HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2014-07-16TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon Town Council
1505 Tiburon Boulevard July 16, 2014
Tiburon, CA 94920 Regular Meeting - 7:30 p.m.
AGENDA
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Councilmember Fraser, Councilmember O'Donnell, Councilmember Tollini, Vice Mayor Doyle,
Mayor Fredericks
CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT, 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 comments to three (3) minutes.
• Introduction of New Police Officer — Fred Gutierrez
• Presentation: Recognition of Allan Bortel for 12 Years of Service ( Marin Commission on
Aging)
• Presentation: Recognition of Dave Gotz for 13 years of Service (Heritage & Arts
Commission)
• Presentation: Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director of the Transportation Authority of
Marin, Regarding Proposed Widening of On -ramps and Installation of Metering Lights
at Certain Northbound U. S. Highway 101 On -Ramps in Central and Southern Marin
County
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 so at this time.
1. Recognition of Service for Fred Lustenberger - Adopt resolution commending
Building Official Fred Lustenberger for his years of service to the Town (Community
Development Director Anderson)
2. Chandlers Gate Grant Deed - Accept Grand Deed from Chandlers Gate Homeowners
Association for a 200 square foot parcel of land to enable creation of a pathway between
Reed School and Dairy Knoll (Community Development Director Anderson)
3. Adopt Integrated Pest Management Policy - Adopt an Integrated Pest Management
Policy as required by the Phase 11 Permit of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (Director of Public Works Barnes; Town Attorney Danforth)
ACTION ITEMS
1. Award of Bids for Median Project and Budget Amendment- Recommendation to
Award the Tiburon Boulevard Median Improvement Project - Cecilia Way to Bay Vista
Drive - to Green Growth Industries, Inc., and Approve a Related Budget Amendment of
$34,000 (Town Manager Curran; Director of Public Works Barnes)
2. Consideration of School Bus Subsidy - Recommendation to Authorize a Council
Committee and Staff to Work with the Reed Union School District and the City of
Belvedere to Implement an Experimental Bus Subsidy Program to Reduce Traffic on
Tiburon Boulevard and Appropriate Funds for the Program in Partnership with Belvedere
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District - Conduct public hearing to:
a. Consider any protests to continue TTBID assessments as set forth in Resolution
No. 30 -2014;
b. Consider adoption of a resolution to continue TTBID assessments as set forth in
Resolution No. 30 -2014
(Town Attorney Danforth)
2. Continued Public Hearing and First Reading of Single Use Carryout Bag Ordinance -
Consider amendments to Title III of the Tiburon Municipal Code by adding Chapter 10A
regulating the use of carryout bags at certain types of establishments -First reading of
ordinance (Town Attorney; Community Development Department)
3. Marijuana Dispensary Ban - Consider Amendments to Title IV, Chapter 16 (Zoning) of
the Tiburon Municipal Code for the Purpose of Prohibiting Marijuana Dispensaries in All
Zones (Community Development Department ) - Continued without discussion to
August 6, 2014
TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS
TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT
WEEKLY DIGESTS
• Town Council Weekly Digests July 4 and July 11, 2014
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 Clerk 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,
www.ci.tiburon.ca.us.
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 days before the
meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above
address.
J: f1_._tl►
Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parries 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.
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of Town Council
Community Development Department
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda Item:
Presentation by Dianne Steinhauser of the Transportation Authority of Marin
(TAM) Regarding the Proposed Metering of Certain Northbound U. S.
Highway 101 On -ramps in Southern and Central Marin County
The Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM), Caltrans, and the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission (MTC) are currently working on plans to install metering devices on selected
northbound U.S. Highway 101 on ramps in southern and central Marin County.
In April, Town staff distributed a memo regarding the project to the Town Council via the weekly
Digest. The memo is attached. The Town Council subsequently requested a presentation on the
project and Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director of TAM, has graciously agreed to make the
presentation to the Town Council.
RECOMMENDATION
Hear the presentation and direct questions as appropriate.
1sl;V, _11:3YY
Memo dated April 22, 2014
Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development `
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
Town of Tiburon
MEMORANDUM
TO: Peggy Curran, Town Manager
FROM: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: U.S. Highway 101 Ramp Metering Project
DATE: April 22, 2014
BACKGROUND
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) recently completed a preliminary
assessment regarding the installation of metering devices on northbound U.S. 101 on -ramps
through portions of southern and central Marin County. This project would involve widening of
certain on -ramps and installation of metering lights at the base of each on -ramp. Affected on-
ramps in the immediate Tiburon vicinity include the two northbound on -ramps at the U.S. 101 /
Tiburon Boulevard intersection, as well as the single ramp at the Seminary Boulevard
interchange with U.S. 101. The Tiburon Diagonal on -ramp would be increased from one to
three lanes and the Blithedale Loop on -ramp would be widened to two lanes. It appears the
Seminary on -ramp would not be widened but would only have metering lights installed. The
executive summary of the MTC assessment is attached.
ANALYSIS
The assessment concluded that metering of the northbound on -ramps would reduce travel times
for those motorists who travel the entire corridor between Marin City and Bellam Boulevard /1-
580 by 24 %, and increase the throughput of vehicles during congested periods in this segment
of freeway. Less travel time would be saved by those motorists entering the freeway midway
through the segment (i.e. at Tiburon Boulevard and at Paradise/Tamalpais Drive). It is expected
that time spent queuing on the on -ramps would actually increase, partially off - setting freeway
travel time gains. The widened on -ramps are necessary to provide enough storage capacity to
allow extensive queuing on the on -ramps without causing back -ups onto local streets.
Unlike many roadway capacity improvement projects, the ramp metering improvements appear
to be on the fast - track. Caltrans is busily designing the improvements and MTC is coordinating
with the Transportation Agency of Marin (TAM) on public outreach and informational efforts. The
improvements are funded and the preliminary timeline is as follows:
Summer 2014: Public Outreach and Information Distribution
Early 2015: On -ramp widening and metering light installation construction begins
Early 2016: Project complete
The project contact person for general information is Winnie Chung at MTC; 510 - 817 -5980.
Attachment: Executive Summary
EXHIBIT NO. I.
Marin US 101 Northbound
Preliminary Ramp Metering Assessment
Marin County, California
Prepared For:
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 Eighth Street
Oakland, CA 94607
(510) 817 -5700
Prepared By:
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 900
Oakland, California 94612
(510) 839 -1742
Project Manager: Allen Huang
Project Principal: Mark Bowman, P.E.
Project No. 13932.00
January 2014
I . r
Morin US 101 Northbound
Preliminary Ramp Metering Assessment Jonuary 2014
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Motorists traveling along US 101 in Marin County currently experience significant delay during peak
traffic conditions — southbound from Novato to San Rafael during the AM commute, and northbound
from Mill Valley to the Sonoma County line during the PM commute.
An initial analysis, conducted in March 2013 for the Marin US 101 Freeway Performance Initiative (FPI)
Ramp Metering Feasibility Study, of northbound US 101 showed that travel times from the Marin City
on -ramp to the Marin- Sonoma county line during the weekday PM peak hour were more than twice as
high as off -peak travel times. The travel time for this 24 -mile trip took about 50 minutes, compared to
about 24 minutes under free -flow conditions. Congestion regularly occurs approaching the Marin-
Sonoma Narrows, Lucas Valley Road, Manuel Freitas Parkway, Second Street/ Central San Rafael, and
Tamalpais Drive to as far south as State Route 1. The recurring bottlenecks and queues result in the
potential for collisions, which further contributes to congestion.
Experience with ramp meters in the Bay Area and elsewhere in the country has shown safety, travel
time, speed, throughput, and environmental benefits'. Ramp metering can improve safety by
smoothing the flow of traffic entering the freeway and reducing stop- and -go driving behavior on the
freeway. Experience in California and across the nation has demonstrated reductions in collisions of
ranging from 15 to 50 percent. Metering can also improve overall system performance by increasing
freeway throughput and travel speeds, which in turn decreases delay. These factors lead to reduced
fuel consumption and vehicle emissions. Additionally, ramp metering can make diversion of short trips
off of the freeway less desirable by requiring the traffic that exits the freeway to stop at a ramp meter
to re -enter the freeway.
To address the congestion and safety concerns on US 101, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission (MTC) is working with Caltrans and the Transportation Authority of Merin (TAM) to
evaluate the feasibility of implementing ramp metering along northbound US 101 corridor in southern
Marin County. A preliminary assessment was performed to determine if northbound US 101 would
show benefits similar to the benefits derived on other congested freeways, such as 1 -580 in Alameda
County and US 101 in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. The analysis conducted for this assessment
was based on traffic data for US 101, as compiled by Caltrans, MTC, and TAM, to reflect current
conditions. A freeway operations analysis tool, FREQ, was used for this study.
The assessment evaluated an initial segment of northbound US 101 consisting of eight (8) freeway on-
ramps from the Bridgeway/ Gate 6 on -ramp in northern Sausalito to the Sir Francis Drake Boulevard on-
ramp in Larkspur.
' Ramo Management and Control Handbook. January 2006, Federal Highway Administration
-" Kittelson & Associates, Inc
,yt
Morin US 101 Northbound
Preliminary Romp Metering Assessment
Executive Summary
January 2014
Figure 1 identifies the freeway on -ramps included in the study:
1. Bridgeway / Gate 6
2. Highway 1 /Pohono
3. Redwood Highway/ Seminary
4. Blithedale Loop
5. Tiburon Diagonal
6. Tamalpais Loop
7. Tamalpais Diagonal
8. Sir Francis Drake Blvd
or �
1
6recnhrBF .� �::�
Figure 1: Study Area Showing Ramp Locations
X. 2 Kittelson& Associates, Inc
Morin US 101 Northbound
Preliminary Romp Metering Assessment January 2014
Executive Summary
Table 1 summarizes the five (5) on -ramps that would be widened as part of the capital improvement
projects necessary for implementing ramp metering under MTC's Freeway Performance Initiative (FPI):
Table 1: FPI Northbound US 101 Ramp Widenings
After widening the ramps and implementing ramp metering, all on -ramps are expected to be able to
store vehicle queues without negatively affecting traffic operations on the local streets. Specifically,
vehicle queues are not expected to extend beyond the length of the ramp and spill onto local streets
and intersections. The widening would have a positive effect in reducing or eliminating queues that
currently affect local street traffic operations. Several examples of this type of improvement have been
implemented under other ramp metering capital projects in the Bay Area, including those listed in Table
2.
Table 2: Other Bay Area Ramp Metering Capital Projects
ovals HE I e •
.(°
'
i ?
Bernal Road loop on -ramp to
1 HOV; 1 Mixed -flow
2 Mixed -flow
northbound US 101 (San Jose)
Blossom Hill Road loop on -ramp to
1 Mixed -flow
2 Mixed -flow
northbound US 101 (San Jose)
Tasman Drive loop on -ramp to
1 Mixed -flow
2 Mixed -flow
northbound 1 -880 (Milpitas)
Zanker Road on -ramp to westbound
1 Mixed -flow
2 Mixed -flow
SR -237 (San Jose)
Hillsdale Boulevard loop on -ramp to
1 Mixed -flow
2 Mixed -flow
southbound US 101 (San Mateo)
The results of the analysis indicate that the implementation of ramp metering on northbound US 101 in
southern Marin County is expected to reduce travel times for those who travel the entire corridor (from
Marin City to Bellam Boulevard /1 -580) by 24 percent and increase the throughput of vehicles during
congested periods. However, there would be less travel time savings for motorists entering the freeway
midway through the segment. The improved travel times will result from less congestion and a steadier
�yyV_^� I 3 Kittelson & Associates, Inc
Morin US 101 Northbound
Preliminary Ramp Metering Assessment January 2014
Executive Summary
flow of traffic with fewer occurrences of stop- and -go conditions. This smoother traffic flow on the
freeway is expected to improve traffic safety and air quality, consistent with the improvements
experienced on other congested freeways where ramp metering has been implemented. Table 3
provides travel time comparisons for 4:00 -5:00 PM and 5:00 -6:00 PM.
Table 3: Travel Time Comparison
bie1A}'liY
T N �llalttho. m Meier rth�Ram 1 rtn TM _ SRI eY rtce x
f naly isre .i)ne 3 d mutes r r i' MiriuYes Miutgg , , l �rcent ;+
NOR
From Marin City off -ramp to Bellam Blvd /1 -580 off -ramp (6.44 miles)
Source: FREQ model
As noted earlier, the capital project will provide sufficient on -ramp storage to accommodate the
anticipated vehicle demand in this initial segment of US 101. After implementation of ramp metering,
motorists at the ramp meters may encounter more delay at the ramps than they currently experience.
The average delay would be 1.5 minutes during the highest peak hour when the freeway is most
congested. While motorists may encounter delays at the metered on- ramps, these additional delays
would be compensated, to some extent, by improved travel times after they enter the freeway. As
ramp metering is extended beyond the limits of this initial section of US 101, greater travel time savings
will be realized for those who enter the freeway at ramp meters.
Currently, during congested periods, drivers seek alternative routes that would save them travel time,
and traffic exits the freeway earlier to avoid freeway congestion. Ramp metering will reduce this by
improving traffic flow on the freeway mainline, discouraging diversion, and by requiring that traffic
exiting the freeway stop at a ramp meter to re -enter the freeway.
