HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Digest 2006-09-01
TOWN COUNCIL WEEKLY DIGEST
Week of August 28 - September 1, 2006
1) Correspondence from Anne Drew - re: Lyford Undergrounding
2) Correspondence from Ronald Brown - re: Kol Shofar
3) Correspondence from Karen Nygren - re: Kol Shofar
4) Email from Tim Metz - re: Kol Shofar
5) Correspondence from Dan Watrous - re: Ling Precise Development Plan
6) Police Recap - July 2006
7) Correspondence from LCC - re: Proposition 218 and Water Service Rates
8) Agenda - Design Review Board - September 7, 2006
9) Meeting Cancellation - POSC - September 12, 2006
Attached Original Separates (Councilmembers Only)
1a) Invitation - Calfed Bay-Delta Program Science Conference - Oct.23-25,2006
2a) Estuary - Newsletter S.F. Bay-Delta - August 2006
3a) Change of Address - New Office Location - Bay Area Council
----
1"'.
,
. 1';,
Below, CKS details its search for alternative locations. The hiring of Rabbi Lavey Derby
in the 1990's was the beginning of a growth spurt for Kol Shofar, as the congregation had
been without a rabbi for over two years following David White's departure. While the
simple appointment of a rabbi was an incentive for people to re-join, it was more true that
our growth was a result of the dynamic leadership and vision of Rabbi Derby. As we
grew, it became apparent that the facility was no longer meeting our needs. Parking was
the first and easiest solution, and so we applied to the Town for a permit to pave oVer the
upper parking lot. In 1997, the Town amended the existing CUP to allow the paving. A
few neighbors sued in August of 1997. The court ruled in their favor in 1998,
overturning the CUP, and the case was settled in September of 1998.
Although CKS did experience a growth spurt in the 1990's, membership levels have
since remained steady. We have been operating in inadequate facilities for many years.
Towards the end of 1998, under the leadership of then-President Mark Goldman, we
began to see if there were other places we could move that could accommodate our
congregation. The search led to the Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary,
occupying about 100 acres of land on the Strawberry Peninsula. For several years, we
engaged the Seminary in a discussion about buying the entire property, as the newly
formed Hebrew High School had backers interested in buying the site and turning it into
a multi-use facility, and so the high cost of the purchase wasnot~de~rrinAfactQ!,.
I70ringthecourse 6ftlienegotlahons, we began to be discouraged about the lack of
progress and so turned our eyes to Larkspur. Through some contacts, we met with the
owner of the old Niven Nursery site on Doherty Drive, and expressed an interest in
buying the undeveloped 17 acre parcel. However, we were too late, as the owner had
already optioned the right to buy to a developer who proposed to build housing. We had
discussions both with the developer and the city manager about becoming a part of the
project, but the developer was not interested and eventually we dropped out of the talks.
During this time, the city manager asked us to take a look at the old Escalle site on
Magnolia A venue in Larkspur and for a brief time, we did some homework to ascertain
whether this site might be suitable for us (eventually, we decided that the physical
characteristics of this site were unsuitable for a synagogue.)
We eventually came back to the Seminary site, and at the end of the day, the Seminary
offered to sell us the site on the condition that we buy it with no option, that is, absent
favorable zoning and master plan approvals. Obviously, we were unwilling to do that, I
and a few years ago, we stopped meeting with tbe Seminary altogetber.
I
I
At that point, we agreed that our only option was to renovate our existing facility, and to
engage in a capital campaign to do so. A building committee was formed to interview
and pick an architect, and Sim Van de Ryn was retained (a campaign committee was also
-----
formed and began to work to raise money). Shortly thereafter, Sim decided to retire from
the day to day business of being an architect, and we retained Herman & Coliver.
The Tiburon Neighborhood Coalition also suggests that the EIR should consider the
alternative of renting other sites for the observance and celebration of life cycle events.
First, we note that the purpose of erecting a multi-purpose room is chiefly religious and
educational, NOT to stage raucous parties, as stated by TNC's attorney. In the Jewish
tradition, Iifecycle events are considered religious occasions and acquire the decorum that
befits such an occasion. The multi-purpose room is designed to accommodate many
existing activities that have occurred for many years in our inadequate facilities. Renting
another facility is not a feasible solution for accommodating daily activities.
Furthermore, CKS has routinely searched for alternative facilities to hold specific large
events, such as High Holy Days services, to no avail. The only facility in the county that
is large enough to house us is the Civic Center, but Congregation Rodef Shalom uses the
theatre and the auditorium is unavailable to us due to previous commitments by the
county to established users. We have talked to the owner of the largest theatre in Marin
(in Corte Madera) but he is unwilling to close down the theatre for any reason. We have
also looked into other houses of worship (non-Jewish) but the ones we saw were either
too small, in use, or had too few parking spaces. The Mill Valley Community Center is
also unavailable to us as the city's policy is to not let religious services take place there
(plus, the building is too small). This fruitless search is quite frustrating and leaves us in
the position of having our religious practices compromised.
