Board Annual Report Prepared By: Greg Chanis.Town Manager Fit o T! Ito V (J 3 oi�3 RESOLUTION NO. xx-2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS ON LODGING ESTABLISHMENTS WITHIN THE TIBURON TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT TO FUND THE APPROVED DISTRICT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, Section 36500 et seq.. authorizes counties to establish parking and business improvement areas for the purpose of promoting tourism; and WHEREAS, the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989. Section 36500 et seq., authorizes cities to establish parking and business improvement areas for the purpose of promoting tourism; and WHEREAS, in 2007, the Town formed the Tiburon "Tourism Business Improvement District ("TTBID"), to levy a one percent (I %) assessment Q[1 lodging emablishments m ithin the Town's borders: and WHEREAS, in 2010, at the request of the Town's two lodging establishments, the Lodge at Tiburon and the Water's Edge Hotel ("collectively, "Town Hotels")_ the Town increased the TTBID assessment to two percent (2%) and WHEREAS, the TTBID Advisory Board ("Advisory Board*') approved its annual report on May 10, 2019, which report sets forth the legally required program and budget information ("Annual Report"), which included the TTBID Program and which the Council reviewed and approved on June 5, 2019; and WHEREAS, on June 5, 2019, the Council also adopted Resolution No. 17-2019_ ("Resolution of Intention''), declaring its intention to levy the TTBID Assessments. setting a public hearing on June 19, 2019 to consider any protests and directing related actions; and WHEREAS, the Town published notice of the June 19, 2019 public hearing as required by § 36534 of the Streets and Highways Code and further provided written notice to the Town Hotels_ WI-IEREAS, the Town Council conducted the public hearing on the proposed T'l BID Program and assessments on June 19, 2019 pursuant to 5 36524 ofthe Streets and I ays Code and provided all interested parties an opportunity to be heard: and WHEREAS, the Town had not received any protests to the proposed TTBID Program and Assessments by the close of the public hearing and, having considered all public testimony. the Town Council found that there was no majority protest that would preclude the Council from Tiburon Town Council DRAFT Resolution No. XX-2018 06'192019 Page I o! 3 EXHIBIT I approving the TTBID program and assessments as set forth in the Resolution of Intention: and WHEREAS, the Council rinds that the TTBID Program will provide a direct and specific benefit to the payors that is not provided to those not charged and that the assessments will be levied according to benefits accruing to the assess businesses to the maximum extent feasible. The direct and specific benefit to payors will be increased sales of room nights provided throu(lh programs designed to directly benefit payors. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby resolves, determines, and finds as follows: Section 1. The recitals set forth herein are true and correct. Section 2. The Town Council hereby approves the TTBID Program without modification. Section 3. The Town will levy and collect assessments within the TTBID, which is co-extensive with the corporate limits of the Town, as set forth in the Resolution of Intention. The Town will use the "TTBID funds to finance and administer marketing programs as set forth in the Annual Report, the TTBID Program and the Resolution of Intention. Section 4. The assessment will be levied on all lodging establishments, existing and future, at a rate of 2% of gross room rental revenue. The assessment is proposed to be this percentage for the following reasons: a. An assessment based on percentage is most fair to lodging establishments because it will cost smaller, lower service level and less expensive lodging businesses less money than it will cost larger, perhaps higher service level and higher room rate lodging businesses. b. Benefits received by the assessed lodging businesses are likely to be proportional to their assessment, depending upon programs implemented. c. An assessment based on percentage will result in revenues that rise and tall in reflection of greater and lesser business in an overall up or down tourism market and v,yorld economy. d. An assessment based on percentage is direct, and easy to understand and calculate. Section 5. New hotels within the boundaries will not be exempt from the levv of assessment pursuant to Section 36531. Section 6. Except vv here funds are otherwise available, the lodging business Tiburon Town Council 0R.1/=T Resolution No. XX-2018 06/19/2019 Pace 2 of 3 assessment will be levied annually to pay for all improvements and activities within the TTBID specific lodging-related and visitor services. These include. but are not limited to, Web-site construction and maintenance, including assessed hotels, providing visitor information to promote mid-week and off-season overnight lodging; management/alliances/board of directors; research; sales in target markets, general advertising and administration & personnel. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Connell of the Town of Tiburon held on June 19, 2019, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: DAVID KULII<. MAYOR TOWN Of TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFANI. TOWN CLERK TibLn-on Town Council DRAFT Resolution No. XX-'_018 06!19/2019 P-mu 3 of3 TOURISM BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ADVISORY BOARD REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: TTBID Advisory Board Subject: Report of the TTBID Advisory Board re TTBID Funding and Program; Recommendation to Approve Report Date: May 8, 2019 1. BACKGROUND The Tiburon Town Council (the Council) formed the Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District ("TTBID") in 2007. The impetus behind that action was the request from Town's two hotels, the Lodge at Tiburon and the Water's Edge, to join the Marin County tourism promotion effort, which is administered by the Marin County Visitors Bureau ("MCVB"). The TTBID orig- inally imposed assessments of 1% of gross hotel revenue. In 2011, the Town raised the amount of the assessment from 1% to 2% of gross hotel revenue, also at the hotels'request. Initially, the Town contracted with MCVB to administer the Town's TTBID program. 