The primary conclusion of this preliminary study of ramp metering on northbound US 101 in southern
Marin County is that ramp metering is feasible and will provide significant benefits for motorists in
Marin County. Prior to implementation, MTC, Caltrans, and TAM will prepare an Implementation Plan
to refine ramp metering rates to balance ramp delay across all on -ramps along the corridor.
.pl '0`'1 4 Kittelson &Associates, Inc.
A '\
4.I
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of Town Council
Community Development Department
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda Item •G/a i
Resolution Commending Building Official Fred Lustenberger on His Four
Years of Service to the Town
Building Official Fred Lustenberger has submitted his resignation after 4+ years of service to the
Town to take a Building Official position in another California municipality.
The Town thanks him for his service and wishes him well and has prepared a resolution
commending him for his service.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
EXHIBIT
1. Draft Resolution (to be distributed prior to or at the meeting)
Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
To:
From:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Members of Town Council
Community Development Department
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda Item C
Subject: Accept Grant Deed From Chandlers Gate Homeowners Association for a 200
Square Foot Parcel of Land to Enable Creation of a Pathway Between Reed
Elementary School and Dairy Knoll (Resolution)
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
The Town has previously entered into an agreement with the Chandlers Gate Homeowners
Association to purchase a small portion of the latter's common area for purposes of establishing a
public pathway from Reed Elementary School to Dairy Knoll recreation facility.
ANALYSIS
The previously- negotiated purchase price is $5,000 cash. As required by law, the Planning
Commission has reviewed the proposed acquisition of real property and found it consistent with
the Tiburon General Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution accepting the Grant Deed and authorize its recordation.
1. Form of Grant Deed
2. Resolution of Acceptance
Prepared By: Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development Ti
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Town of Tiburon
Town Attorney
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
APNs: 058- 460 -26 & 058 - 151 -27
(Space Above this Line Reserved for Use by Recorder)
(Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Government Code Sections 6103 and 27383)
101,4111 10I1 D1 D) 11
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
the Chandlers Gate Homeowners Association, a California corporation, ( "Grantor ") hereby
grants to the Town of Tiburon, a California municipal corporation, ( "Grantee "), all of Grantor's
right, title and interest in that real property ( "Property") described on Exhibit "A ", attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Grant Deed on this
day of 12014.
GRANTOR:
CHANDLERS GATE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
By:
Allan Bortel, President of the Board of Directors
ATTEST:
Secretary of the Board
Attachment: Exhibit "A ", Legal Description
EXHIBIT NO. I
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
All that certain real property situated in the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of
California being a portion of Parcel "A" Common Area as shown on that certain map entitled
"Chandlers Gate at Tiburon" filed August 24th, 2000 in Book 2000 of Maps, at Page 138, Marin
County kecords, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of said Parcel "A'; thence, along the Easterly line of said
Parcel "A" S 9° 15'3011 W, 28.87 feet; thence N 40° 55'34" W, 18.03 feet to the Northwesterly
line of said Parcel "A'; thence along said Northwesterly line N 47° 54' 00" E, 22.18 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
Containing 199.93 square feet or 0.0046 acres more or less.
RESOLUTION NO. XX -2014
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ACCEPTING A GRANT DEED
FROM THE CHANDLERS GATE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
(ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 058 - 460 -26)
WHEREAS, the Chandlers Gate Homeowners Association has presented to
the Town a grant deed for real property located at 2 -98 Ned's Way, said real property being
an approximately 200 square foot of association common area more particularly described
in attached Exhibit 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon Town of Tiburon hereby accepts the grant deed from the Chandlers Gate
Homeowners Association and directs the Town Clerk to record it with the Office of the
County Recorder.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon on 2014 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. XX -2014 - -1- -12014
EXHIBIT NO. I
EXHIBIT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
All that certain real property situated in the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of
California being a portion of Parcel "A" Common Area as shown on that certain map entitled
"Chandlers Gate at Tiburon" filed August 24th, 2000 in Book 2000 of Maps, at Page 138, Marin
County kecords, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the most Northerly corner of said Parcel "A'; thence, along the Easterly line of said
Parcel "A" S 9° 15' 30" W, 28.87 feet; thence N 40° 55'34" W, 18.03 feet to the Northwesterly
line of said Parcel "A "; thence along said Northwesterly line N 47° 54'00" E, 22.18 feet to the
Point of Beginning.
Containing 199.93 square feet or 0.0046 acres more or less.
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Director of Public Works / Town Engineer
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda Item C
Adoption of an Integrated Pest Management Policy as required by the Phase
II ppe�rmit of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
Pursuant to the Clean Water Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has
established a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES ") that protects water
quality by regulating sources of water pollution. Phase II of this program requires small
municipalities operating a storm water drainage system to obtain a discharge permit. The EPA
designates such cities as "Small MS4s."
hi California, the State Water Resources Control Board ( "SWRCB ") administers the NPDES
permit program. On February 5, 2013, the SWRCB adopted the Phase II, NPDES Permit
(Phase II Stormwater Permit). This is a general permit designed to cover Small MS4s throughout
the state;' the Town of Tiburon is one of the named permittees. The Phase II Stormwater
Permit's effective date is July 1, 2013 and its requirements are phased in during the five year
permit term.
The Phase II Stormwater Permit regulates discharges from Small MS4s and requires permittees to
implement a stormwater management program. As part of this program, Attachment G of the
Phase II Permit specifically requires the Town and other Marin County agencies to adopt an
Integrated Pest Management ( "IPM ") Policy or Ordinance to reduce pesticide- related toxicity in
urban streams. The Town's Public Works Department has developed the IPM Policy in
coordination with the Town Attorney and the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Program ( "MCSTOPPP ").
ANALYSIS
The purpose of the proposed IPM Policy is to reduce reliance on and minimize use of pesticides
that threaten water quality.
The IPM Policy outlines how the Public Works Department is to perform pest management to
ensure compliance with the Phase II Stormwater Permit. In addressing pest management needs,
the Town would focus on long -term prevention or ongoing suppression of pest problems,
including consideration of a "no action" approach to minimize or preclude the need to use
'The full name of the permit is the Phase H Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, Water Quality Order No. 2013- 0001 -DWQ, General
Permit No. CAS000004 (Phase 11 Stormwater Permit).
TOWN OFTIBURON PAGE 1 OF 2
chemical pest control methods. The Policy recognizes that pesticides are potentially hazardous to
human health, wildlife, and the environment and requires Town staff to give preference to
available, safe and effective non - pesticide alternatives and cultural practices when considering
options for pest management on Town property.
The Phase II Stormwater Permit requires that the Town Council adopt the IPM Policy. The
Town Attorney has reviewed the IPM Policy and found the proposed policy to be consistent with
the Phase II Stormwater Permit requirements.
A copy of the proposed policy is attached.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
The Town has the option of adopting an ordinance or policy for IPM. Staff recommends the
adoption of a policy as the appropriate mechanism to implement IPM. If the Town finds that a
greater level of control is needed, a more stringent policy or ordinance could be considered in the
future.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The IPM policy reflects the Town's current practices, thus staff does not anticipate any financial
impact.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Adopt the attached resolution approving the Town of Tiburon Integrated Pest
Management Policy
Exhibits: Integrated Pest Management Policy
Resolution authorizing the adoption of an Integrated Pest Management Policy
Prepared By: Matthew Swalberg, Engineering Technician
Pat Barnes, Director of Public Works / Town Engineer
Ann Danforth, Town Attorney
TOWN nr TmUk0N
TOWN OF TIBURON
INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Policy No.
Subject:
Integrated Pest Management Policy
Resolution No.
Issue Date:
July_, 2014
Latest Revision Date:
July 8, 2014
Prepared By:
Tiburon Public Works Department
Approved By:
Town Council, July 16, 2014
Introduction
The Town of Tiburon Public Works Department is committed to a comprehensive
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program guiding the management of its parks,
landscaped areas and other public lands.
The purpose of this IPM program is to ensure and enhance the health, safety and
welfare of citizens, visitors and Town staff by clearly defining the Town's pest
management strategy, the priorities for administering this strategy and the various
means by which these priorities may be realized. Public access to records and
information relating to the Town's pesticide use is an essential component of a
successful IPM program and the Town is fully committed to providing all pertinent
information to the public in a timely, comprehensive and understandable manner.
Additionally, it is the purpose and intent of this IPM policy to reduce reliance on and
minimize use of pesticides, as defined in Section 12753 of Chapter 2 of Division 7 of
the California Food and Agricultural Code which threaten water quality during Town
operations and on Town property.
The Public Works Department realizes some pesticides are potentially hazardous to
human health and the environment, and shall administer this IPM program with a focus
on long term suppression of pest problems with minimal impact on human health, non -
target organisms and the environment. Least toxic pesticides are used only after
monitoring indicates such a need, pursuant to the provisions of this policy.
What is IPM
IPM is a decision - making process for managing pests to determine if pest injury levels
warrant treatment. It combines biological, cultural, mechanical, physical and chemical
tools and other management practices to control pests in a safe, cost effective and
environmentally sound manner that contributes to the protection of public health. This
method uses extensive knowledge about pests such as infestations, thresholds, life
histories, environmental requirements and natural enemies to complement and facilitate
S: /PW /MD /IPM /AR2 1-
biological and other natural control of pests. IPM involves the use of nonchemical pest
control methods and the careful use of least toxic chemical methods when nonchemical
methods have been exhausted or are not feasible. When IPM is properly implemented
chemical controls are used only as a last resort. They are used as spot treatments and
are chosen and timed to have the smallest negative impact on non - target organisms
and the environment. IPM does not have percentage cut backs and benchmarks in it,
rather it states to monitor and use the least toxic methods to reduce the pest to a
managable level.
Scope of IPM Policy
This policy governs not only Department of Public Works employees but also landscape
contractors hired by the Department and persons acting under the authority of the
Department in the care and maintenance of Town parks, medians, landscaped areas,
and other essential public lands. Although it is understood that the term "pesticide" is a
general term that includes herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, rodenticides etc., the
primary focus of this policy is to address the Town's use of herbicides.
As the Town plans for the maintenance and rehabilitation of existing areas, specific
attention will be directed toward including specifications that eliminate or reduce the
need for chemical pesticides (e.g., mow strips next to fencing, covering all new planting
areas with mulch, etc.).
As used in this policy, a "Category I, "Category II," Category III" and "Category IV"
pesticide shall refer to a pesticide product that falls within the commensurate toxicity
category specified in Section 156.10 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations and
bearing on the front label panel the word Danger, Warning, or Caution, as required
therein.
IPM goals regarding pesticide selection and use shall include but not be limited to:
1. Elimination of Category I and II pesticides.
2. Minimization of Category III and IV pesticides.
3. Elimination of pesticides that are classified by government agencies as
carcinogenic, reproductive toxicants (teratogems, mutagens), endocrine
disruptors, carbamates, organophosphates or ground water contaminants.
4. Use of pesticides only when necessary and employing a pesticide that is both
effective and least toxic.
5. Elimination of all pesticide use on playgrounds.
6. Compliance with thePhase II, MS4, NPDES Storm Water permit requirements as
outlined in F.5.f.9 (page 91 of permit)
The Director of Public Works has directed staff to implement these goals and
incorporate them into agreements with outside contractors.
2-
Integrated Pest Management Coordinator
The Superintendent of Public Works is designated the IPM Coordinator. The IPM
Coordinator is primarily responsible for implementing the IPM Policy and coordinating
efforts to implement IPM techniques within the Public Works Department. The
Coordinator is responsible for communicating goals and policy decisions to appropriate
Town staff and contractors, as well as ensuring proper training of all employees
involved with the IPM program and all contractors who perform landscape maintenance
on the Town's behalf.
Only individuals designated by the IPM Coordinator as Pesticide Applicators shall be
permitted to apply pesticides on Town parks, landscaped areas, and other essential
public lands. Applicators shall possess a Qualified Applicator Certificate or Qualified
Applicator License, issued by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation.
Presently, two Public Works staff are "Qualified Applicators" certified to apply
pesticides.
The IPM Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that pesticide use is recorded and
making those records available for public review pursuant to this policy.
Additionally, the Town of Tiburon shall support MCSTOPPP to conduct public ourtreach
through the Our Water Our World program, monitor water and sediment for pesticides
in urban creeks and keep the County Agricultural Commissioner informed of water
quality issues.
Guidelines for Pest Treatment Selection
The Town shall use the following factors to determine the appropriate treatment
strategy:
1. Pesticide to be applied
2. Area of treatment
3. Quantity applied
4. Date of Application
5. Least disruptive of natural controls
6. Least hazardous to human health and the general environment
7. Least toxic to non target organisms
8. Cultural, biological and mechanical solutions have been considered
9. Prior treatments used to control the pest and an evaluation as to its success
10. Cost effectiveness in the short and long term
A Guideline has been developed to select the best pesticide to use and is found on
page 8 of this policy.
3-
Education and Training of Staff
Education and training of personnel is critical to the success of this IPM program.
Employees involved in the maintenance of the Town parks and landscaped ares, or
with purchasing, storage, handling and application of pesticides shall receive all
mandated and reasonable training required to perform such work in an efficient and
safe manner consistent with the provisions and intent of this policy.
Continuing Education in IPM and training in the use of non - chemical methods of pest
control are important to a successful program. Landscape Division staff attend
continuing pesticide education through the Professional Applicators Pesticide
Association, (PAPA) on a yearly basis to maintain application certification. Additionally,
the IPM Coordinator maintains all training records of qualified applicators.