Although CKS has previously detailed its search for alternative locations at public
hearings, TNC nevertheless has repeatedly claimed the EIR must describe additional
alternatives. As described above, there are no other feasible locations, in Tiburon or
beyond, that will accommodate CKS's needs.
Sincerely,
ff~ )).6..
Ronald D. Brown
Immediate Past-President
Congregation Kol Shofar
Rue; 25 06 02:33p Karen N~gren 415-435-4642
p. 1 1-
John and Karen Nygren
22 Paseo Mirasol
Tiburon, CA 94920 -,
i--'\ il;~;" (, 7' ',\
Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development Ii'! ',- ".-' \
Tiburon Town Council ,Wi[ r\
Tiburon Town Hall ~UL::: '
[\,Uc: L L i i....j
1505 Tiburon Blvd. J
Tiburon, CA 94920 PLANNltiG DlVISION
,OWN Of TltJliFION
August 25,2006
Dear Mr. Anderson and Town Council members,
New information has come to our attention regarding a program of which Congregation Kol
Shofar has recently become a participating member. The program is called Synaplex. You will
find attached pages, downloaded from the Internet, t11at verifies our statements and descriptions
oflhe program, samples of how the program functions at other congregations and an article by
Gary S. Cohn stating the results of the program. You can find out more information about
Synaplex by investigating its comprehensive website hl1p://www.starsynagogue.orgl
We commend the religious community for its desire to attract more people to its program, but
wonder why Congregation Kol Shofar has not revealed this information to the Town or Planning
Commission at prior meetings and have told thc public and staff they have no plans for growth.
We believe it is critical for the Town Council to be aware of the Synaplex program, which
Congregation Kol Shofar is now part of, to understand the extensive impacts of such a program
on the surrounding neighborhood. The Town must consider how Synaplex and its impacts will be
included as part of the Conditional Use Application soon to be beard by the Town Council.
Significant new questions need to be answered after discovering this new information. Will these
new expanded activities and events be regulated by the existing or potentially new CUP? Will
Synaplex activities be considered an expansion of existing activities or events OT be considered
new programs and events? If there is, as suggested in these articles) a 50 -80% increase in
attendance on Friday nights, and Saturday daytime and Saturday evenings, how will the CUP
regulate, if at all, the parking, traffic, noi~e, lights, hours of use and other environmental impacts
of this new program, Synaplex? This is new information was not reveled by Congregation Kol
Shofar and thus not included in the FEIR analysis. In order to understand the full impacts of the
expansion ufthe multipurpose room and a new CUP, Ihe impacts ofSynapJex must be included in
the FEIR analysis. This is the only way thallbc Town ""d Town Council can be able to fully
understand the significant impacts of ti,e proposed Congregation KoJ Shofar project on the
surrounding quiet residential neighborh:lOd.
We strongly urge the Town and Town Cuullcil to invc5tigate and find out the extent of the
impacts of the new Synaplex project and hll\!o,' and if tIlt: significant impacts from a potential 50 -
80% increase of attendance by Congrcgal ion Kol Shobr can be mitigated to a level of
insignificance,
Thank you for your interest in protecti:lg th<: :-;;:side.nts (,1' our Town,
3;nCereIY~~r/"''L O~Jr'~
/fofn;nd K~gren
~ Rue; 25 06 02: 33p Karen N~~ren 415-435-4642 p.2
. anding the Many Dimensions of Shabbat http://www.starsynagogue.orgisynap'eXl
.Plex-
. "",^',' .,.,.......,. ~~,...."
'.\
STAR GAZER fu '~l'.' .. --- -----111III
1 Elul 5766 - Se;lrch L-. _"_ ._ m
Newsletter I SiDnu~ Parti., ~
"'r-
Abnut:Syn-apleit- Home. >> Synaplex~"
SymUllex~Ph"bJ A1lo"m Expandli,g the M~,,;'. :limensions of Shabbat
~--_."..,,-_.....,_.,~,..~.,,~_...
,...... ... ......
Fl\,QS Synaplex'''' is d,~ ~\ned to trar ,,~ contemporary American synagogue from an
a__." _,...'~.'~H . ._."~.__._..",-,,.~,.:.~. .K~"~"" institution that ':': :(:aks to iJn iT 'ily limited segment of the Jewish community to
CJtherS1A~"rO!ltam$ one that is rele\;,;ot, inspira\ Ild signlflcant. The vision of Synaplex'''' Is for
...... . --.. -.---- .-_.. ,'.:--........ ~ synagogues to qr.)w wIth peol .~ ci", :ey evolve over' time, instead of allowing people to
grow out of them. Synagogue~ ';)1"1,;' ,,:e lifelong opportunities for Jewish living, learning
A~outSTAR and celebration and place a premiu'" on being part of a pluralistic, multi-generational
community.
Contact Us Synaplex"" syr, 'Jgues focus r~" i <2rgies on provIding a multitude of difFerent
JewIsh experier: 'S un Shabb;. <.Ire characterized by excellence in programming,
marketing and ' Inectin') to I 5 and the broader community, both In their
tlomQ Shabbat progr,-:I i :1ilH.j and in ',ng they do. View samole SvnaoJex"" materials.