1112013. the Town re-directed the fiends to a locally based business improvement effort that would focus on the specific attractions of the Tiburon peninsula. In 2014, Destination Tiburon, a nonprofit public benefit corporation was formed to implement the TTBID program. The Town must also comply with the procedural laws governing business assessment districts. Those procedural laws require an annual assessment process that begins with the TTBID Adviso- ry Board's (the Board) preparing this report for the Council approval. 11. TTBID Program A. Procedural Requirements. The Town created the TTBID in 2007 pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, Section 36500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act"). The Act requires the Board to prepare an annual report containing the following information: I. The improvements and activities to be provided for the upcoming, fiscal year, i.e., the business improvement program. 2. An estimate of the cost of the business improvement pro,-ram for that fiscal year. TOWN OF TI BU RON ----- - - --- - PAGE 1 OF 4 EXW BIT 3. The method and basis of levying the assessment in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business for that fiscal year. 4. The amount of any surplus or deficit revenues to be carried over from a previ- ous fiscal year. 5. The amount of any contributions to be made from sources other than assess- ments levied pursuant to this part. The Council must review this report and approve it either as submitted by the Board or with changes. Approving the report is the first step in the process of imposing assessments for the new fiscal year. B. Tourism Business Improvement Program. 1. Improvements and Activities The TTBID consists of a broad-based destination marketing campaign to raise Tiburon's profile as a premiere location for vacations, conferences, meetings and other events. This campaign is directed both at leisure tourists and at travel, event and conference professionals. FY2019/2020 can be typified by an intense period of strategic development and marketing planning combined with incredibly productive phases executing the plan. Specific activities in the fiscal year beginning in 7/1/2019 and ending 6/30/2020 consist of: • Develop a multi-channel communications plan designed to reach Meeting Planners at all relevant touch points. • Maintain marketing materials for Meeting Planner target: website (MeetlnTiburon.- com), Tip Sheets, White Papers, Photography, Video, Trade Show presence, collateral, print advertising, eBlasts and content, Instagram strategy and content, cinema advertis- ing. • Create Familiarization Trips for Meeting Planners and Influencers to deliver the unique Tiburon experience. • Deliver Destination Tiburon message directly to high potential targets at Meeting Planner-and Public Relations Trade Shows and networking events. • Update Leisure Traveler website (DestinationTiburon.ora) with new content de- signed to motivate the target with unique Tiburon experiences, and to include user generatecontent.. • Continue distributing collateral materials in the Consumer channel: Tiburon Guides are distributed to guests at Tiburon hotels. These are designed to drive traffic to local 17 businesses and attractions. Rack Cards are distributed at the ferry Building in San Francisco and California Welcome Centers throughout the Bay Area. • Collaborate with the Board to develop and lead strategic planning aimed at promoting the organization's mission statement • Develop partnerships with industry associations and marketingpartners to maximize existing members and customers. • Engage SEO professional to optimize all web activitic s for Destination Tiburon. __. EXHIBIT • Increase overall awareness of Tiburon through targeted digital and paper ads and direct email newsletter campaigns. 2. Estimated cost of the TTBID Program for Fiscal Year 2019-20. The Board expects program expenditures during Fiscal Year 2019-20 will be approximately $225,000. Any sums remaining would be carried over to the program for Fiscal Year 2020-21. 3. Method and basis of assessment The basis for the assessment will not change. When the Town created the TTBID, the MCVB recommended that the Town calculate the assessment level as a percentage of gross receipts, indi- cating that the benefit to the assessed businesses would be commensurate with those receipts. Both of the Town's lodging establishments supported that level of assessment. The Town de- ferred to the joint expertise of the MCVB and the hotels. The hotels continue to support the 2% of gross receipts assessment and the Advisory Board accepts their judgment. 4. Surplus or deficit revenues carried over from prior fiscal year. The Board expects the TTBID will enter Fiscal Year 2019-20 with a surplus of$265,000 carried over from the prior fiscal year, and receive revenues totaling $190,500 during the fiscal year. This estimated revenue figure is the combined total of an anticipated $160,500 in assessments related to the TTBID and an additional $30,000 from the Town of Tiburon. Based on these rev- enue projections and the estimated expenses noted in Section 2, the TTBID expects to cant' over a surplus of approximately $265,000 to Fiscal Year 2020-21. The Board anticipates FY2019-20 will be a productive year, with the creation of an entire suite of marketing materials. At the close of FY2019-20, marketing production will scale back and the focus of the organization will be getting the marketing materials into the appropriate channels. 