The IPM Coordinator shall verify and document all contractors hired to perform IPM
related work on the Town's behalf have received appropriate education and training.
This documentation will be verified through state licenses and certifications.
The Public Works Department is dedicated to ensuring adequate funding and budget
planning to maintain training and educational opportunities for all employees.
Use of Alternatives to Herbicides
The Town is fully committed to the use of pesticide alternatives whenever practicable.
Currently, the Parks Division utilizes the application of mulch materials to discourage
weed growth and encourage plant health. The Town works with arborists and specifies
the provision of mulch material generated in the course of the tree maintenance work to
be utilized by the Parks Division as a first line of defense against the proliferation of
weeds. Additionally the Town also uses the tried and true methods of hand pulling,
hoeing and weedwhipping.
Criteria for Selection and Use of Herbicides
Herbicide applications shall not be permitted on turf areas except in the maintenance of
tree wells (a weed free zone around each tree), and certain landscape facilities
(irrigation controllers, valve boxes, light fixture poles etc.).
It is understood that a completely weed free landscape environment is not a goal of IPM
to which the Town aspires. The Public Works Department shall maintain landscaped
areas as reasonably weed free to preserve the function and reasonable aesthetic
appearance of Town facilities. With this goal in mind and considering the Parks
Division staffing levels and ability to provide fundamental services, the Public Works
Department shall select herbicides of the least toxic formulation.
Herbicides shall be used only after all other non - pesticide means of weed control have
been utilized or have been determined to be not feasible in a particular application due
to site factors, ability of staff to provide a particular function or service, or other pertinent
factors. Application of herbicides shall comply with the provisions of this policy.
M
As with the criteria for selection and use of all pesticides, the selection and use criteria
for herbicides shall conform to standard IPM principles. No product from the Approved
Use list shall contain any of the following:
• Pesticides classified as Toxicity Category I and Category II by the USEPA
• Carbonate (Car /Diox Gas) and organophosphate (Salts) pesticides
• Type A or B (known or probable) carcinogens, as well as mutagens and
reproductive toxins
• Persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals (PBT)
Approved Use Products
The only pesticide currently used by the Town of Tiburon is Round Up Pro. Other
Toxicity Category III (Caution) herbicides may be used, if approved by the Director of
Public Works at the request of the IPM Coordinator, providing that the requested
herbicide complies with this policy. In addition, the Town does use yellow jacket traps
for their control.
As permitted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Town also applys an
aquacide for control of cattails in the Town maintained Railroad Marsh. This application
will only take place during the months of October and September as to not disturb
nesting migratory bird populations.
The Town contracts with a pest control firm to control rats in the ferry terminal and
wharf area. The pesticide used is Diasonone, common name Eaton's bait block and
the active ingredient "diphacinone" (anticoagulant) is .005% in concentration. This
project is classified as a Category III "caution" pesticide.
Notification of Pesticide Applications
The Department of Public Works will not post pesticide notices in areas where use by
the public is low or non - existant. In areas of high visibiltiy and heavy use by the public,
the Department of Public Works will advise the public of pesticide application by posting
notification 48 hours in advance. The locations requiring notification shall be
maintained on a list (as Attachment A to this policy) and updated as necessary.
Notification shall be accomplished by posting signs at reasonable entry point locations.
Notices shall include the product name, EPA Registration # (if applicable), date(s) of
pesticide application, Public Works contact phone number and any other information
deemed necessary by the IPM Coordinator.
Record Keeping of Pesticide Applications
The IPM Coordinator shall be responsible for maintaining records of all pesticide
applications on Town property performed by the Department of Public Works, or by
contractors or persons authorized to apply pesticides on behalf of the Department of
Public Works. The Town shall maintain these records for a period of two years as
active files and 28 as inactive. Pesticide record information shall be made available to
the public upon request. Application records shall include at least the following
information:
-5-
1. Date and Site of application
2. Target pest(s) and application method
3. Name of product and active ingredient of the pesticide(s) applied and EPA
registration number
4. Name of pesticide applicator and applicator identification number
5. Amount of product applied and pesticide signal word: warning, caution or danger.
The IPM Coordinator documents all applications on the State of California Monthly
Summary Pesticide Use Report, a sample of which is attached as page 9. In addition,
IPM records shall include a list of all exemptions granted, as well as the written
justifications developed for the consideration of those exemptions.
The Public Works Department shall strive to make this information available in a prompt
and efficient manner with the understanding that its provision is not only the legal right
of any member of the public but also a critical component of a successful IPM program.
Non - herbicidal Pesticide Use
The Town of Tiburon does not use non - herbicidal pesticides (insecticidal soaps) on any
of its grounds at the present time.
Should the IPM Coordinator determine a need for applying a non - herbicidal pesticide,
recommendation and request shall be made to the Director of Public Works for
approval. The Director shall approve such requests only if the IPM Coordinator has
documented in writing:
1. A compelling need to use the pesticide
2. A good faith effort to find alternatives to the particular pesticide
3. That effective, economic alternatives to the particular pesticide do not exist for the
proposed use
4. That the recommended pesticide is the least toxic pesticide available to control
the target pest.
Exemption To This Policy
The Marin Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control Distict is exempt from this policy to the
extent necessary to control biting and stinging insects such as yellow jackets, wasps,
mosquitoes and other similar pests.
In addition, the Town acknowledges that certain government agencies are not subject
to the Town's authority with respect to pesticides and thus are exempt from this policy.
Attachment A
Locations requiring public notification for pesticide applications:
1.
McKegney Green
2.
Shoreline Park
3.
Cypress Hollow Park
4.
Zelinsky Park
5.
Railroad Marsh
6.
Teather Park
7.
South of Knoll Park
8.
Belveron Mini Park
9.
Bel Aire Mini Park
10.Town
Hall
11.
Police Department
12.
Dairy Knoll
13.
Open Space Areas
-7-
Town of Tiburon Public Works Department
Guideline and Check List
Pest Control Treatment Selection
Guidelines
Chemical to be applied
Area of treatment
Quantitiy app]
Date of application
Least disruptive of natural controls?
Least hazardous to human health?
Least toxic to non target organisms?
Least damaging to the general environment
Cultural, biological and mechanical solutions
have been considered.
Prior treatments used to control the pest and
an evaluation as to its success.
Cost effectiveness in the short and long term.
Yes No Alternates
13
z m
OU
r
z°
]W
N
H zZQ
�
OZ
G
p
K
7 m
w z
r
U
y
m W
Q
a
Q
E
u o
W L
L U
U
w
d j
y O
N
Ow K❑
m
$
LU
aW
z
'z
E
p
w
0
✓ C
z
0,
F
a
m"�
W
¢
0
0
❑
W
0
O
U
00
W
n O d.0
O
r
mU
J
pp�
a
U vi .m0 3
za
2 Q
a
0
Q�
❑�
❑�
El <0
❑�
El (<D
❑6
e
05
El 8y
El
0
U C
ymc�ae8
El
❑o
El
V
O 'c
OO D
�c�am2�
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
U a C U �pp d
❑ a
❑ a
f o
❑ o
❑ O
❑ O
❑ O
❑ ON
❑ O
d
W
N d p Q G O
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
a`�nEdo�t'i
❑ m
❑ m
Z
h
m d U
C m{
O
w
o
e
U
U
D g N G y E ,Q
Zw-q s
m cmx0, ue. ,d
M
0
y U d O
N
r c o m E i
W
W❑
w
a.Oi aOi vdvm
C
m
Z m
W
a
Z
O
wp-pp
ipgp 2
p
O
a
Q
z
0
8��m�
W
O
°
�
w m 4 m d m
m
n¢nn n
° m
W
m
a a E
mmmmm�m;
N
N
a
2,2020,00".0
U
Q
N c c c c F F F$
2
u
Z
w
O G
N
C
° Z :
W
LL
z
z
w
O : o in
IL
nt
FS
z
�aoo iZ_
J
IL
p
2
C tz
D C C o 0 c
W
c
of U U c'o
c
tru-
d
«}
O m y m Ug (m
C j
vy «'oaamjm'o
�a
¢
m
mama m =aw'am
Q
�2
U
2
0� OU-
a .
Qa � N
° a
Z
_
2.9
> ?2 °c-�Bf E'I
vv 05 a' >U�U
0
W z
O
LL
z
U
�
o
oQ
no.m dmmmmm¢
W
F
O
W
N
K
0 0 o O o 0 0 o O
a C
C
N
W
w
❑ U U U U 0000 U
y
❑
Z
O
O
E
O
LL
C
a`
F
O
m
❑
K
a
W
a
0
O
a
W
K
g
m
C
n
a
O
d
d
Q
U
0
T;
w
❑
0
r
z°
]W
�
W
rcF
Q
N
Ow K❑
U-
0,
F
0
0
❑
W
0
O
U
00
O
r
mU
J
za
2 Q
w,'q
❑�
❑�
El <0
❑�
El (<D
❑6
❑<
05
El 8y
El
0
El
El
❑o
El
V
O 'c
OO D
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
❑ a
f o
❑ o
❑ O
❑ O
❑ O
❑ ON
❑ O
❑ o
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
❑ m
O
w
w
mw
m °o
M
ZU
z¢
OZ
FJ
¢h
P W
m °
W z
� Z
a-
Z
O
U
a
w
❑
w
Za
Qa
w<
WV
KD
a
P°
a�
jw
lO
Z
E
O
LL
C
a`
F
O
m
❑
K
a
W
a
0
O
a
W
K
g
m
C
n
a
O
d
d
Q
U
0
T;
w
❑
0
GENERAL INFORMATION FOR COMPLETING THE MONTHLY SUMMARY PESTICIDE USE REPORT
(Page 2 of 2)
Reporting Requirements
Reporting of all pesticide applications including spray adjuvants and plant growth regulators, is required by:
1. Landscape maintenance gardener pest control businesses, agricultural pest control businesses performing residential work, and structural
pest control businesses.
2. Public agencies, pest control businesses and property operators who apply pesticides for agricultural use other than for the production of an
agricultural commodity. These uses include applications for the production of poultry, fish, and apiary. Pest control businesses must report uses
for the production of livestock. Also, uses on golf courses, parks, rights -of -way, cemeteries, forests, ditches, fence lines, etc. must be reported.
3. Persons who use restricted materials for uses other than the production of an agricultural commodity.
4. Persons who use a pesticide for industrial post - harvest commodity treatments.
5. Persons who use a Ground Water Protection pesticide, listed in Title 3, California Code of Regulations, section 6800(b) for any outdoor,
institutional or industrial use.
Report Filing Deadlines
Submit two (2) copies of this report to the county agricultural commissioner by the 10th of the month, following the month in which the work was
performed. Reports may be hand - delivered or mailed, the postmark serving as the date of delivery. Retain a copy for your records.
For each month when no pest control work has been performed, licensed pest control businesses must submit a use report by the 10th day of
the following month to the county agricultural commissioner in counties where they are registered. The use report must indicate that no pest
control work was performed.
SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FACE PAGE
The operator /fine information should be filled out completely, including the address, ZIP code, and telephone number.
Identify the Operator Identification /Restricted Material Permit Number, if applicable.
Enter the name of the county where the pesticide(s) was applied.
Indicate the county number where the product(s) was applied. The county number is available from the county agricultural commissioner's
office. A separate report must be filed for each county where pesticides were applied.
Enter the month and year in which the applications were made.
Enter the total number of applications (i.e., the total of column D below) made during the month.
In Column A, enter both the manufacturer and brand name of the product.
In Column B, enter the "EPA Registration Number' or "California Registration Number'that appears on the pesticide label, including alpha
codes, if any (AA, ZA, ZB, etc.). Dc not use the "EPA Establishment Number' (Est. No.).
In Column C, indicate the total amount of product used as formulated and packaged by the manufacturer. Do not report the total mixture after
dilution. Check only one unit of measure. If necessary, decimals and fractions may be used.
In Column D, indicate the total number of applications for each pesticide used during the reporting month. Each separate site (home, apartment
complex, building, right -of -way, grain silo, etc.) should be counted as one application. For tank mixes, each represented pesticide should be
credited with one application.
In Column E, if the use of the product is structural, landscape, right -of -way, vertebrate, public health, commodity fumigation (nonfood /nonfeed)
or regulatory, enter the appropriate code number. Leave Columns F and G blank.
In Column F, if use of the product is Dot included in one of the number coded categories that are identified in column E, such as food /feed
commodity fumigations, seed treatment, noncrop fencelines or ditch banks, etc., enter the commodity or site treated. Leave Column E blank.
Do not enter vertebrate pest control work in production areas such as orchards or other crop areas. This work should be reported on the
Production Agriculture Monthly Pesticide Use Report.
In Column G, if use of the product is not included in one of the number -coded categories that are identified in Column E, enter the amount
treated and the appropriate unit of measure (acres, pounds, square feet, tons, etc.). If you have a different measure, describe it fully and enter
the amount treated. Leave Column E blank.
Enter the name of the person responsible for completing the information, and date the report. This could be a licensee, a manager, the person
who applied the pesticide, a bookkeeper, etc.