.._..~...,-,-,..,_.-_.._...-._------- The goal is nol rely hi cre< innovative programs. Ratherl Synaplex'"" uses
programs as (J c:r for sIren J Jewish Identity and. developing communIty. Each
piece of the p, ,; ram l~ based .tical experience with synagogues as well as
demoaraohic r~search ill the J.:;:, '.ommunlty.
Syna-ple*1M prolfides-a powe-rlu.L-<.l:l' I native to how synagogl.les_loQk today~_____
For a limited, .'le, yoUr co ,ion can ;oin the national Svnaolex™
Initiative for' "
l'" '\
Learn mor.-' '~llt Syr.lplc-, . he links at left. Bring inspiration to your own
congregati(\ \'itli QCn.ctical ' ~. Alrei!ldya Synaplexn4 congregation? Login
to access acJ,:J,tional resources, 11 as svnaolex: Celebrate Shabbat! a model for
small congn~()~tions.
"- - I
lo.
r-
I 0 Re-Envisioning the
, 'kJ!:
.,.c .L. Syn~gogue:
,_... i
.i~,\;,; "...the most provocativel
~,.I most insightful book
STAR Res"urCCS Vi:, ->ynaplex'''' Synagogue
on Jewisnlife I nave
read in years; full of
hard tl'Uths we need
to hear." -- Harold
Kushner
MORE>>
10f2 8/2512006 10:34 AM
.-
Page 1 of 1 Cf.
Scott Anderson
From: Metz, Tim [ .J
Sent: Friday. August 25, 2006 5:21 PM
To: Scott Anderson /)IG~
Cc: .... -, ~ .-
Subject: KS Facility Usage, the CUP and the new Synaplex Initiative Sr
Hi Scott,
Thanks for taking Ihe time to talk with me today. I wanted to foliow-up with you to stress how important the whole
Synaplex issue is and how even more important it is to get a matrix filled out with current, pre-Synaplex. baseline
usage. I know that KS has been resistant to filling out the matrix that I provided, but we definitely need
information at this level of detail to truly understand the current facility usage and the baseline of impacts that we
currently experience. In addition, we need them to layer in the projected usage so we can qualify and quantify the
changes.
The significanl ramping up of number and frequency of activities as well as the dramatic increase in number of
attendees at events that a Synaplex can bring cause very significant concerns for us. We all feel that even the
current CUP would need to be reviewed and revised in light of the new information regarding Synaplex. In
addition, these new Synaplex activities cause an even more elevated level of concern regarding what the
projected new usage patterns could mean when coupled with the potential of a dramatically expanded facility.
Thanks for listening and I hope these concerns can be addressed In the Staff Report.
Best regards,
Tim Metz
___ - - ___..__________n___
8/28/2006
f.
Town of1iburon . 1505 1iburon Boulevard .1iburon, CA 94920 . P. 415.435.7373 E 415.435.2438 . www.ci.tiburon.ca.us
Community Development Department September 1, 2006
Neil Sorensen
950 Northgate Drive, Suite 107 DIG~sr
San Rafael, CA 94903
RE: Withdrawal of Ling Precise Development Plan application; File #30302
Dear Mr. Sorensen:
The Town of Tiburon is in receipt of your letter dated August 30, 2006 withdrawing
the application for the Ling Precise Development Plan. The Town therefore has
deemed this application to be withdrawn.
We look forward to working with you on a redesigned project as part of a future
application to develop this property. We feel confident that a project can be
designed that will meet your client's needs and fit well into the surrounding
neighborhood. Please contact me at your earliest convenience so we can begin
the process of working together toward a successful conclusion for the project.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (415) 435-7393.
Sincerely,
~A,0.,AI~
Daniel M. Watrous
Planning Manager
William Verelley
21 Mountain View Avenue
Mill Valley, CA 94941
Joe Ling
P.O. Box 159
Sausalito, CA 94966
Elliott Grimshaw
113 La Goma Street
Mill Valley, CA 94941
"
"
,.
TOWN OF TIBURON
MEMORANDUM
p-~
To: Joan
From: Dave
Subject: July 2006 Tiburon PD Recap for the Digest DIGEST
Date: August 29, 2006
Joan,
With the retirement of Sergeant Rossi, we now have a new person preparing the Monthly Recap for
the PD, Sergeant Shane Ford. This is his first attempt at preparing this document for the Council.
Could you please see that this gets included in a future Digest that will be going out soon for me?
Thanks!
r Cm_,
A:/~ ~c~,
DAVID M. HUTTON
CAPT AlN
"...
~ .:~
TIBURON POLICE DEPARTMENT
MONTHL Y RECAP
JULY 2006
In the month of July, 2006, Officers responded to 572 calls for service and there
were 145 case reports filed. The case reports were classified as follows:
78 - FALSE BURGLAR ALARMS.
