The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTC Agd Pkt 2003-03-19 II' . . . " TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Chambers 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 March 19, 2003 7:00 PM - Closed Session 7:30 PM - Regular Meeting / Au4- ~ 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. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at, or prior to, the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. AGENDA CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Section 54956.9(a)) Howard Zack, Diane Zack v. MERA and Town of Tiburon . MERA v. Town of Tiburon and Dean Bloomquist Citizens for Open Process in Antenna Siting (COPAS) v. MERA and Town of Tiburon PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Section 54957) Title: Town Manager CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Berger, Councilmember Gram, Councilmember Thompson, Vice Mayor Fredericks, Mayor Slavitz .. , ; " ~' " '.",. . .~\ '" '''t, 4:~'. ".. . J" '~t.'ft i>.^C:;~' \ . l.i~ ":.1:. ~i~"'r...t (l if. " .. \ ~ Agenda - Town Council Meeting March 19, 2003 Page 2 of 3 , ;t., "?!, ..5t;\ \ , ~..:F'" h Jr', . ,; L \;~ y i" i I~ ;1':i~ . ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. IF ANY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on any subject not on the agenda may do so now. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action tonight on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or staff for consideration and/or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to no more than three (3) minutes. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion unless a request is made that an item be transferred to the Regular Agenda for separate discussion and consideration. Any item on the Regular Agenda may be moved to the Consent Calendar. 1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - March 5, 2003 2. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Accept Town Investment Summary for February 2003 . 3. Recommendation by Town Manager - Authorize Town Manager to Approve a Request by the . Marin Housing Authority to Refinance Bradley House Note (Resolution) 4. Recommendation by Town Clerk ~ Appointments to Town Boards, Commissions and Committees - continued from March 5, 2003 . HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION REGULAR AGENDA 5. Presentation and Request by Angel Island Park Superintendent - Proposed Restoration of the Immigration Station a) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Endorsing the Angel Island Immigration Station Area Restoration Project Located on Angel Island State Park 6. Presentation by Mill Valley Refuse Service - Proposed Changes to Curbside Recycling Program 7. Recommendation by Town Manager - Request from MERA for Partial Activation of System 8. Recommendation by Town Manager - Reaffirm Joint Oversight JPA Committee Program 9. Recommendation by Town Manager - Review of Revenue Enhancement Proposals for Incorporation into the 2003-2004 Annual Budget . /-.) " . Agenda - Town Council Meeting March 19, 2003 Page 3 of 3 PUBLIC HEARING 10. Recommendation by Director of Community Development and Town Attorney - Rescind .Emergency Ordinance and Resolution Pertaining to 145 Sugarloaf Drive Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance (Read by Title Only) a) An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Repealing Ordinance No. 469 N.S. that Established Streamlined Permit Review Procedures for a Wireless Communication Facility Located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive (Assessor Parcel No. 058-351-31) b) A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Rescinding Resolution No. 51-2002 that Approved the Southern Marin Emergency Radio Authority at 145 Sugarloaf Drive (Assessor Parcel No. 058-351-31) COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS . Town Council Weekly Digest - March 7, 2003 Town Council Weekly Digest- March 14,2003 ADJOURNMENT UPCOMING AGENDA ITEMS & EVENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Request by Golden Gate Transit forTown Maintenance of Relocated Bus Shelter at Stewart Drive and Tiburon Boulevard - (April 2) Request for Special Event Permit - Classic Car Show (April 2) Draft Guidelines for Formation of Undergrounding of Utilities Assessment Districts - (April 2) 2002-03 Street Rehabilitation Program Award of Contract - (April 16) Downtown Design Guidelines Furniture Supplement - (future agenda) Resolution in Support of Formation of Raccoon Lane Undergrounding Utilities District Recognition of Outgoing Commissioners 2000-2003 - (future agenda) Creation of Downtown Business Improvement District - (future agenda) Draft Grading Ordinance - (future agenda) Draft Open Space Policy Guidelines - (future agenda) Report on Library Expansion - (future agenda) Request for relocation of Gallows Wheels - (future agenda) Presentation of 8th Annual Heritage Preservation Award - (May 7) HOMEOWNER'S SUMMIT - SATU~DAY, MARCH 29 - 10:00 a.m. at Town Hall Joint Meetings of the Design Review Board, Planning Commission and Town Council - TBA . . . ~ 'I.jR.M. J){). I - _!!:~:~~J:J:~'Ff~''i:r!