RESOLUTION NO. -2014
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
APPROVING THE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT POLICY
WHEREAS, the Town of Tiburon is covered by and must comply with the State Water
Resources Control Board Water Quality Order No. 2013- 0001 -DWQ National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit No. CAS000004, Waste Discharge
Requirements for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
(hereafter Phase H Permit); and
WHEREAS, the Phase II Permit incorporates the Urban Creek Diazinon and Pesticide
Toxicity Total Maximum Daily Load (hereafter Pesticide TMDL) requirements, originally
adopted by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board through Resolution
No. R2- 2005- 0063); and
WHEREAS, the Pesticide TMDL requires the adoption of an Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) Policy or Ordinance applicable to all the Agency's operations and property
(owned, leased and maintained) and consistent with the TMDL implementation plan
requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Phase II Permit requires the IPM Policy to be formally approved by the
Town Council and implemented by Town staff pursuant to the IPM Policy's terms and
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has considered the Integrated Pest Management Policy,
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which contains procedures, rules,
policies and suggested practices to reduce the use of pesticides, among other things, and which
complies with the Phase II Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon as follows:
1. Said IPM Policy is hereby approved and the Town Manager is directed to implement and
oversee the implementation of said IPM Policy in accordance with its terms and conditions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council on the 16th day of
July, 2014, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
1/1
To:
From:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Department of Public Works
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda Item: I
Subject: Recommendation to Award the Tiburon Boulevard Median
Improvement Project - Cecilia Way to Bay Vista Drive - to Green
Growth Industries, Inc., and Approve Related Budget Amendment of
$34,000
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
In its 2013 -2014 budget, the Town Council authorized $65,000 for the design and engineering of
the Tiburon Boulevard Median Improvement Project (planting.the medians from Cecilia Way to
Bay Vista Drive). That budget also identified an additional $235,000 in the five year capital
projection as possible future expenditure to build the project. It was understood that these
combined sums were unlikely to be sufficient for the task; the funding gap was to be reduced, or
eliminated altogether, through a private fundraising effort.
The engineering effort yielded a total project estimate of $417,000, of which $319,000 was for
construction costs. Despite the fact that fundraising was still underway, on March 5, 2014, the
Town Council authorized staff to go out to bid on the project. This was done to enable the
project to be built in the calendar year 2014 should the remaining funding be raised or otherwise
materialize for the project.
Formal bids were received June 18, 2014. The Town received five bids. One bid was non-
responsive as it did not include the addendum. The responsive bids were:
• Green Growth Industries, Inc. in the amount of $344,096
• Marina Landscape in the amount of $366,199
• Bortolussi & Watkins in the amount of $352,103
• Ghilotti Brothers in the amount of $541,223
While the low bid is approximately 8% higher than the engineer's estimate of $319,000, the
closeness of the three lowest bids leads staff to believe the bid is reasonable.
The planned improvements include removing the existing concrete surfacing from the median,
excavation, replacement with soil and adding irrigation planting and mulch. The low bidder,
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Green Growth Industries, Inc. is a qualified contractor with a valid Contractor's License, and is
responsive to the contract specifications with reasonable references.
This project requires a permit from Caltrans. Earlier this year the Council approved an
amendment to the Town's standing Median Maintenance Agreement with Caltrans to include
these areas, which was a necessary precursor to the permit. All required documents from the
Town were subsequently submitted to Caltrans and the Town permit is being processed. The
final permit step must be taken by the contractor conducting the work (submission of appropriate
insurance documentation, etc.). Staff has been in frequent contact with Caltrans regarding this
permit and expects it to be finalized shortly.
If the project is approved by Council, the following approximate timeline can be established:
Contractor applies for encroachment Permit: 7/21/14
• Encroachment Permit Received: 8/1/14
• Preconstruction meeting and start date: 8/2/14
• 25 working -day end date: 9/8/14
FISCAL IMPACT
Costs: The Fiscal Year 2014 -2015 budget allocates $352,000 for the Median Project
construction. While the low bid of $344,096 is within that amount, it is insufficient to cover a
recommended contingency allowance of 12 percent ($41,292) for any approved unforeseen work;
this is particularly important when excavation is involved and the Town is not the owner of the
property in question. (Staff, of course, always seeks to minimize the use of contingency funds.)
This brings the total funding required to $385,388, requiring a budget amendment of $34,000 to
build the project. Construction management and inspection will be performed in- house.
Funding: The private fundraising effort to complement the Town's contribution to the project
has been quite successful, yielding $99,795 and a great deal of enthusiasm from the community.
Donations continue to trickle in, so it is likely the total will exceed $100,000 soon. The donors
were:
County of Marin:
$25,000
Belvedere Community Foundation:
$25,000
Tiburon Peninsula Foundation:
$10,000
Cove Apartments
$10,000
The Cove Shopping Center
$8,000
Paul & Elle Stephens
$5,000
Don Santa and Woodlands Market:
$1,500
Roger & Mary Greenberg
$2,000
John Harrington & Ida Baugh
$1,000
Bob McCaskill
$1,000
Barbara Mizel
$1,000
Amanda Hoenigman
$1,000
Barbara Meislin
$1,000
Individual donations under $1,000
$8,295
Total: $99,795
OFTIBIT tON Page 2 of 3
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
The Town owes a particular debt of gratitude to the Tiburon Peninsula Foundation for its
successful fundraising with residents from all corners of the peninsula: Tiburon, Belvedere and
Strawberry. Most of the individual donations, $15,045, came through TPF; the balance of
contributions came directly to the Town. We are very grateful to TPF and all the funders, big and
small, who stepped forward to help bring the project to this stage and make it a true community
effort. The total project cost, including design expenses from the prior fiscal year, is $446,783.
The outside funding brings the Town's total contribution down to $346,988. This is higher than
planned, but still a reasonable outcome for a project of this magnitude.
Source of Town Funds: The project to date has been completely funded through general funds,
however, staff has verified it is also permissible to use Gas Tax funds for this purpose. The
Town's current Gas Tax reserves are projected to be $892,857 at the end of the current fiscal
year. Staff believes it would be prudent and reasonable to use $100,000 of Gas Tax fund for the
project, with the remainder to be funded through general funds as originally proposed.
RECOMMENDATION
While the Town's total contribution to this project is somewhat higher than originally anticipated,
due primarily to the bid coming in higher than the engineer's estimate, staff urges an award of bid
at this time to allow it to be built later this summer. So many individuals (66!), in addition to the
foundations and other generous donors, are anxiously awaiting this improvement, and the
fundraising effort raised hopes and expectations across the peninsula that it might materialize
soon. Staff sees no advantage in delaying the project.
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
a. Move to approve the award of a construction contract for the Median
Improvement Project, from Cecilia Way to Bay Vista Drive, to Green Growth
Industries, Inc. in the amount not -to- exceed $344,096; and
b. Move to amend and increase the FY 2014 -15 capital improvement budget by
$34,000 for the completion of this project with a 12% contingency allowance; and
c. Authorize the use of $100,000 in Gas Tax funds for the project; and
d. Direct staff to issue commendations on behalf of the Town Council, to be signed
by the Mayor, to major donors in recognition of their extraordinary generosity.
Prepared By: Patrick Barnes, Director of Public Works /Town Engineer
Peggy Curran, Town Manager
TOWN OF TIBURON Page 3 of 3
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Town Council
Town Attorney
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 20
Agenda Item: P#
Recommendation to Adopt a Resolution Approving the TTBID
Program and Levying TTBID Assessments
d�'
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
The Town formed the within the Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District ( "TTBID")
under Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 ( "Act "). The Act requires the Town
to annual approved the TTBID assessments and the activities funded by those funds. The Town
has taken the first two steps in that process:
On June 4, 2014, the TTBID Advisory Board approved its Annual Report, which included
information on the TTBID's past and projected revenues and expenditures and the
proposed TTBID Program for the upcoming year.
On July 2, 2014, the Town Council adopted Resolution No. 30 -2014 ( "Resolution of
Intention "), declaring its intention to levy and collect assessments within the TTBID and
to use those assessments to fund the TTBID Program. The Resolution of Intention set
these actions for public hearing on July 16, 2014.
The draft Report recommends that the Town use the TTBID assessments to continue and expand
upon the initiatives begun during the past fiscal 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. The TTBID program will consist
of the following activities:
• A broad -based destination marketing campaign to raise Tiburon's profile as a
premiere location for vacations, conferences, meetings and other events. This
campaign will be directed both at leisure tourists and at travel, event and conference
professionals.
• Market research to determine the best means of attracting customers to the assessed
businesses.
• Strategies to raise Tiburon's profile on the internet and in social media.
• Creation and distribution of maps, brochures, advertising materials and similar
tourism- related documents that support the TTBID mission.
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
• Representation at trade conferences and other events directed towards the tourism and
event industry.
• Identification and implementation of opportunities to attract favorable media attention
to the Town (an example is the Town's sponsorship of the America's Youth Cup
TEAM USA45).
• Provision of visitor services to improve room night consumption.
As explained in the report, staff anticipates that the TTBID will raise approximately $130,468 in
assessment revenue during the 2014/2015 fiscal year and expend approximately $170,000.
Surplus funds will be carried over to the next fiscal year.
Tonight's action is the last step in that process. 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
can move forward and adopt the Resolution attached to this staff report, continuing the TTBID
assessments for the upcoming year.
As of this date, the Town has received no protests. I note that the assessed parties, the Town's
two lodging establishments, have been very supportive of the TTBID and are represented on the
Advisory Board.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff does not expect any significant financial impact. The Town will fund the TTBID program
from the TTBID assessments and, as before, keep a I% allowance to recover its administrative
costs.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1. Hold a public hearing on the proposed Resolution to Collect and Levy Assessments to
fund the TTBID Program.
2. Determine whether there are any public protests to the proposed assessments and
TTBID Program.
3. If there is no majority protest, adopt the proposed Resolution to Collect and Levy
Assessments to fund the TTBID program.
Exhibit: Draft Resolution
Prepared By: Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney
O %1 'S OF TIBURON Page 2 0 ( 11
RESOLUTION NO. -2014
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 (1 %) assessment on lodging establishments within 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 1/o) and
WHEREAS, the TTBID Advisory Board ( "Advisory Board ") approved its annual report
on June 6, 2014, 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 July 2, 2014; and
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2014, the Council also adopted Resolution No. 30 -2014,
( "Resolution of Intention "), declaring its intention to levy the TTBID Assessments, setting a
public hearing on July 16, 2014 to consider any protests and directing related actions; and
WHEREAS, the Town published notice of the July 16, 2014 public hearing as required
by § 36534 of the Streets and Highways Code and further provided written notice to the Town
Hotels;
WHEREAS, the Town Council conducted the public hearing on the proposed TTBID
Program and assessments on July 16 2014 pursuant to § 36524 of the Streets and Highways 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
Page 1 of 3
approving the TTBID program and assessments as set forth in the Resolution of Intention; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds 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 through
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 fall in
reflection of greater and lesser business in an overall up or down tourism
market and world 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 levy of
assessment pursuant to Section 36531.
Section 6. Except where funds are otherwise available, the lodging business
Page 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 Council of the Town of
Tiburon held on July 16, 2014, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ALICE FREDERICKS, VICE MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Page 3 of 3
To:
From:
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Office of the Town Manager
Tiburon Police Department
Town Council Meeting
Jul Y 16 ' 2014
Agenda Item: R 1
Subject: Recommendation to Authorize a Council Committee and Staff to Work with
the Reed Union School District and the City of Belvedere to Implement an
Experimental Bus Subsidy Program to Reduce Traffic on Tiburon Boulevard
and Appropriate $225,000 to Fund the Program in Partnership with Belvedere
Reviewed By: _
INTRODUCTION
This report seeks authorization to participate in a program to reduce traffic on Tiburon Boulevard
by increasing ridership on yellow school buses to Reed Union School District (RUSD) campuses.
The notion is that lowering the cost of school bus passes by one -half will significantly increase
bus ridership which, in turn, will eliminate many private vehicle trips on the Boulevard during
peak traffic periods. The Town and the City of Belvedere would pay for the subsidy on a one-
time, experimental basis; the bus program would be administered by RUSD. If the program
succeeds in meaningfully reducing traffic on Tiburon Boulevard, a permanent source of funding
would need to be identified for future subsidies. The program is slated to launch immediately to
be effective for this school year, which starts on August 21, 2014.
BACKGROUND
CART Process
For many years now the residents of Tiburon and Belvedere have witnessed worsening traffic
congestion on Tiburon Boulevard, particularly during the school year. To address this problem,
CART (Community Action to Reduce Traffic), led by then Tiburon Mayor Fraser and former
Councilmember Slavitz (succeeded when he left office by Vice Mayor Doyle), was formed in
October of 2011. CART included elected officials from Belvedere, Managers of the Town and
City, both Chiefs of Police, representatives of RUSD, the Marin Transit Authority and occasional
subject matter experts. CART met approximately twice monthly for well over a year trying to
understand traffic congestion and develop solutions to it.
A substantial amount of time was spent defining the problem. Traffic surveys were conducted in
July and September (after the start of the school year) and it immediately became evident that the
worst periods of congestion coincided with the start and end of the school day (Exhibit 1).
Summertime levels, while at or near capacity, were deemed acceptable. The committee engaged
in an exhaustive effort to identify possible solutions. Many avenues were explored and a list of
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
over twenty items offering some potential relief was developed. Most offered only the possibility
of improvement in small increments. One concept identified by CART did hold the promise of a
significant traffic impact, and that was increasing school bus ridership.
Since the CART process concluded in May of 2013, several of the steps it identified have been
implemented to ease traffic. These include experimentation with a bike train and work with
Caltrans to improve signal performance. The notion of tackling bus ridership, a potentially big fix
but one with a relatively high and recurring cost, was not identified as feasible at that time.