5. The Amount of Contributions from non-TTBID Sources. The Town contributed approximately $30,000 during the present fiscal year and, a noted in Sec- tion 4 above, expects to contribute a like amount in Fiscal Year 2019-20. At this juncture, the Board does not anticipate any other contributions from outside sources. However. the Board rec- ommends exploring participation from local merchants that could benefit from tourism promotion activities. FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff anticipates no additional financial impact to the Town, other than the contribution noted in Section 5 above. The Town will continue to collect the 1 % administrative allowance as provided by law. All remaining funds would be expended on the TTBID program without farther contribu- tions from the Town. RECOMMENDATION EXHIBIT The TTBID Advisory Board recommends that the Tiburon Town Council: I. Hear public testimony and make any desired changes to the Advisory Board Report; and 2. Move to approve a Resolution Approving the Report and take such other actions as are necessary to set the assessments for Fiscal Year 2019-20 for a public hearing. EXHIBIT Objective Design and Development Standards: Scope Items Standard Toolkit (Assume for All Participating Jurisdictions): The standard toolkit will include an initial data gathering phase, vetting of development zones and building typologies. All participating jurisdictions will have a standard toolkit of Objective Design and Development Standards to modify for their specific needs. • Consultant will review documents for all jurisdictions related to zoning and development. They will review available design standards, guidelines and procedures, and development code. The Planning Director Housing Working Group (PDHWG) project manager will have a list of documents from all participating jurisdictions for the consultant to review. o Meetings: Kick Off Meeting • Site Visits and Work Sessions: The consultant will make site visits to each jurisdiction to capture a visual inventory and discuss existing conditions with the Planning Director and staff. The consultant will have a targeted work session with the PDHWG after all of the site visits. The PDHWG project manager will coordinate the site visits and meetings with jurisdictions based on the consultant's availability. The site visits will take place over a consolidated 2.5 day period. o Meetings: Kick Off Meeting, Site Visit to Each Jurisdiction, and Follow Up Work Session with PDHWG. o Deliverable: Existing Conditions Memorandum • Develop Base Map and Objective Design Standard "Zones" and "Building Types": Consultant will develop standard zones for the ODDS that would include allowable building types, allowable uses, and intent. The zones and building types should be grounded in existing locations within County of Marin jurisdictions and should correspond with existing zoning code. o Zones may include: ■ Transit Center ■ Commercial Center ■ Main Street (Commercial Corridor) ■ Neighborhood Center ■ Multi-Family Neighborhood ■ Mixed, Small-Scale Multi-Family o Building types include: ■ Residential, Multi-family, "Downtown" (Larger Scale, 5+ units) ■ Mixed Use: Multi-family Residential, Commercial • Small Lot Mixed Use: Multi-family Residential, Commercial (historic downtowns) ■ Small Lot Multi-Family (Triplex, Fourplex, etc. in existing single family/duplex, etc. neighborhoods). o Specific needs for each building type include: • Building placement • Access • Drainage • Equipment/Service Areas • Flood Zone Requirements • Lot coverage • Lot size • Setback • Slope • Views ■ Building form • Articulation of Open Space • Building Height • Encroachment • Fapade Articulation • FInnd 7nnP Ranlliramantc • Footprint • Frontage Types • Massing • Orientation • Shadows • Stepbacks • Window Placement ■ Parking • Bicycle Parking • Location • Design • Layout • Parking on Hillsides • Transit Amenities • Required Spaces • Setback • Screening and Landscape Buffers � rIGJCIII Draft VUjCI.:UVC veJiyll Stan dards to ruH'v"vv: The consuiiant will present a draft of the above scope item to the PDHWG and allow a comment period so that individual jurisdictions can discuss with planning staff, etc. One set of compiled and vetted comments will be delivered to the consultant via the project manager. o Meeting: Present Draft of Zones and Building Types to PDHWG o Deliverables: Draft Zones and Building Types • Administrative Draft: The consultant will present an administrative draft that includes a table of contents, graphic standard, and sample chapter. Consultant will receive consolidated comments from the PDHWG based on the Administrative Draft. o Meeting: Present Administrative Draft to PDHWG o Deliverable: Administrative Draft • Develop Procedural Changes: The consultant will work with the PDHWG to develop procedural changes, for example, by-right zoning, to streamline approval processes. o Meeting: Discuss procedural changes with PDHWG (Conference Call) o Deliverable: Procedural Changes Chapter • Develop Architectural Styles "Pattern Book": The consultant will develop one architectural styles chapter for each jurisdiction. Content should include descriptions of intent, illustrations, and checklists of materials and finishes, lighting standards, siding, rooflines, fenestrations, eaves, color, etc. Consultant should expect to receive one set of comments from each jurisdiction for the architectural styles chapter. o Deliverable: Architectural Styles Chapter • Final Draft: Consultant will circulate a final draft to the PDHWG for comment. Consultant will receive one set of compiled comments from the PDHWG project manager. o Deliverable: Final Draft (Digital) • Public Hearings: Planning Director will present (with consultant help if necessary) to City Council/BOS for approval. Meetings: If needed, consultant will attend one meeting (council or planning commission) per jurisdiction and support for up to 2 additional meetings through conference calls. • Final Submission: Based on specific feedback from each jurisdiction's council, compiled by the PDHWG project manager, consultant will make targeted edits and submit final documentation to the PDHWG. o Deliverable: Final Digital Copy of ODDS toolkit including PDF and InDesign Document. Project Management: Biweekly conference calls with PDHWG Project Manager, plus 3 additional phone calls with PDHWG as needed.