7 - TRAFFIC RELATED REPORTS.
20 - MISe. REPORTS.
2 - CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS REPORTS.
4 - THEFT REPORTS
2 - V ANDALISIM REPORTS.
3 - FRAUD REPORTS.
10 - LOST / FOUND PROPERTY REPORTS.
1 - MENTAL Y ILL IN CUSTODY REPORTS.
5 - SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE REPORTS.
2 - NARCOTIC ARREST REPORTS.
3 - BURGLARY REPORT.
8- DUI ARRESTS.
--~RfMES*6AINSTi>ERSONS: --- --
A homeowner on Red Hill Circle walked outside to find a suspect in his vehicle, which was
parked in his carport. When the home owner yelled to his wife to call the police, the suspect
tried to push his way past the homeowner. The homeowner and suspect engaged in a violent
physical fight, with each one landing several punches to the face. The suspect fled on foot just
prior to police arriving on scene.
There was an extensive search performed by Tiburon police officers and officers from Belvedere
P.D., Mill Valley P.D., Sausalito PD., Marin County Sheriffs Office and a K9 officer from
Novato P.D. Officers were unable to locate the suspect but they did recover the suspect's cell
phone, which he dropped as he fled.
Tiburon Police Officers called several stored numbers in the cell phone until they reached
someone who was willing to tell officers who the phone belonged to, identifying the suspect.
The person even came to Tiburon to show officers where the suspect was living. It turns out the
suspect was a 20 year old Tiburon man who had been kicked out of his mother's house and was
living in the bushes just east of Red Hill Circle.
Officers searched for a couple hours before they found the suspect's camp site. Officers
recovered stolen property at the camp site, although the suspect was not there. Officers then
started looking for the suspect, who they believed would be in the area breaking into vehicles.
--~"...._- --
Officers located the suspect walking on Centro West St. wearing a ski cap, gloves, a backpack
full of burglary tools and stolen property, and narcotics. A records check on the suspect revealed
that he had numerous arrests in Marin for burglary and other theft related crimes. The suspect
was booked into the Marin County Jail.
PROPERTY CRIMES:
On 07/11/2006, a man walked outside to find an adult male subject in hisgarage. The subject
was holding the home owner's tools when confronted. The homeowner asked the subject what
he was doing and the subject fled the scene in an older red BMW with loud exhaust. The
homeowner waited a couple hours to call police so, needless to say, the suspect got away.
On 07/11/2006, an unknown suspect entered an unlocked home in the 2000 block of Paradise
Dr. and stole approximately $17,000 in property. The homeowner had gone to the Tiburon
Library and was only gone for two hours. This burglary occurred between II :30 AM and 1:20
PM. There are no suspects in this case at this time.
MISCELANEOUS REPORTS:
On 07-02-2006, 2 juvenile run-aways from a facility in San Anselmo were located at a residence
in Tiburon. Tiburon Police returned the juveniles to the facility.
On 07/04/2006, Officers responded to drunken male yelling profanities at Sam's Anchor Cafe
Security Guards. Upon arrival, the drunken subject, a Mill Valley man, ran from officers but
. Vl'a!iquickly <lITested inside Sam's. The subject was booked in-the Marin County Jail for being
drunk in public.
On 07/05/2006, Officers responded to a bar fight at Sam's Anchor Cafe. Upon arrival, a Chico
man, who was reported to be the instigator in the fight, refused to follow the officer's orders.
The man was very intoxicated. Officers used the minimal amount of force to gain his
compliance. The man was then taken into custody for being drunk in public and resisting arrest.
The Man's father then became confrontational with officers as he was also very intoxicated. The
father was arrested for being drunk in public and assault on a police officer.
On 07/21/2006, shortly after midnight, officers stopped a vehicle for not having license plates.
The car was occupied by four adults. As one officer was talking to the driver, the other officer
noticed a handgun on the floorboard near the right rear passenger's feet. The passenger was
attempting to hide the handgun with his feet. Officer's called for assistance and officers arrived
from Belvedere P.D., Mill Valley PD., Marin County Sheriffs Office and Sausalito P.D.
All of the subjects were taken out of the car at gunpoint and detained in handcuffs. The gun was
retrieved and officers learned that it was a BB gun. The BB gun looked exactly like the side
arms carried by the officers. It turns out that the subjects were going to meet a Belvedere man
who they wanted to purchase a car from. They were carrying over a thousand dollars in cash on
them and had the gun for protection from being robbed themselves. The gun was confiscated
and the subjects were identified, cleared of wants and warrants, and released.
On 07/21/2006, Officers responded to a report of an intoxicated subject who was drinking
alcohol in front of Paradise Burgers at 1694 Tiburon Blvd. Officers arrived and found an
intoxicated San Leandro man sitting in a chair fronting Paradise Burgers. The man's blood
alcohol content was .208. He was singing to about 2012-14 year old children, who were sitting
all around him.