Traffic on Tiburon Boulevard
The graph in Exhibit 1 shows the difference in 15 minute increments in traffic on Tiburon
Boulevard at Avenida Miraflores (chosen as a midpoint) between August when school is not in
session and September when it is. The difference is over 700 more vehicle trips through that
intersection in roughly a one hour period. By 8:30 AM during the school year, traffic has
returned to levels typically seen during the peak period in the summer months. Traffic is often at,
but not over capacity at that time. A graph comparing traffic in one hour increments from 6:00
AM to 6:00 PM is seen in Exhibit 2.
Bus Subsidy Program
Several months ago, Councilmembers Fraser and O'Donnell formed a study group with
Belvedere representatives Mayor Bob McCaskill, Councilmember Sandra O'Donnell and City
Manager Mary Neilan, and RUSD Superintendent Steve Herzog and Business Manager John
Frick, to explore whether the Town and City subsidizing school bus transportation could achieve
the desired outcome of reduced traffic. The concept was to structure an experiment to see if
halving the cost of a bus pass would result in significantly greater ridership — enough to make e-a
real difference in traffic. The characterization as "experimental" is important, and acknowledges
the unsustainable nature of an ongoing subsidy from the Town and City for this purpose.
Funding this experiment will require both Tiburon and Belvedere to dip into reserves. Doing that
for a one -time program or effort is reasonable from a budgetary perspective, but ill- advised as a
means to fund an ongoing expense.
RUSD contracts with First Student to provide student bus service to Reed, Bel Air and Del Mar
schools. The cost to ride the bus is $427 /year one -way ($854 /year round -trip) and is paid for
entirely by the users. There are 1,534 students enrolled in RUSD for the upcoming school year;
346 have purchased a bus pass for the ride to school in the morning and 331 have purchased a
pass for the ride home, 677 one -way trips total. The study group examined the factors that
influence school transportation decisions and discussed ways to increase bus ridership by students
enrolled at all three schools.
During this process, RUSD conducted a transportation survey in May 2014 to discern why more
families do not use the school bus service. The reason given most often by the 454 parents that
responded was "cost is too high ". Other reasons included the inconvenience of pickup /drop off
locations, the length of time students spend on the bus and concerns about safety. The recent
discussion by the study group has focused on solutions that encourage and incentivize families to
use the school bus service instead of driving personal vehicles. The ultimate goal of what is being
called The Yellow Bus Challenge is to "double the ridership and halve the cost ".
TOWN OF TIBLTRON Page 2 of 4
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
The study group has reviewed student addresses and proposed two additional routes that would
address the concerns expressed in the survey related to bus pickup locations and time spent on the
bus. With regard to the issue of price, the study group is asking the City and Town to consider
underwriting the cost of school bus service for one year to test how much ridership improves and
traffic congestion is reduced. The subsidy would be to lower the cost of a bus pass for everyone
in the system, those who have already bought passes and new purchasers alike. If the one -year
experiment proves successful, a permanent source of financing would need to be identified and
secured.
Based on traffic counts and observed traffic patterns, the study group believes school bus
ridership would have to increase by a minimum of 360 one -way trips, reasonably distributed
between morning and afternoon, to have a discernibly positive impact on traffic congestion. If
less than 360 new one -way passes are sold, the Yellow Bus Challenge may not go forward. This is
because there is an embedded cost of reimbursing one -half of the bus pass cost to all existing
purchasers of $144,540. Enough new riders to make a real dent in traffic is necessary to justify
the subsidy of the overall program. The study group is hopeful that once well publicized, the
Challenge will yield an even greater number of new riders than 360 and yield a significant
decrease in school related traffic. It should be noted that each trip by a bus rider is counted as
two car trips off the Boulevard, since dropping a child at school typically involves a round trip for
the driver.
An email communication (Exhibit 3) and an FAQ intended for the RUSD website (Exhibit 4)
would inform RUSD parents about the Yellow Bus Challenge and will describe the benefits,
including enhanced safety, of school bus transportation over riding in a personal vehicle. The
study group intends to meet weekly during the next month to fine tune plans and adjust the
implementation and communication program to address any unforeseen issues that may surface.
If both the City and Town approve the request (the Belvedere City Council will have met on July
14), RUSD parents will be notified immediately, as time is very short, and will have until August
11 to sign up for the new bus service. The study group will meet on that day (the 11 fl), analyze
the response and decide whether the program will proceed in FY14 /15.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The proposed subsidy would decrease the cost of a one -way trip to $213.50, a reduction of 50 %.
All riders would benefit from this subsidy, whether they have already purchased a pass for the
coming year, or sign up as a result of the Yellow Bus Challenge.
The cost of the program has been estimated at $228,000 if 360 new one -way bus trips are sold. A
more robust response (400 new one -way trips) would cost a total of $260,000. Cost of the
program would be shared 80/20 by Tiburon and Belvedere. Belvedere is considering fanding
20% of this cost ($52,000) on its July 14 agenda. The Town's 80% would be $208,000.00. The
Town Council previously appropriated $25,000 for a routing study that proved unnecessary, so
that sum is available for this purpose. Thus $183,000 is anticipated to be needed at this time..
However, because time is so short and it is possible there is a very strong response to the program
oFTIBpRON Page 3 of 4
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
that requires a greater subsidy, staff recommends Council appropriate an additional $225,000 to
cover this contingent outcome. Funds would come from the unallocated reserve. If the program
is deemed successful, a permanent funding source will need to be identified to continue it in
future years.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Town Council:
1. Formalize a Town Council Committee of Councilmembers O'Donnell and Fraser and
direct them and staff to work with Belvedere and RUSD to implement the bus subsidy
program on an experimental basis as described in this report; and
2. Approve a budget amendment of $225,000, to be used in conjunction with the $25,000
previously allocated for a bus study, for the bus subsidy program.
Exhibits:
1. Graph titled "Tiburon Blvd at Avenida Mira Flores AM Period"
2. Graph titled "Tiburon Blvd at Avenida Mira Flores 6:00 Am — 6:00PM"
3. DRAFT email outreach to RUSD parents
4. DRAFT FAQ sheet for RUSD website
Prepared By: Peggy Curran, Town Manager
Michael Cronin, Chief of Police
OF TI Iii BON Page 4 o14
TIBURON BLVD atAVENIDA MIRA FLORES AM PERIOD
0,500
LL
LL
L350
?300
3250- +SEP
P200 -#-AUG
150
a100
= 50
LL
io
07:00 07:15 07:30 07:45 08:00 08:15 08:30 08:45
Exhibit 1
TIBURON BLVD at AVENIDA MIRA FLORES 6:OOAM - 6:00 PM
2000
a 1800
p 1600
=1400 - - - - - - - - -
w1200 - - - - - - - - - ❑SEPTEMBER
N 1000 - - -
J 800 _ JULY
C) 600
w 400 —
> 200 - -
0
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 CIS.
00 00 00 00
Date: July 17, 2014
To: All Reed Union School District Parents
From: Town of Tiburon, City of Belvedere and Reed Union School District
Re: Additional School Buses -- Immediate Action Requested
The Yellow Bus Challenge: "Half the Cost, Twice the Ridership"
This email describes a plan to cut the cost of school bus ridership by 50% for both new and existing
riders, and offers two new routes.
We all know traffic on Tiburon Boulevard has become increasingly difficult. Traffic jams cause significant
delays that are not only inconvenient, but also create safety concerns by impeding emergency response
vehicles.
As a RUSD parent, you have a unique opportunity to help address this issue by participating in the
Yellow Bus Challenge and signing your children up for a bus pass. But you must act right away.
Goal of the Yellow Bus Challenge:
• To significantly reduce traffic on Tiburon Boulevard by attracting at least 360 new "trips" (either
morning or afternoon ridership is one trip) by August 111h, 2014.
Why you should participate:
• If we can achieve 360 new trips, reasonably distributed between morning and afternoon,
Tiburon and Belvedere will help us to offer bus passes to all RUSD students at half price ($427
round trip; $214 one -way). That's $1.19 per trip!
• We hope to add two new bus routes: a Reed School -bound only route from near the Cove
Shopping Center, and one from Old Tiburon to Bel Aire (with a stop at Del Mar). Both routes
would loop through the hills of Tiburon.
• Those who have already purchased passes will get a 50% refund. Existing pass holders do not
need to do anything; their child's place on a bus will remain secure.
• If more bus ridership improves traffic, everyone benefits. The next step will be to find a
permanent funding source to continue the program into subsequent years.
What happens if we do not hit the goal? Because 360 is the minimum number of new bus trips deemed
necessary to make a significant dent in traffic and justify the expense of the subsidy, failure to reach this
number means the subsidy program will not happen and the current bus schedule and pricing will
remain in place.
Sign Up Today
We have an opportunity to help improve traffic while ensuring our children arrive at school safely and
on time. If your child already has a bus pass, you're done, but please encourage your neighbors and
friends to participate.
1 EXHIBIT NO.,
I�
L
HOW TO SIGN UP
Go to the school's website at http: / /www.reedschools.org.
DEADLINE
New enrollments must be made by August 11. This deadline is firm, as a decision to proceed
must be made by then to provide parents with final transportation information 10 days before
the August 21, 2014 start of school. Credit cards will not be charged for new passes until
confirmation is formally issued.
Why Put Your Child on a Bus?
Many parents report that cost is the primary barrier to purchasing bus passes for their kids, but other
issues come up as well. Please consider the following when deciding whether to join this big push to
reduce traffic on our peninsula:
Safety
Statistically speaking, there is simply no safer means of getting your child to school than a yellow school
bus. This is well documented. Modern buses meet rigorous safety standards that far exceed family cars,
even large ones. Consider these statistics from the 2012 -13 school year:
• The chance for injury on or around a school bus was 1 in 9,272,722 miles driven.
• The chance of a student left unattended on a school bus was 1 in 154,285,714.
All school buses are now equipped with cameras, too, which has a very positive impact on bus behavior.
Convenience
No more rushing to deliver your child on time in uncertain traffic conditions. More bus riders create the
possibility of better bus routes, less time on the bus, and more pick -up points. The greater the
participation, the more the bus system will be able to optimize performance now and into the future.
Cost
Gas prices are hovering around $4.50 per gallon. A $1.19 per trip, putting your child on a bus is highly
cost - effective alternative to the family car.
Tiburon Boulevard Traffic
More kids on buses means fewer kids being driven to school. That means less traffic, and that is good
for parents and everyone on the peninsula. Less traffic, less pollution and fewer visits to the gas station.
THE YELLOW BUS CHALLENGE:
SAVE TIME AND MONEY, IMPROVE SAFETY AND REDUCE TRAFFIC
SIGN UP TODAY!
Why are Tiburon and Belvedere providing a school bus subsidy?
It's all about traffic. School- related traffic is certainly not the only cause of congestion, but it is one
that may lend itself to change on a scale that can make a difference. To reduce traffic, the Town and
City are willing to fund an experiment to see if lowering the cost of school buses from $2.38 per ride
to $1.19 per trip will result in substantially more ridership and fewer cars on Tiburon Boulevard. If the
experiment results in meaningful traffic improvement, the next step will be to find a permanent funding
source for the 2015 -2016 school year.
2. Why is this just an experiment — shouldn't it be permanent?
This challenge will draw heavily upon reserves from both Tiburon and Belvedere. While possible on
a one -time basis, this approach is not sustainable as an ongoing funding source. If our communities
want to subsidize school buses to improve traffic on an ongoing basis, they will need to create a new
annual source of funding, perhaps in combination with assistance from regional funding partners like
the Transportation Authority of Marin. Traffic is a community -wide issue, and a big challenge to
overcome. A successful experiment will have demonstrated what is possible with more bus ridership.
It will then be up to us, as a community, to figure out how to lock in that breakthrough in a fiscally
sustainable way.
3. Why the threshold of 360 new "trips "? Isn't that a lot?
Yes, and we hope for even more. There are currently 677 one -way bus pass holders (that is, for
either morning or afternoon service, each of which is a trip). While 360 is somewhat less than a
"doubling" of ridership, it is enough to proceed. 360 new trip sign -ups will mean at least two
additional buses in both the morning and the afternoon, which should make a real dent in traffic.
Right now half of all Reed District kids are being driven to school in a private car. We aim to lower
that percentage considerably.
Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT NO'. 4
DRAFT
4. What if I have already purchased a pass for my child?
You don't need to do a thing. You child's space on a bus is secure. If the program goes forward,
you will automatically receive a refund for half the cost.
5. What if I prefer a new route to my existing route?
Those with current bus passes will not be able to change routes unless, after all new sign -ups are
received, it turns out that some rebalancing works. Those interested in a different route for their child
will be placed on a waiting list, but should not expect to be able to switch. We apologize that starting
over with routing is not an option at this stage, but don't forget that the worst case is that your child
has what they originally were guaranteed, but at half the cost. If the experiment is successful, more
ridership will enable better bus routes in the future for everyone.
6. What happens if new sign -ups don't reach 360?
Failure to reach critical mass will cancel the challenge. The status quo will remain, meaning those
who currently have passes will still have bus service, but there will be no subsidy and no expansion
of the bus program. A minimum in new ridership is necessary because the subsidy includes
providing 50% refunds to those who have already signed up (which is only fair), so a significant
number of new trips is required to justify the overall expense of the program. If only a handful of new
riders sign up, the public cost would still be significant but without any meaningful traffic benefit ...
which is not a reasonable outcome.