~F~~~~~itf:'f~'J;<'*,J!li':~If.l~ TOWN COUNCIL MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Slavitz called the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 5, 2003, in Town Council Chambers,'1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Thompson PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth, Director of Community Development Anderson, Director of Public WorkslTown Engineer Echols, Chief of Police Odetto, Director of Administrative Services McVeigh, Administrative & Financial Analyst Stott, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION (Section 54956.9(a)) Howard Zack, Diane Zackv. MERA and Town ofTiburon MERA v. Town ofTiburon and Dean Bloomquist Citizens for Open Process in Antenna Siting (COPAS) v. MERA and Town ofTiburon PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (Section 54957) Title: Town Manager INTERVIEWS . Richard Deringer, 1741 Mar West Street . Emmett O'Donnell, 135 Avenida Miraflores . John Kunzweiler, 16 Norman Way ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION. IF ANY Mayor Slavitz said that no action was taken in closed session. Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page J r' ORAL COMMUNICATIONS . . Ron Miska, Assistant Director of the Marin County Open Space District, spoke about the upcoming process for review of Open Space Policies. . Local resident Todd Werby spoke in support ofthe Miska statement and encouraged local participation in process. . Resident Henry Broderick gave Council a brief report on the proposed Del Mar Valley Undergrounding Project. INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOWN EMPLOYEE . Community Service Officer Caitlin Collins Chief of Police Odetto welcomed Ms. Collins to the Tiburon "family" and assisted her mother in pinning on the badge. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Town Council Minutes - February 5, 2003 2. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Accept Town Investment . Summary for January 2003 3. Recommendation by Public Works Director - Accept Notice of Completion of Ferry Plaza Project 4. Recommendation by Public Works Director - Adopt Resolution Authorizing Notice of Intent to Comply with California Stormwater General Permit Resolution of the Town of Tiburon Authorizing the Town Manager to Prepare and sign Application Documents Signifying an Intent to Comply with a General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems 5. Recommendation by Public Works Director.- Authorize Harris & Associates to Perform GASB 34 Infrastructure Inventory and Assessment Valuation 6. Recommendation by Director of Community Development - Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution ofIntention to Initiate Zoning Ordinance Amendments (R-2 zone) Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 2 . . . . ( "" '.. 7. Recommendation by Director of Administrative Services - Budget Amendment for Purchase of Accounting System Server Councilmember Berger requested clarification of a statement he made concerning the process of the Skatepark Task Force in the February 5, 2003 minutes (Item No. I) With regard to the Ferry Plaza (Item No.3), Berger suggested a conditional acceptance of the Notice of Completion, pending further work by the contractor. He pointed out the need for shielding of the lights along the bike rail, and the fact that the pain was peeling on the directional signs for the ferry. Director of Public Works said that he was working on these issues with the contractor, but noted that the lights specified in the contract were not shielded. He also informed Council that there was a one year performance bond which covered work on the project. MOTION: Moved: Vote: To adopt Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 7, as amended above. Fredericks, seconded by Gram AYES: Unanimous APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS. COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES 8. Recommendation by Town Clerk - Appoint Various Members to Boards, Commissions and Committees . DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PLANNING COMMISSION PARKS & OPEN SPACE COMMISSION JT. RECREATION COMMITTEE . . . Town Clerk Crane Iacopi said that in addition to the applicants interviewed by the Council for terms expiring on February 28, 2003, letters had been received from all the incumbents on the above commissions, requesting reappointment. She said that the Heritage & Arts Commission had been inadvertently omitted from the agenda so that appointments to the Commission would have to be continued to March 19. Councilmember Berger expressed his support of reappointment of all the incumbents. In particular, he said that having appeared before the Design Review Board in the past as an architect, he appreciated the "yeoman's service" of both Boardmember Beales and McLaughlin, who he said, "put applicants to the test." Vice Mayor Fredericks noted the opportunity before the Council to appoint a representative on the Board from the Paradise Drive area. Councilmember Thompson agreed with both Berger and Fredericks. Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 3 r MOTION: Moved: Vote: MOTION: Moved: Vote: ,MOTION: Moved: Vote: MOTION: Moved: Vote: To reappoint incumbent Wayne Snow to the Planning Commission Fredericks, seconded by Thompson AYES: Unanimous . To reappoint incumbent Kirk Beales and to appoint John Kunzweiler to the Design Review Board Fredericks, seconded by Gram AYES: Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Thompson NOES: Berger To reappointment incumbent Mindy Canter to the. Parks & Open Space Commission Fredericks, seconded by Thompson AYES: Unanimous To reappointment incumbents Jerry Riessen and Priscilla Tripp to the Jt. Recreation Committee Gram, seconded by Thompson AYES: Unanimous REGULAR AGENDA 9. Recommendation by Director of Community Development - Downtown Design Guidelines - Furniture Supplement . Director of Community Development Anderson said the furniture supplement was "suggestive and advisory" and was to be used as "a starting point" for both applicants and Staff. Mr. Anderson said that the data had been reviewed by the Guidelines Steering Committee, as well as the Planning Commission and Design Review Board, although he pointed out that Staff had disagreed with some of the Board's suggestion for changes to the final version. Councilmember Berger said that the handbook was "a little light" on the basis for its suggestions, and said that more narrative would be useful and give Staff more of a basis for its evaluation of applications. He also commented that most of the recommended designs were "crisp and contemporary" in nature rather than traditional. Councilmember Gram asked who had drafted the furniture supplement; Director Anderson replied that it was the same consultant team who had put together the Downtown Design Guidelines. Gram commented that he thought a lot of the designs were "inappropriate for our downtown. " Councilmember Berger further commented that the existing, unshielded street lights on Tiburon Boulevard in downtown were "unbelievably inappropriate." Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 4 . . . . Councilmember Thompson said that he noticed a "lot of problems" with some of the suggested designs, such as the lighted bollards. He also said that he would prefer more traditional "Smith & Hawkins" type benches for downtown. Vice Mayor Fredericks concurred that the proposed bollard lights would "throw glare," and said that the bike racks that were specified did not allow the use of certain types of locks. Mayor Slavitz asked Director Anderson whether the guidelines were advisory only. Mr. Anderson concurred. Councilmember Thompson said that Boardmember McLaughlin had suggested adding more "verbal concept" to the handbook, to promote ideas and Town policies like those of fitting in with neighborhood characteristic. Director Anderson said that language could be lifted from the Downtown Design Guidelines and added to the Furniture Supplement. Mayor Slavitz concurred that it would be helpful to have more than just a pictorial. catalog. MOTION: To incorporate Council comments into the Downtown Furniture Supplement and bring a revised version back for Council approval. Berger, seconded by Fredericks AYES: Unanimous Moved: Vote: 10. Report by Town Manager- State Budget Update Town Manager McIntyre said that it was important to keep in mind that the State was still "fixing the current year's budget," so that the impact on the Town for the current fiscal year remained positive. However, he said that the Town was "dodging the bullet for the moment." Mr. McIntyre said that the Town's revenue estimates were "on track" to date but that the data for expenditures to date was not yet available. He said that Staff would "kick off' the annual budget process for the upcoming fiscal year the following week and would bring a balanced budget to Council for adoption in June. The Town Manager also said that Staff would bring some of the revenue enhancement ideas discussed in the Town Council/Staff retreat to the next Council meeting for review. McIntyre said that he would keep the Council apprised of the status of the State budget talks. He said that the League of California Cities did not anticipate an adopted State budget until the end of the calendar year. Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 5 COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS . II. Report by Councilmember Berger - Skatepark Task Force Timeline and Process Councilmember Berger reported on the progress of the Skatepark Task Force. He said that . determining the need for a skatepark was the toughest aspect of the process undertaken by the Task Force. He acknowledged that, in the end, the decision of whether or not a skatepark would be built in Tiburon was a political one which would be made by the Town Council. Berger asked whether the Council wanted the Task Force to bring a "needs assessment" to the Council for review and, in so doing, Berger said that the assumption was that a suitable location would be found, with the only "cost" to the Town being the permission to use the land. Vice Mayor Fredericks asked whether the experts preparing the study were being paid by the