Officers ran a computer check on the subject and learned that he was a registered sex offender
and was on probation out of the East Bay. The man was not supposed to be consuming alcohol
per his probation terms. Officers placed the man under arrest for being drunk in public. As
officers were placing the subject under arrest, all the children started to yell "BOOOO" and
"Leave the poor guy alone", etc. to the police. Hmmmm, if they only knew.
On 07/24/2006, a female home owner was sitting in her living room when an adult male opened
her front door and walked into her house. The home owner did not know the man and became
very frightened. She yelled at him to leave her house, which he did. The man was later
identified as a drug addict who lived near by. This incident is being investigated and it is not
known what the man's motives were.
TRAFFIC COLLISION REPORTS:
On 07/01/2006, a Tiburon man_w~s_(lrivingj1()!lle froIn the aiIport, rt:tumingfromhi~Yacationin______
Hawaii. The man was only a block from home. As he was driving E/B on Tiburon Blvd.,
approaching Trestle Glen Blvd., the man fell asleep. His vehicle crossed the double yellow lines
and crashed into the guard rail. His car bounced off of the guard rail and hit another vehicle head
on. The other vehicle was traveling WIB on Tiburon Blvd. Miraculously, there were no injuries
in this collision. Both vehicles sustained major damage and had to be towed from the scene.
On 07-10-2006, a 15 year old girl had taken her parents vehicle without their knowledge.
Needless to say, the girl was unlicensed. The girl left a house party off of Trestle Glen Blvd.
with two other juveniles in the vehicle. The girl was traveling at a very high rate of speed down
Trestle Glen Blvd. when she lost control of the vehicle. The vehicle went down into the deep
drainage ditch on the west side of Trestle Glen Blvd. and the vehicle rolled over.
All three juveniles sustained minor injuries. It was determined that the 15 year old driver had
been drinking and was legally DUr. A blood test was taken from the girl and she was released to
her parents. Charges of Dm were sought through the Marin County Juvenile Probation
Department.
-.--
On 07-14-2006, a Mill Valley woman was driving E/B on Tiburon Blvd. at San Rafael Ave. She
was looking at the anti-war protestors on the corner when she noticed the traffic in front of her
had stopped. The woman was unable to stop her vehicle prior to colliding with the vehicle which
had stopped in front of her. There were no injuries in this collision.
D.D.I. ARRESTS:
On 07/04/2006, Officers stopped a vehicle for suspicion of committing auto burglaries on
Marinero Circle in Tiburon. A resident from Marinero Circle had reported the suspicious
activity. Officers located stolen property in the vehicle and arrested the driver, who was a 17
year old Tiburon boy, for driving under the influence. The 17 year old's blood alcohol content
was .11. The stolen property was returned to the owner.
On 07/05/2006, a San Jose man was arrested for DUL The man's blood alcohol content was .17,
over double the legal limit. The man was booked into the Marin County JaiL
On 07/05/2006, a Mill Valley man was arrested for DUI, after an off duty Tiburon Police Officer
called an on duty officer to report the driver was "All over the road". The man's blood alcohol
content was .17, over double the legal limit. The man was booked into the Marin County JaiL
On 07/07/2006, a San Rafael man was arrested for DUI after a citizen reported him as a
wreckless driver. The man was unlicensed and his blood alcohol level was .212. almost 3 times
the legal limit. The man was booked into the Marin County JaiL
On 07/14/2006, a Tiburon man was arrested for DUL His blood alcohol content was .16, double
the legal limit. The man was booked into the Marin County JaiL
On 07/15/2006, a Napa woman raced past the Tiburon Police Department at approximately 70
miles per hour, passing cars over a double yellow line. This took place in the early evening
hours when there was heavy vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian traffic in the area. Once officers
caught up to the woman, she refused to stop for the officers. After a while, the woman stopped
on Trestle Glen Blvd. near Juno Rd. The woman was very intoxicated and her blood alcohol
content was .20, 2 Yz times the legal limit. The woman was booked into the Marin County JaiL
On 07/27/2006, a Tiburon man was arrested for D.U.L His blood alcohol level was .116. The
man was later released to a sober adult per the Tiburon Police Department's "Community
Release Program."
On 07/30/206, a 17 year old Tiburon boy was arrested for D.U.L His blood alcohol level was
.153; over three times the legal limit for persons under 21. The boy was released to his mother
with a juvenile citation.
INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO D.U.I.'S:
To be arrested for D.U.!., an adult driver's blood alcohol content (B.A.C.) must be at least .08%.
For drivers who are under the age of21, the driver's RA.e. must be at least .05%.
Ifa driver who is under 21 has a blood alcohol content which is under .05, but at least .01, they
are not subject to criminal arrest. In this case, there would be an administrative form filled out
by the officer. When that form is sent to DMV, the driver's license would be suspended for a
period of one year.
-- ----- --------------- - ______ _m___
---~
Fax -> 4154352438 Diane Crane [acDpi Page 881 Of 887 7.