7. How much will this program improve traffic?
Traffic survey data shows a difference of about 400 vehicle trips between summertime and the school
year during each of the two weekday traffic peaks. Most (not all) vehicle trips to drop off kids at
school count twice — once going to school and once returning home - so if we add 180 morning bus
trips we believe that could eliminate close to 360 private vehicle trips at that time of day. There
should be similar results in the afternoon if 180 are also signed -up for those buses. In other words,
we hope the result will move to something resembling a summertime traffic pattern. Actual traffic
reduction is exactly what we wish to test in this experiment.
8. Are Yellow Buses really safe?
Statistically speaking, there is simply no safer way to get your child to school than on a yellow school
bus. Modern school buses meet rigorous safety standards that far exceed family cars, even large
Page 2 of 3
ones, and drivers are extensively trained. During the 2012 -13 school year, the chance of injury on or
around a school bus was 1 in 9,272,277.
9. Will my child get to school on time?
Yes. The RUSD has modified bus schedules and bell times this year to greatly increase on -time
arrivals. In the unlikely event your child is ever late to school on a yellow bus, they will never be
marked tardy.
10. When will I know if the program will actually happen?
August 11 is the firm deadline for sign -ups so that a go / no -go decision can be made by that date.
This will give parents 10 days prior to the start of school to know if this program is happening or not.
Page 3 of 3 DRAFT
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
To:
From:
Subject:
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
Agenda item:��
Community Development Department
Office of the Town Attorney
Revised: Plastic Bag Regulations and Consideration of Adding Chapter
10A (Carryout Bags) to Title III of the Tiburon Municipal Code
(Introduction of Ordinance)
9�1-�
The Town Council first considered adopting a ban of single -use plastic bags in late 2011. At that
time, several local agencies had adopted such bans only to face legal challenge by representatives
of the plastic bag industry. The challenges had some initial success. In 2010, a Court of Appeal
ruled that the City of Manhattan Beach could not adopt a ban without first preparing an EIR
because the plaintiffs had submitted substantial evidence that the ban would lead to increased
usage of paper bags, which in turn would cause significant environmental impacts. The
California Supreme Court overturned that decision in July 2011, upholding the City's use of a
negative declaration. However, the same plaintiffs had attacked Marin County and San
Francisco's 2011 ordinances on similar grounds, alleging that those agencies had improperly
relied on CEQA exemptions despite potential significant impacts from increased use of paper
bags.
In light of the continued controversy regarding plastic bag bans, the Council decided in 2011 to
table the proposed ordinance and focus on voluntary efforts. In 2013, the Court of Appeal upheld
both the Marin County and San Francisco ordinances. In the interim, the Marin County
Hazardous and Solid Waste Joint Powers Authority ( "JPA ") had prepared an environmental
impact report on a model ordinance and the Marin County Civil Grand Jury had issued a report
urging all agencies to adopt similar bans. Accordingly, at its 2014 retreat, the Town Council
directed staff to bring such an ordinance back to Council for consideration.
The Council considered the draft ordinance on July 2, 2014. All four Council members present
voiced their enthusiasm for the ban. However, several members were uncomfortable with the
proposed requirement that merchants charge a fee for recyclable paper bags; they indicated that
the proposed 10¢ per bag fee was too high and unlikely to achieve its purpose of reducing paper
bag use. They believed that the vendors should decide whether to charge its customers for the
bags.
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 3
Town Council Nfecting
July 16, 2014
ANALYSIS
In response to these concerns, staff has prepared two alternative ordinances for the Council's
consideration. The first, attached as Exhibit 1, would lower the paper bag charge to $0.05 per
bag. The second ordinance, attached as Exhibit 2, would eliminate the charge altogether. Each
ordinance has its virtues.
The Exhibit 1 ordinance has the following advantages:
• The 5¢ per paper bag charge would allow the Town to adopt the ordinance based on the
JPA's EIR, which is significant from the perspective of legal defensibility.
According to the JPA's EIR and the County's 2011 analysis, the charge would create a
disincentive to switch from plastic to paper bags, which would limit any environmental
impacts from the ban. The Court of Appeals accepted this conclusion in the Mann
County and San Francisco cases.
Exhibit 2's primary advantage is that it would allow local merchants to decide whether to charge
a fee for paper bags.
All sides of the plastic bag debate seem to agree that paper bags cause their own adverse
environmental consequences. The consensus is that a plastic bag ban will have the optimal
environmental effect only if users shift, at least to some degree, to reusable bags. The JPA's EIR
specifically rejected consideration of a "no charge" plastic bag ban alternative because it would
not deter customers from switching to paper bags. That said, the Council could reasonably find
that the ordinance is exempt from CEQA as a regulatory measure to ensure protection of the
environment and natural resources and because the Town's small size and population make any
increase in paper bag use extremely unlikely to cause a significant impact (see Section I.E of the
draft ordinance).
PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Exhibit 1 Ordinance: The JPA's Final EIR project description included a 5¢ charge for
recyclable paper carryout bags. The draft ordinance in Exhibit 1 would be consistent with that
project. Staff has reviewed the Final EIR and determined that adoption of the proposed ordinance
would not result in any significant new information or new significant impacts that had not been
previously analyzed in the Final EIR. Staff has prepared a resolution (Exhibit 3) making the
necessary CEQA findings to adopt the proposed ordinance.
Exhibit 2 Ordinance: Staff has reviewed the evidence in the record and believes that substantial
evidence indicates that the draft ordinance would protect the environment and water and marine
resources by reducing litter from plastic bags. There is no evidence in the record indicating that
the ordinance would increase paper bag use so as to cause a significant adverse effect on the
environment. Accordingly, the draft ordinance contains findings that the ordinance is exempt
from CEQA.
iX1 Y oP rm'RO» Page 2 of 3
Town Council Meeting
July 16, 2014
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Staff does not anticipate any fiscal impact on the Town.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
1. Hold a public hearing on the draft ordinances and consider all testimony.
2. Determine whether it wishes to adopt the ordinance in Exhibit 1 or Exhibit 2.
3. If the Council decides to adopt the ordinance in Exhibit 1, adopt the CEQA findings
resolution in Exhibit 3.
4. If appropriate following deliberation, proceed with the introduction and first reading of
the selected draft ordinance. The procedure would be to move to read the ordinance by
title only, waiving any additional reading, and introduce the Ordinance adding Title III,
Chapter 10A (Carryout Bags) of the Tiburon Municipal Code. Pass the first reading by
roll call vote. If first reading is passed, the Ordinance will return for final adoption on a
future consent calendar. The ordinance would take effect 30 days after adoption.
I WV 1111 W
1. Draft Ordinance - 5¢ charge for paper bags.
2. Draft Ordinance — no charge for paper bags.
3. Draft Resolution of CEQA Findings (for Exhibit 1 Ordinance)
Prepared By: Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney
Page 3 of 3
EI
1 ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT N.S.
2
3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADDING
4 CHAPTER 10A TO TITLE III OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE
5 WITH RESPECT TO REGULATION OF CARRYOUT BAGS
7 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
9 A. The Town Council held duly noticed public hearings on July 2 and July 16, 2014 and has
10 heard and considered all public testimony on the proposed Ordinance.
11 B. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant to the
12 adoption of this Ordinance have been followed.
13 C. The Town Council finds that the actions made by this Ordinance are necessary for the
14 protection of the public health, safety, and welfare for the following reasons:
15 (1) The manufacture and distribution of single -use carryout bags requires
16 utilization of finite natural resources.
17 (2) The use of single -use shopping bags have severe environmental impacts,
18 including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm to wildlife, water consumption
19 and solid waste generation.
20 (3) Plastic bag litter results in costs to public agencies, including the Town of
21 Tiburon, through necessary removal of bag debris from storm drains, public
22 roadways and open spaces that are owned and maintained by those public
23 agencies, including the Town of Tiburon.
24 (4) Statewide the rate of recycling of plastic bags is only approximately five
25 percent (5 %).
26 The Town Council finds that the certified EIR for the project contains substantial
27 evidence in support of the above findings. It is the desire of the Town of Tiburon to
28 conserve natural resources, to protect wildlife and natural habitat, to reduce waste, litter
29 and marine pollution and to protect the public health and welfare, and adoption of the
30 ordinance will further these objectives.
31 D. The Town Council finds that the actions made by this Ordinance are consistent with the
32 goals and polices of the Tiburon General Plan and other adopted ordinances and
33 regulations of the Town of Tiburon.
34 E. The Town Council finds that adoption of this ordinance would be comply with the
35 requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as described below:
36 (1) In 2013 the Marin County Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Joint Powers
37 Authority ( "JPA ") prepared a draft Model Single Use Carryout Bag Reduction Ordinance
38 that participating JPA member agencies within Marin County (including the Town of
39 Tiburon) can consider for adoption.
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. -- N. S. Effective —1- -12014 1 '
Ti K11IBIT NO.
40 (2) The JPA was assigned the role of administering the California Environmental Quality
41 Act ( "CEQA ") process, and a determination was made that the JPA would prepare an
42 Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") through Final EIR completion for possible
43 adoption of the model ordinance in all of the member municipalities. The JPA prepared a
44 Notice of Preparation for an EIR for the draft model ordinance, which was published on
45 June 21, 2013, initiating a 30 -day review period. On July 9, 2013, the JPA conducted a
46 public scoping meeting.
47 (3) On November 1, 2013 the Single Use Carryout Bag Reduction Ordinance Draft EIR
48 was completed and published for public review (State Clearinghouse #2013062049).
49 Commencing on November 1, 2013, a 45 -day public review period was observed, ending
50 on December 15, 2013. The Draft EIR concluded that: a) for each environmental issue
51 studied, impacts would either be less - than- significant or beneficial; b) the draft model
52 ordinance would not result in any significant, unavoidable impacts, or any significant
53 impacts that require mitigation. Further, as required by the CEQA Guidelines, the Draft
54 EIR analyzed seven alternatives to the project (model ordinance) and identified an
55 environmentally superior alternative to the project.
56 (4) Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21091(d)(2)(A) and CEQA Guidelines
57 Sections 15088 and 15089, the JPA responded to all environmental comments that were
58 submitted on the Draft EIR during the public review period. A Final EIR was prepared
59 and published.
60 (5) On January 16, 2014 the JPA Board of Directors held a duly- noticed public hearing
61 on the Final EIR, accepting all oral and written public testimony and the written report of
62 the JPA staff. Following closure of the public hearing and deliberation, the Board of
63 Directors, on an 11 -0 vote, adopted Resolution No. 2014 -01 certifying the Single Use
64 Bag Reduction Ordinance Final EIR.
65 (6) Following the certification of the Final EIR by the JPA Board of Directors, the Town
66 of Tiburon determined to proceed with the model ordinance (Mandatory Charge of $0.05
67 for Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags) in the Final EIR as a basis for adoption of a town -
68 wide ordinance regulating carryout bags.
69 (7) The Town Council reviewed the Final EIR to determine if it adequately analyzed the
70 environmental impacts of the proposed ordinance. The Council has determined, based on
71 all of the evidence in the record, that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA
72 and certifies that the EIR reflects the Council's independent judgment regarding the
73 proposed ordinance and that the Council reviewed and considered the EIR before
74 adopting the proposed ordinance. Moreover, based on its review, and as set forth in the
75 findings below, the Town Council finds that there is no significant new information or
76 changes to the project or the project's circumstances that indicate new significant impacts
77 that were not previously analyzed in the Final EIR. Consistent with the requirements of
78 CEQA Guidelines Section 15096, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon has
79 considered the Final EIR prepared by the JPA as the lead agency, and has reached its own
80 conclusions on whether and how to approve the proposed ordinance, based on findings of
81 fact previously adopted by separate resolution of the Town Council.
a]
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. -- N. S. Effective —1- -12014
83 SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 10A.
84
85 Chapter l0A (Carryout Bags) is hereby added to Title III of the Tiburon Municipal Code to read
86 as follows:
87 Chapter 10A CARRYOUT BAGS
88 Sections:
89 10A.010 Title.
90 10A.020 Purpose and Intent.
91 10A.030 Definitions.
92 10A.040 Plastic carryout bags prohibited.
93 10A.050 Permitted bags regulated.
94 10A.060 Reusable bags regulated.
95 10A.070 Exempt customers.
96 10A.080 Enforcement; violations; penalties; cumulative remedies.
97 10A.090 No conflict with federal or state law.
9E
99 10A.010 Title.
100 This chapter shall be known as the "Town of Tiburon Carryout Bag Ordinance" and may be so
101 cited.
102 10A.020 Purpose and Intent.
103 The purpose of this chapter is to reduce harmful waste from entering the environment by
104 regulating Single Use Carryout Bags in Stores and generally requiring Reusable Bags or
105 Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags in their place.
106 10A.030 Definitions.
107 The following defmitions apply to this chapter:
108 A. "Carryout Bag" means a bag intended to convey or protect goods, products or packaged food
109 products provided by a Store to a Customer at the point of sale.
110 B. "Customer" means any person purchasing goods from a Store.
111 C. "Operator' means the person in control of, or having the responsibility for, the operation of a
112 Store, which may include, but is not limited to, the owner of the Store.
113 D. "Plastic Carryout Bag" means any bag made predominantly of plastic derived from either
114 petroleum or a biologically -based source, such as corn or other plant sources, which is provided
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -1 -- -12014 3
115 to a Customer at the point of sale. Plastic Carryout Bag includes compostable and biodegradable
116 bags but does not include Reusable Bags or Product Bags.