-
GtJ/ IJIGEsr
. . ~ t,F~:~St)~I~ 1400 K Street, Surte 400. Sacramento. California 95814
Phone 916658 8200F~~~c~F,ft~CEIVED I
. CITIES
FOR YOUR INFORMATION ! ~U~ 2 2006 I
TOWN CLERK
August 28, 2006 TOWN OF TIBURON
TO: Mayors, Council Members. City Managers, Finance Officers. Public Works
Directors, City Clerks
(Please Circulate!!)
FROM: Dwight Stenbakken, Deputy Executive Director
Patrick Whitnell, Assistant General Counsel
RE: Important Infonnation on California Supreme Court Decision:
Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil, Kelley
In a case handed down on July 24. 2006. the California Supreme Court has held for the
first time that water service rates are subject to Proposition 218. While the Court's ruling
only specifically covered water rates, its reasoning would likely also apply to sewer rates
and government proVided refuse collection rates. The attached "Q&A" is intended to
respond to questions that city officials are likely to have about this decision
':Auq 28 2ooE. 18:48:44 Via Fax -) 4154352438 Diane Crane Iacopi Page 002 Of DO?
1# ""
Bighorn-Desert View Water Agency v. Verjil, Kelley
In a case handed down on July 24, 2006, the California Supreme Court has held for the
first time that water service rates are subject to Proposition 218. While the Court's ruling
only specifically covered water rates, its reasoning would likely also apply to sewer rates
and government provided refuse collection rates. The following "Q&A" is intended to
respond to questions that city officials are likely to have about this decision.
The California Supreme Court's Decision
Ql. What dId the Califarllla Supreme Court decIde?
AI. The Supreme Court decided that (1) rates for domestic water service delivery to an
established customer are property-related fees subject 10 the procedural and substantive
requirements of Proposition 218; (2) an initiative can be used to reduce or repeal property-
related fees; but that (3) Mr Kelley's initiative was invalid because it required voter
approval for future rate increases tn conflict with provisions of Proposition 218 that exempt
water rate increases (as well as increases in rates for sewer services and government-
provided refuse collection services) from the voter approval requirements that otherwise
apply to property-related fees.
Q2. What did the Court say about usmg the illltiative to reduce water rates?
A2. The Court held that Proposition 218 allows taxes, assessments, and fees or charges to
be reduced or repealed by an initiative. Although it did not decide whether the "fees or
charges" that could be repealed by an initiative included fees other than the .. property-
rel_"~'f<o~s and cJ1ar~~4efmed by AnicleXIUD oftlae measure,th"Courtmade clear
that the initiative power covers no less than the property-related fees and charges defined
by Article XIIID. Thus, all property-related fees - including those for water, sewer, and
government-provided refuse collection - may be reduced or repealed by an initiative
measure.
Q3. Why dId the Court conclude that rhe Agency's water rate was subJecr to Proposition
218?
A3. The Court held that since domestic water delivery through a pipeline is a property-
related service essential to most uses of property, the Agency's water rates are property-
related fees subject to the procedural and substantive provisions of Article XIIID because
they are imposed for the property-related service of water delivery'
Q4, What was the baSIS of the Agency's argument that the mltlative was unlawful? ,
I
I
I The Court specifically disapproved Howard JaTVIs Taxpayers Association v Ciiy olLos Angeles
(2000) 85 Ca1.App, 4" 79, a DIstrict Court of Appeal deCISIon whIch held that consumption-based water
rates were not property-related
August 28, 2006 2
- - ---,..~----
,
Hug 2B 2BB6 1B:49:B9 Via Fax -> 415435243B Diane Crane IacDpi Page BB3 Of BB?
A4. The Agency offered two arguments: (1) Setting water rates is within the exclusive
power of the Agency's Board and rates are therefore not a proper subject for an initiative
because state law charges the water district's board with setting rates at a level no higher
than cost and no lower than necessary to pay the operating expenses of the agency, provIde
for repairs and depreciation of works, provide a reasonable surplus for improvements,
extensions. and enlargements, pay the interest on any bonded debt, and provide a sinking
or other fund for the payment of the principal of such debt.' (2) Consumption-based water
rates are not "property-related fees" wIthin the meaning of Article XIIID of Proposition
218 and are therefore beyond the initiative power created by Article XlIlC of that same
measure.
Q5. What deCISIons had the Califorma Supreme Court made on Proposmon 218 and water
rates prior to th,s deCIsIOn?
AS. In R,chmol1d v, Shasta Commumty Services D,strIcr the Court considered whether a
water service connection fee was a fee or charge within the meamng of Proposition 218'5
defimtion of "fee" or "charge" in Article XlIlD4 The Court concluded that connection
charges are not property related fees because they are triggered by voluntary decisions to
develop property and not by mere property ownership. However, relying heavily on the
LegIslative Analyst's ballot pamphlet analysis of Proposition 218, the Court suggested that
water delivery service is a property-related servIce because water is indispensable to most
uses of real property. S Because water dehvery charges were not in issue in the Richmond
case, many local government lawyers did not view that language as a bindmg holding.
What legal requirements apply 10 imposing or increasing a water, sewer, or
government-provided refuse collection service fee?