117 E. " Postconsumer Recycled Material' means a material that would otherwise be destined for
118 solid waste disposal, having completed its intended end use and product life cycle. Postconsumer
119 Recycled Material does not include materials and by- products generated from, and commonly
120 reused within, an original manufacturing and fabrication process.
121 F. "Product Bag" means any bag without handles used exclusively to carry produce, meats, or
122 other food items such as bulk foods to the point of sale inside a Store or to prevent such food
123 items from coming into direct contact with other purchased items.
124 G. "Recyclable" means material that can be sorted, cleansed, and reconstituted using available
125 recycling collection programs for the purpose of using the altered form in the manufacture of a
126 new product. "Recycling" does not include burning, incinerating, converting, or otherwise
127 thermally destroying solid waste.
128 H. "Recyclable Paper Carryout Bag" means a paper bag that meets all of the following
129 requirements: (1) contains no old growth fiber, (2) is one hundred percent (100 %) Recyclable
130 overall and contains a minimum of forty percent (40 %) Postconsumer Recycled Material; (3) is
131 capable of composting, consistent with the timeline and specifications of the American Society
132 of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard D6400; (4) is accepted for recycling in curbside
133 programs in the Town of Tiburon; (5) has printed on the bag the name of the manufacturer, the
134 location (country) where the bag was manufactured, and the percentage of Postconsumer
135 Recycled Material used; and (6) displays the word "Recyclable" in a highly visible manner on
136 the outside of the bag.
137 I. "Reusable Bag" means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for
138 multiple reuse and meets all of the following requirements: (1) has a minimum lifetime of 125
139 uses, which for purposes of this chapter means the capability of carrying a minimum of 22
140 pounds 125 times over a distance of at least 175 feet; (2) has a minimum volume of 15 liters; (3)
141 is machine washable or is made from a material that can be cleaned or disinfected; (4) does not
142 contain lead, cadmium, or any other heavy metal in toxic amounts; (5) has printed on the bag, or
143 on a tag that is permanently affixed to the bag, the name of the manufacturer, the location
144 (country) where the bag was manufactured, a statement that the bag does not contain lead,
145 cadmium, or any other heavy metal in toxic amounts, and the percentage of Postconsumer
146 Recycled Material used, if any; and (6) if made of plastic, is a minimum of at least 2.25 mils
147 thick.
148 J. "Single Use Carryout Bag" means a bag made of plastic, paper, or other material, that is
149 provided by a Store to a Customer at the point of sale that is not a Reusable Bag as defined in
150 this chapter. A Single Use Carryout Bag does not include a Product Bag or a bag provided by a
151 pharmacy pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of the California
152 Business and Professions Code to a Customer purchasing a prescription medication.
153 K. "Store" means a retail establishment located within the Town of Tiburon that meets any one
154 or more of the following definitions:
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -1- -12014
155 1. A full -line, self - service retail store with gross annual sales of two million
156 dollars ($2,000,000) or more that sells a line of dry grocery, canned goods, or
157 nonfood items and some perishable items;
158 2. A store of at least 10,000 square feet of retail space that generates sales or use
159 tax pursuant to the Bradley -Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part
160 1.5 (commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation
161 Code) and that has a pharmacy licensed pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with
162 Section 4000) of Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code; or
163 3. A drug store, pharmacy, supermarket, grocery store, convenience food store,
164 food mart, or other entity engaged in the retail sale of a limited line of goods that
165 includes milk, bread, soda, and snack foods, including those stores with a Type 20
166 or 21 license issued by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
167 L. Town Manager" means the town manager of the town or his or her designee.
168 10A.040 Plastic carryout bags prohibited.
169 A. No Store shall provide to any Customer a Plastic Carryout Bag.
170 B. This prohibition applies to bags provided for the purpose of carrying away goods from the
171 point of sale and does not apply to Product Bags.
172 10A.050 Permitted bags regulated.
173 All Stores shall provide or make available to a Customer only Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags
174 or Reusable Bags for the purpose of carrying away goods or other materials from the point of
175 sale, subject to the terms of this chapter. Nothing in this chapter prohibits a Customer from using
176 a bag of any type that is brought to the Store by that Customer or from carrying away goods that
177 are not placed in a bag, in lieu of using bags provided by the Store.
178 10A.060 Recyclable paper carryout bags regulated.
179 A. Any Store that provides a Recyclable Paper Carryout Bag to a Customer must charge the
180 Customer at least five cents ($0.05) for each such bag provided, except as provided in section
181 10A.080. The Town Council may increase the five cent ($0.05) minimum charge by resolution.
182 B. No Store shall rebate or otherwise reimburse a Customer any portion of the minimum charge
183 required in subsection A, except as provided in section 10A.080.
184 C. All Stores must post signage clearly indicating the per bag charge for Recyclable Paper
185 Carryout Bags.
186 D. All Stores must indicate on the Customer sales receipt the number of Recyclable Paper
187 Carryout Bags provided and the total amount charged for the bags.
188 E. All monies collected by a Store for Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags pursuant to this chapter
189 will be retained by the Store.
190 10A.070 Reusable bags regulated.
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -A -12014
191 A. All Stores shall make Reusable Bags available for purchase by a Customer for at least five
192 cents ($0.05) for each such bag provided, except as provided in section I OA.080. The Town
193 Council may increase the ten cent ($0.05) minimum charge by resolution.
194 B. A Store may provide Reusable Bags to Customers at no cost until sixty (60) days after [insert
195 effective date of this ordinance].
196 C. Each Store is strongly encouraged to educate its employees and staff to promote Reusable
197 Bags and to post signs encouraging Customers to use Reusable Bags.
198 D. No Store shall rebate or otherwise reimburse a Customer any portion of the minimum charge
199 required in subsection A, except as provided in section 10A.080.
200 E. All Stores must post signage clearly indicating the per bag charge for Reusable Bags.
201 F. All Stores must indicate on the Customer sales receipt the number of Reusable Bags provided
202 and the total amount charged for the bags.
203 G. Each Store is strongly encouraged to charge for a Reusable Bag a price commensurate with
204 the cost to procure the Reusable Bag, in order to encourage maximum reusability and not cause
205 the Reusable Bags to be treated as throw -away items.
206 H. All monies collected by a Store from the sale of Reusable Bags pursuant to this chapter shall
207 be retained by the Store.
208 10A.080 Exempt customers.
209 All Stores must provide at the point of sale, free of charge, either Reusable Bags or Recyclable
210 Paper Carryout Bags or both, at the Store Operator's option, to any Customer participating either
211 in the California Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children pursuant
212 to Article 2 (commencing with Section 123275) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the
213 Health and Safety Code or in the Supplemental Food Program pursuant to Chapter 10
214 (commencing with Section 15500) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
215 10A.090 Enforcement; violations; penalties; cumulative remedies.
216 A. The Town Manager has primary responsibility for enforcement of this chapter. The Town
217 Manager is authorized to promulgate regulations and to take any and all other actions reasonable
218 and necessary to enforce this chapter, including, but not limited to, investigating violations,
219 issuing fines and entering the premises of any Store during business hours.
22o B. If the Town Manager determines that a violation of this chapter has occurred, he /she will issue
221 a written warning notice to the Operator of a Store that a violation has occurred and the potential
222 penalties that will apply for future violations.
223 C. Any Store that violates or fails to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter after a
224 written warning notice has been issued for that violation shall be guilty of an infraction.
225 D. Violations of this chapter shall be punishable and subject to remedy as follows:
226 (1) Violations of this chapter will be subject to enforcement under title VI, chapter 31
227 of this code, which may include, without limitation, a citation assessing a monetary fine
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -1- -12014
228 not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars per violation. The town council may adjust the
229 monetary fine amount for violations from time to time by resolution.
230 (2) Any property owner or employee, agent or contractor working for a property
231 owner who violates this chapter may also be considered guilty of an infraction, and each
232 day such violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate
233 offense and shall be punishable as such. Such infraction shall be punishable by a
234 monetary fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars. The town council may adjust the
235 monetary fine amount for violations from time to time by resolution.
236 (3) Violations of this chapter shall be deemed a public nuisance. In addition to other
237 remedies provided in this section, the Town may summarily abate any such violation or
238 bring civil suit to abate the same, or use other methods of enforcement as set forth in
239 chapter 31 of the Tiburon Municipal Code.
240 E. The remedies provided in this section shall be cumulative and not exclusive.
241 10A.100 No conflict with federal or state law.
242 Nothing in this chapter is intended to create any requirement, power or duty that is in conflict
243 with any federal or state law.
244 SECTION 3. SEVERABIIdTY.
245
246 If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason
247 held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such
248 decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Town
249 Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, any
250 section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
251 more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or
252 unconstitutional.
253 SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
254
255 This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of adoption,
256 and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its adoption a copy of the ordinance shall be
257 published, with the names of the members voting for and against it, at least once in a newspaper
258 of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
259 This ordinance was read and introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
260 Town of Tiburon, held on the 16th day of July, 2014, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the
261 Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, held on the _ day of _, 2014, by the following
262 vote:
263
264
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective —1 -12014
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
gill
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -/- -12014 8
4t:�
1 ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT N.S. N + G
ra
3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ADDING
4 CHAPTER 10A TO TITLE III OF THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE
5 WITH RESPECT TO REGULATION OF CARRYOUT BAGS
7 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.
9 A. The Town Council held duly noticed public hearings on July 2 and July 16, 2014 and has
10 heard and considered all public testimony on the proposed Ordinance.
11 B. The Town Council finds that all notices and procedures required by law attendant to the
12 adoption of this Ordinance have been followed.
13 C. The Town Council finds that the actions made by this Ordinance are necessary for the
14 protection of the public health, safety, and welfare for the following reasons:
15 (1) The manufacture and distribution of single -use carryout bags requires
16 utilization of finite natural resources.
17 (2) The use of single -use shopping bags have severe environmental impacts,
18 including greenhouse gas emissions, litter, harm to wildlife, water consumption
19 and solid waste generation.
20 (3) Plastic bag litter results in costs to public agencies, including the Town of
21 Tiburon, through necessary removal of bag debris from storm drains, public
22 roadways and open spaces that are owned and maintained by those public
23 agencies, including the Town of Tiburon.
24 (4) Statewide the rate of recycling of plastic bags is only approximately five
25 percent (5 %).
26 It is the desire of the Town of Tiburon to conserve natural resources, to protect wildlife
27 and natural habitat, to reduce waste, litter and marine pollution and to protect the public
28 health and welfare, and adoption of the ordinance will further these objectives.
29 D. The Town Council finds that the actions made by this Ordinance are consistent with the
30 goals and polices of the Tiburon General Plan and other adopted ordinances and
31 regulations of the Town of Tiburon.
32 E. The Town Council finds that adoption of this ordinance would comply with the
33 requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as described below:
34 (1) The Town Council finds that the project is exempt from the requirements of the
35 California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15307 of the CEQA Guidelines. There
36 is substantial evidence in the record that plastic single -use carryout bags affect marine
37 natural resources, as such bags constitute a substantial portion of man-made marine
38 debris and degrade into smaller pieces which are more difficult to remove from the
39 environment and are consumed by wildlife. The manufacture, transport and recycling of
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective 4- -12014 1
ItdKKIBIT NO. 51
40 reusable bags uses far less natural resources than plastic disposable bags and only a small
41 fraction of all plastic bags are recycled.
42 (2) The Town Council finds that the project is exempt from the requirements of the
43 California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15308 of the CEQA Guidelines. There
44 is substantial evidence in the record that because of their shape and light weight, plastic
45 bags are highly windblown throughout the urban environment and into creeks, wetlands
46 and the Bay. Plastic bags also comprise a large portion of storm drain debris and man -
47 made marine debris and represent a significant threat to wildlife.
48 (3) The Town Council finds that the project is exempt from the requirements of the
49 California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15061 (b[3]) of the CEQA Guidelines.
50 Due to the small population and limited commercial areas of Tiburon create a certainty
51 that the adoption of this ordinance regulating plastic carryout bags would not possibly
52 have a significant effect on the environment.
53 SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 10A.
54
55 Chapter I OA (Carryout Bags) is hereby added to Title III of the Tiburon Municipal Code to read
56 as follows:
57 Chapter 10A CARRYOUT BAGS
58 Sections:
59 10A.010 Title.
60 10A.020 Purpose and Intent.
61 10A.030 Definitions.
62 10A.040 Plastic carryout bags prohibited.
63 10A.050 Permitted bags regulated.
64 10A.060 Reusable bags regulated.
65 10A.070 Exempt customers.
66 10A.080 Enforcement; violations; penalties; cumulative remedies.
67 I0A.090 No conflict with federal or state law.
M
69 10A.010 Title.
70 This chapter shall be known as the "Town of Tiburon Carryout Bag Ordinance" and may be so
71 cited.
72 10A.020 Purpose and Intent.
Tiburon Toii n Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective - -1- -12014 2
73 The purpose of this chapter is to reduce harmful waste from entering the environment by
74 regulating Single Use Carryout Bags in Stores and generally requiring Reusable Bags or
75 Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags in their place.
76 10A.030 Definitions.
77 The following definitions apply to this chapter:
78 A. "Carryout Bag" means a bag intended to convey or protect goods, products or packaged food
79 products provided by a Store to a Customer at the point of sale.
8o B. "Customer" means any person purchasing goods from a Store.
81 C. "Operator" means the person in control of, or having the responsibility for, the operation of a
82 Store, which may include, but is not limited to, the owner of the Store.
83 D. "Plastic Carryout Bag" means any bag made predominantly of plastic derived from either
84 petroleum or a biologically -based source, such as corn or other plant sources, which is provided
85 to a Customer at the point of sale. Plastic Carryout Bag includes compostable and biodegradable
86 bags but does not include Reusable Bags or Product Bags.
87 E. "Postconsumer Recycled Material" means a material that would otherwise be destined for
88 solid waste disposal, having completed its intended end use and product life cycle. Postconsumer
89 Recycled Material does not include materials and by- products generated from, and commonly
90 reused within, an original manufacturing and fabrication process.
91 F. "Product Bag" means any bag without handles used exclusively to carry produce, meats, or
92 other food items such as bulk foods to the point of sale inside a Store or to prevent such food
93 items from coming into direct contact with other purchased items.
94 G. "Recyclable" means material that can be sorted, cleansed, and reconstituted using available
95 recycling collection programs for the purpose of using the altered form in the manufacture of a
96 new product. "Recycling" does not include burning, incinerating, converting, or otherwise
97 thermally destroying solid waste.
98 H. "Recyclable Paper Carryout Bag" means a paper bag that meets all of the following
99 requirements: (1) contains no old growth fiber, (2) is one hundred percent (100 %) Recyclable
100 overall and contains a minimum of forty percent (40 %) Postconsumer Recycled Material; (3) is
101 capable of composting, consistent with the timeline and specifications of the American Society
102 of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard D6400; (4) is accepted for recycling in curbside
103 programs in the Town of Tiburon; (5) has printed on the bag the name of the manufacturer, the
104 location (country) where the bag was manufactured, and the percentage of Postconsumer
105 Recycled Material used; and (6) displays the word "Recyclable" in a highly visible manner on
106 the outside of the bag.
107 I. "Reusable Bag" means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for
108 multiple reuse and meets all of the following requirements: (1) has a minimum lifetime of 125
109 uses, which for purposes of this chapter means the capability of carrying a minimum of 22
110 pounds 125 times over a distance of at least 175 feet; (2) has a minimum volume of 15 liters; (3)
111 is machine washable or is made from a material that can be cleaned or disinfected; (4) does not
112 contain lead, cadmium, or any other heavy metal in toxic amounts; (5) has printed on the bag, or
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective 4- -12014
113 on a tag that is permanently affixed to the bag, the name of the manufacturer, the location
114 (country) where the bag was manufactured, a statement that the bag does not contain lead,
115 cadmium, or any other heavy metal in toxic amounts, and the percentage of Postconsumer
116 Recycled Material used, if any; and (6) if made of plastic, is a minimum of at least 2.25 mils
117 thick.
118 J. "Single Use Carryout Bag" means a bag made of plastic, paper, or other material, that is
119 provided by a Store to a Customer at the point of sale that is not a Reusable Bag as defined in
120 this chapter. A Single Use Carryout Bag does not include a Product Bag or a bag provided by a
121 pharmacy pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 2 of the California
122 Business and Professions Code to a Customer purchasing a prescription medication.
123 K. "Store" means a retail establishment located within the Town of Tiburon that meets any one
124 or more of the following definitions:
125 1. A full -line, self - service retail store with gross annual sales of two million
126 dollars ($2,000,000) or more that sells a line of dry grocery, canned goods, or
127 nonfood items and some perishable items;
128 2. A store of at least 10,000 square feet of retail space that generates sales or use
129 tax pursuant to the Bradley -Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law (Part
130 1.5 (commencing with Section 7200) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation
131 Code) and that has a pharmacy licensed pursuant to Chapter 9 (commencing with
132 Section 4000) of Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code; or
133 3. A drug store, pharmacy, supermarket, grocery store, convenience food store,
134 food mart, or other entity engaged in the retail sale of a limited line of goods that
135 includes milk, bread, soda, and snack foods, including those stores with a Type 20
136 or 21 license issued by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control.
137 L. Town Manager" means the town manager of the town or his or her designee
138 10A.040 Plastic carryout bags prohibited.
139 A. No Store shall provide to any Customer a Plastic Carryout Bag.
140 B. This prohibition applies to bags provided for the purpose of carrying away goods from the
141 point of sale and does not apply to Product Bags.
142 10A.050 Permitted bags regulated.
143 All Stores shall provide or make available to a Customer only Recyclable Paper Carryout Bags
144 or Reusable Bags for the purpose of carrying away goods or other materials from the point of
145 sale, subject to the terms of this chapter. Nothing in this chapter prohibits a Customer from using
146 a bag of any type that is brought to the Store by that Customer or from carrying away goods that
147 are not placed in a bag, in lieu of using bags provided by the Store.
148 10A.060 Reusable bags regulated.
149 A. All Stores shall make Reusable Bags available for purchase by a Customer
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective —1- -12014 4
150 B. A Store may provide Reusable Bags to Customers at no cost until sixty (60) days after [insert
151 effective date of this ordinance].
152 C. Each Store is strongly encouraged to educate its employees and staff to promote Reusable
153 Bags and to post signs encouraging Customers to use Reusable Bags.
154 D. All Stores must post signage clearly indicating the per bag charge for Reusable Bags.
155 E. All Stores must indicate on the Customer sales receipt the number of Reusable Bags provided
156 and the total amount charged for the bags.
157 F. Each Store is strongly encouraged to charge for a Reusable Bag a price commensurate with
158 the cost to procure the Reusable Bag, in order to encourage maximum reusability and not cause
159 the Reusable Bags to be treated as throw -away items.
160 G. All monies collected by a Store from the sale of Reusable Bags pursuant to this chapter shall
161 be retained by the Store.
162 10A.070 Exempt customers.
163 All Stores must provide at the point of sale, free of charge, either Reusable Bags or Recyclable
164 Paper Carryout Bags or both, at the Store Operator's option, to any Customer participating either
165 in the California Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children pursuant
166 to Article 2 (commencing with Section 123275) of Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 106 of the
167 Health and Safety Code or in the Supplemental Food Program pursuant to Chapter 10
168 (commencing with Section 15500) of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
169 10A.080 Enforcement; violations; penalties; cumulative remedies.
170 A. The Town Manager has primary responsibility for enforcement of this chapter. The Town
171 Manager is authorized to promulgate regulations and to take any and all other actions reasonable
172 and necessary to enforce this chapter, including, but not limited to, investigating violations,
173 issuing fines and entering the premises of any Store during business hours.
174 B. If the Town Manager determines that a violation of this chapter has occurred, he /she will issue
175 a written warning notice to the Operator of a Store that a violation has occurred and the potential
176 penalties that will apply for future violations.
177 C. Any Store that violates or fails to comply with any of the requirements of this chapter after a
178 written warning notice has been issued for that violation shall be guilty of an infraction.
179 D. Violations of this chapter shall be punishable and subject to remedy as follows:
180 (1) Violations of this chapter will be subject to enforcement under title VI, chapter 31
181 of this code, which may include, without limitation, a citation assessing a monetary fine
182 not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars per violation. The town council may adjust the
183 monetary fine amount for violations from time to time by resolution.
184 (2) Any property owner or employee, agent or contractor working for a property
185 owner who violates this chapter may also be considered guilty of an infraction, and each
186 day such violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective 412014
187 offense and shall be punishable as such. Such infraction shall be punishable by a
188 monetary fine not to exceed two hundred fifty dollars. The town council may adjust the
189 monetary fine amount for violations from time to time by resolution.
190 (3) Violations of this chapter shall be deemed a public nuisance. In addition to other
191 remedies provided in this section, the Town may summarily abate any such violation or
192 bring civil suit to abate the same, or use other methods of enforcement as set forth in
193 chapter 31 of the Tiburon Municipal Code.
194 E. The remedies provided in this section shall be cumulative and not exclusive.
195 10A.090 No conflict with federal or state law.
196 Nothing in this chapter is intended to create any requirement, power or duty that is in conflict
197 with any federal or state law.
198 SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
199
200 If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason
201 held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction, such
202 decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The Town
203 Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, any
204 section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
205 more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or
206 unconstitutional.
207 SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.
208
209 This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days after the date of adoption,
210 and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after its adoption a copy of the ordinance shall be
211 published, with the names of the members voting for and against it, at least once in a newspaper
212 of general circulation in the Town of Tiburon.
213 This ordinance was read and introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the
214 Town of Tiburon, held on the 16th day of July, 2014, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the
215 Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, held on the _ day of , 2014, by the following
216 vote:
217
218 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
219 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
220 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
221
222
223 ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. -- N. S. Effective - -1- -12014 6
224
225
226
227
228
229
TOWN OF TIBURON
ENWI T S
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council Ordinance No. - -- N. S. Effective —1- -12014
RESOLUTION NO. (DRAFT) -2014
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON
ADOPTING FINDINGS RELATING ADOPTION OF CARRYOUT BAG REGULATIONS
IN THE TIBURON MUNICIPAL CODE PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon is considering an ordinance
that would regulations for carryout bags applicable to certain retain establishments; and
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2014 Marin County Hazardous and Solid Waste
Management Joint Powers Authority (JPA) Board of Directors certified a Final
Environmental Impact Report for a model Single Use Bag Reduction Ordinance ( "Model
Ordinance ") that participating JPA member agencies within Marin County (including the
Town of Tiburon) can consider for adoption; and
WHEREAS, following the certification of the Final EIR by the JPA Board of
Directors, the Town of Tiburon determined to proceed with the Model Ordinance (the
"project" analyzed in the FEIR) as the basis for adoption of a town -wide ordinance regulating
carryout bags ("Carryout Bag Ordinance "); and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council makes specific
findings required by the California Environmental Quality Act for actions taken by
responsible agencies as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15096 as follows:
1. Findings per Section 15096 (a): Based on the Record, the Town Council finds that the
Final EIR prepared by the Marin Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Joint Powers
Authority (SCH #2013062049) has been considered by the Town Council, which has reached
its own independent conclusions on whether and how to approve the Carryout Bag Ordinance.
After individual analysis, the Town Council finds that none of the impacts resulting from the
project would be significant. More specifically, as detailed in the Final EIR at Sections 4.0-
5.0 and 6.0, incorporated herein by reference, the Carryout Bag Ordinance would have less
than significant impacts with respect to Air Quality (Section 4.1), Biological Resources
(Section 4.2), Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Section 4.3), Hydrology /Water Quality (Section
4.4), Utilities and Service Systems (Section 4.5), and Long -term Impacts (Section 5). The
CEQA Guidelines require that a lead agency make findings rejecting the adoption of an
alternative in lieu of the proposed project if the Final EIR concludes that the proposed project
will result in significant impacts. However, in this case, the Town is not required to make
such findings in that all potentially significant impacts of the Model Ordinance have been
determined to be less- than- significant.
The Town of Tiburon's proposed Carryout Bag Ordinance is the same as the JPA's
Model Ordinance except for environmentally non - substantive revisions made by the
Town of Tiburon. The Carryout Bag Ordinance's impacts will be the same as those
identified in the EIR. Thus, adoption of the environmentally non - substantive revisions
made by the Town of Tiburon to the Carryout Bag Ordinance would result in an
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. XX -2014 —/ —/2014 1
EXHIBIT NO.43-
environmentally equivalent project in comparison to the Model Ordinance that is
analyzed as the project in the certified Final EIR.
2. Findings per Section 15096 (fl: Based on the Record, the Town Council finds that it
has considered the environmental effects of the Model Ordinance as shown in the
Final EIR prepared by the Marin Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Joint
Powers Authority (SCH #2013062049) prior to reaching a decision on the Carryout
Bag Ordinance. The Town Council also finds that preparation of either a Subsequent
or Supplemental EIR as provided under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163
is not required. The Town Council has reviewed the record and found no significant
new information regarding the Carryout Bag Ordinance, no changes to the Carryout
Bag Ordinance or substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which
Carryout Bag Ordinance will be implemented since the publication of the Final EIR in
January, 2014, that would indicate or constitute substantial evidence of significant
impacts other than those analyzed in the said Final EIR.
3. Findings per Section 15096 (g): Based on the Record, the Town Council finds that
adoption of alternatives or mitigation measures to the project analyzed in the Final
EIR prepared by the Marin Hazardous and Solid Waste Management Joint Powers
Authority (SCH #2013062049) is not necessary to substantially lessen or avoid any
significant effects the project would have on the environment since none of the
impacts resulting from the Model Ordinance or the Carryout Bag Ordinance would be
significant.
4. Findings per Section 15096 (h): Based on the Record, the Town Council finds that the
findings required under Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines are not required to be
made since none of the impacts resulting from the project would be significant. More
specifically, as detailed in the Final EIR Sections 4.0 -5.0 and 6.0, incorporated herein
by reference, the Model Ordinance and thus the Carryout Bag Ordinance would have
less than significant impacts with respect to Air Quality (Section 4. 1), Biological
Resources (Section 4.2), Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Section 4.3), Hydrology/Water
Quality (Section 4.4), Utilities and Service Systems (Section 4.5), and Long -term
Impacts (Section 5).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
Tiburon on 2014, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. KX -2014 —/ —M14
ALICE FREDERICKS, MAYOR
►4rw:1. -19
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. XX -2014 -4-120141