Q6. What prOcedural provisions of Article XJIJD apply to rates for water, sewer al1d
govemme/1t.prov,ded refuse collection serVIces?
A6. To comply WIth Prop. 218, an agency imposing or increasing such a rate must do the
following:
. Identify the parcels upon which the fee will be imposed;
2 Stats 1969, ch 1175 ~ 25. P 2286. 72B West's Ann, Wat-Appen (1995 Ed ) ch 112. P 203
'(2004) 32 Ca14~ 409
4 "Fee" or "charge" is any levy other than a tax or an assessment "Imposed by an agency upon a parcel
or upon a person dS an incldent of property ownership, including a user fee or charge for a property
related servIce,"
5 The Court noted, however. that not all water servIce charges are "fees" or "charges" WIthin the
meaning of Proposition 218 A fee for ongomg water service through an existing connectlOn is a
property-related fee subject to PropoSlllon 218 However, a fee for making a new connection to the
system is not a property-related fee subject to PrOpOSItIon 218 because it results from the owner's
voluntary deCIsion to apply for the connection Note that a fee for a service such as meter repa.ir is
simIlarly not a property-related fee. Similarly, service charges to turn off an account, turn on an
account. late charges. fees for duplIcate bIlls, etc are not governed by Proposlllon 218 because they are
not charges for ongomg water service through an eXisting connectIon but fees for optional services not
tequlred fot baSIC water service
August 28. 2006 3
Aug 28 28B6 18:49:37 Via Fax -> 4154352438 Diane ~rane lacDpi Page BB4 Of BB7 ,
. Calculate the fee;
. Provide written notice by mail to the record owner of each parcel upon which the
fee will be imposed;'
. The notice must include the amount of the fee; the basis upon which the fee was
calculated; the reason for the fee; and the date. time. and location of a public
hearing on the proposed fee; 7
. Conduct a public hearing not less than 45 days after mailing the notice;
. At the public hearing, consider all protests againsl the fee
. Ifwrrtten protests against the proposed fee are presented by a majority of owners of
the parcels, the agency may not impose the fee. If wrrtten protests against the
proposed fee are not presented by a majority of owners of the parcels, the agency
may impose the fee. Voter approval at an election is not required to impose a fee
for water, sewer. or refuse collection.
Q7. May an ag~ncy provid~ notic~ of the requir~d public h~armg With the billfor
service?
A 7. Yes, but there is some quesl10n as to whether notice to record owners of property
(i.e., those listed on the tax roll) who do not pay for service (as, for example, where their
tenants do) must also be given notice. "Record owner" is defined as the owner of a parcel
whose name and address appears on the last equalized secured property tax assessment
roll, or in the case of any public enlity, the representative of that public entity at the address
of that entity known to the agency (Government Code Section 53750(j)). However, Article
XIIlD, Section 2(g) provides "property ownership shall be deemed to include tenancies of
real property where tenants are directly liable to pay the assessment, fee, or charge in
question." Government Code Section 53750(i) states that "notice by mail" means any
. __notice.d required b}'_IProp~21&J.that.is..accompJished through a-mailing, postage prepaid;
deposited in the United States Postal Service and is deemed given when so deposited.
Notice by mail may be included in any other mailing to the record owner that otherwise
complies with [Prop. li8} and this article, including, but not limited to, the maIling ofa
billfor th~ collection of. a properry.relotedf~e or charg~." (Emphasis added.) Based on
these authorities, many agencies include nolices in utility bills. The League of California
Cities, in conjunction with ACW A, CASA, CSAC and CSDA, is discussing legislation that
would amend the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act to allow notice by mail
errher through the utility bill or with reference to the last equalized secured property tax
roll rather than both,
Q8. What are the substantive provIsions of Article XIIJD that apply to rates for water,
sewer and government-provIded solid waste collection services?
A8. Such rates must comply with all of the following requirements'
. Revenues derived from the fee may not exceed the funds required to provide the
service;
· See Question 7 below
7 Where the amount of the fee depends on the amount of service to consume, like a metered water rate.
It would appear to be suffiCient to prOVide the rate table or formula
August 28, 2006 4
-
.
Rug 28 288~ 18:58:84 Via Fax -) 4154352438 Diane Crane Iacopi Page 885 Of 887
. Revenues derived from the fee may not exceed the proponional cost of the service
attributable to the parcel;
. The amount of the fee may not exceed the proportional cost of the service
attributable to the parcel upon which the fee is imposed; and
. The fee may not be imposed unless the service is actually used by, or immediately
available to, the owner of the property
In essence, rates cannot exceed the cost of providing service and rate revenues cannot be
transferred out of a utility fund, especially to a general fund, except on the basis of a cost
rationale, such as a cost allocation plan or on the basis of a study showing that utility
operations impose costs on such general fund services as public safety and street
maintenance
Questions for Another Day
Q9. What Issues were left undecIded by the Court?
A9. Two important questions were left for another day: (I) Are the voters acting by
initiative subject to state laws which require the rate-setting body to set rates high enough
to cover the costs to provide an adequate and safe water supply? The Court noted this
question and said that it was not deciding whether voters acting by mitiative can be held to
such rules. In general, the voters acting via mitiative have no more power than does the
legislative body itself (2) Are the voters acting by initiative subject to rate covenants in
revenue bond issues under which the bond Issuer/rate-setting body has promised revenue
bond holders to maintain utility rates high enough to maintain the utility's infrastructure
and to pay the interest and principal of the bonds? The Coun did not address thiS question
at alL However. rate covenants are protected by the impairment of contracts clause of the
federal constitution. An initiative that violated a rate covenant would likely be held
invalid.
Background 10 the case
Ql0. Who are the parties to the case?
AIO. The BIghorn-Desert View Water Agency is a special district formed under the
Bighorn Mountains Water Agency Law' The Agency provides domestic water service to
residents in a roughly 42.square-mile area north of Yucca Valley in San Bernardino
County,
Karl VerJil is the Registrar of Voters m San Bernardino County. The Registrar of Voters
(acting through its Interim Registrar, Sharon Beringson) certified the initiative which
became the subject of this litigation
E. W. Kelley is a resident of San Bernardino County and the proponent of the initiative
which became the subject of this litigatIOn.
'The Bighorn 1vI0untallls Water Agency Law was enacted III 1969. The Agency acqUired its current
name after consol1dal1on III 1989 With the Desert View Water D.stflct
August 28,2006 5
Aug 28 2BBo 18:5B:29 Via Fax -) 4154352438 Diane Crane lacopi Page BBo Of BB?
Qll. How dId rhe case ger Horred?
All. Me. Kelly circulated initiative petitions to reduce the Agency's water rate and other
charges by half and to require 2/3 voter approval for future rate increases. The Registrar of
Voters certified the initiative and informed the Agency of its options under Elections Code
9 9310 to either adopt the initiative or submit it to the voters at a special election. The
Agency did neither, however. Instead, it filed a complaint in Superior Court asking the
court to declare the initiative invalid under California Law.
August 28,2006 6
,
,.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OIG~sr
AGENDA
TOWN OF TIBURON DATE: 917106
1505 TffiURON BOULEVARD MEETING TIME 7:00 P.M.
TIBURON, CA 94920 AGENDA NO.: #15
PLEASE NOTE: In order to give all interested persons an opportunity to be heard, and to ensure the presentation of all
points of view, members of the audience should:
(1) Always address the Chair; (2) State name for the record; (3) State views/concerns succinctly; (4) Limit presentation
to three minutes; (5) Speak directly into microphone and (6) All documents submitted at the meeting must first be
submitted at the Staff table, to be entered into the record and retained by the Town.
If an item is continued, it is the responsibility of interested parties to note the new meeting date. Notices will not be sent
out for items continued to a specific date.
A. ROLL CALL: Chair Bird, Boardmembers Beales, Doyle, Frymier and Teiser
B. PUBLIC COMMENTS (FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA)
C. STAFF BRIEFING
D. CONSENT CALENDAR
t;----WMain Streetu ----Abrams/Zelinsky Sign
E. OLD BUSINESS BEFORE THE ROAD
2. 7 Seafirth Place Simple Math, LLC New Dwelling
F. NEW BUSINESS BEFORE THE ROAD
3. 71 East View Ave. James Additions/V ariances!Floor Area Exception
4. 5 Rolling Hills Road Western Liability Ins. Additions
5. 4 Warren's Way Argov AdditionsN ariance
G. APPROVAL OF MINUTES #14 OF THE 8/17/06 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
H. ADJOURNMENT
"PLEASE NOTE THAT AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN OUT OF ORDER**
~
DIGESi
NOTICE OF MEETING
CANCELLA TION
THE REGULAR PARKS & OPEN SPACE
COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR
TUESDAY, September 12, 2006
HAS BEEN CANCELLED.
--T-r-J-ENEXT REGUtARLY SCHEDUlED MEETING
OF THE PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION
WILL BE TUESDAY, October 10, 2006.
.
~~~;
Lynn R. Ski . gs, Public Works Arministrative Aide
C!.- -h N "t::-. f
() t' (,...' ,'rY':~,i
DIGEST ~ ~UlH (
AUG 2 5 2006
2345 Spanish Trail Rd. OIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
Tiburon, Ca. 94920 TOWN OFTIBURON
August 25,2006
Dear Troy,
I thought you and the City Engineer would appreciate hearing something
good about the undergrounding going on in our neighborhood. The foreman--
and the workers I have encountered have been very pleasant and accommodating .
As you are well aware, our streets are very narrow and they have been as helpful
as possible. We are anxious for the project to be over, but I do think most of the
neighbors are focusing on the outcome and not the inconvenience.
Yours truly,
LlJ/<E0 -
Anne Drew
435-3978
n . up.Sou-SmaH thought-;-When-thefinalpaving is -done can anything be dnneabout ....
the "Bernal curb" and the very deep gutter on the North side of the street?
. i