Town. COurlcilmember Berger said that they had been retained by the Committee for a Skatepark in Tiburon, a separate group from the task force. Councilmember Gram asked whether the size and type of equipment and liability issues were being assessed in the study. Councilmember Berger said that information would be assessed "later down the road" after it was determined if there was an actual need for a skatepark. In other words, Berger said, if the Council determined that there w~ not a need for such a park, or that competing interests precluded it, there would be no need to tackle the liability or other issues. . Councilmember Berger estimated that the needs assessment would be ready for review by the Council in two months' time. In the meantime, he said that the Skatepark Task Force would continue to hold public hearings to discuss the issue. Mayor Slavitz said that he was concerned that the study would look at the need for a skatepark "in a vacuum," without taking into consider other needs for outdoor recreational activities. He suggested that study focus on projected "usage" rather than "need". That way the Council could look at projected numbers and determine whether there was a need for the park. Vice Mayor Fredericks completed Councilmember Berger on his job in organizing the process and information received by the Skatepark Task Force to date. However, she said that in her experience as Council representative to the Downtown Art Project Steering Committee, she had noted that sometimes "the process gets away from you." Councilmember Berger reiterated that the Task Force was merely a forum for discussion of the issue and determination of need. He said that people were "more savvy" now than at the inception of the process. Councilmember Gram congratulated Berger on the great job he was doing on the Task Force. Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 6 . . . . Councilmember Thompson said he was anxious to hear the item at the Council level in order and would continue to voice his opposition to the concept of a skatepark in Tiburon. During public comment, John Kern, Stewart Drive, said that people in his neighborhood association had suggested that the Town form a "recreation needs committee," rather than a committee to study just one aspect of recreation. Mayor Slavitz said that the Council would review the "usage analysis" when it had been prepared by the Skatepark Task Force. 12. Report by Town Manager - MERA Update . Request by MERA for Activation of the North County Portion ofthe MERA System Town Manager McIntyre said that the MERA Board had now determined that the system could be engineered in order to activate a portion of the system. He said that this "northern loop" would include the cities of San Rafael and Novato, and portions of Ross Valley, but not the cities of Corte Madera or Urrkspur, or the County of Marin. McIntyre said that the Board had proposed asking for comment on the proposed activation from the elected officials in Southern Marin (six cities and two fire protection districts) prior to taking action. McIntyre also said it was ironic that at one time MERA had said the system could not be activated without the Southern Marin component. Vice Mayor Fredericks said that there a potential loss of incentive and responsibility toward the cities of Southern Marin if the members in the northern loop had a system that was up and runnmg. Town Manager McIntyre agreed, and said that there was also a question of whether MERA could force the northern cities to contribute additional funds to finding a solution to the siting problems in Southern Marin. He informed the Council that the MERA Board would take action at its March 20 meeting. Council directed the Town Manager to reconnoiter with other officials in Southern Marin and try to build support for a delay until the entire system could be activated. Vice Mayor Fredericks said that it was important to state that the Town and other cities in Southern Marin should "get what they paid for." Mayor Slavitz said that the Southern Marin portion, once called "the backbone" of the system by . MERA representatives, was now treated as a "spur." However, he concluded that "we speak stronger if we speak together." Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 7 ******* On another matter, Vice Mayor Fredericks reported that CMA was moving forward with November parcel tax measure with emphasis on local transportation projects. . WRITTEN COMMUNICA nONS Town Council Weekly Digest - February 7, 2003 Town Council Weekly Digest - February 14,2003 Town Council Weekly Digest - February 21,2003 Town Council Weekly Digest - February 28,2003 Town Manager McIntyre noted the request by the Marin Housing Authority to refinance the loan for the Bradley House. Item No.4 - February 14-Digest Town Manager McIntyre said that the Jt. Recreation Committee was looking for an endorsement from the Town to be included in the Library expansion plan for future office space. Councilmember Fredericks said that what the Recreation Committee was actually looking for . was a confirmation of their status with regard to office space at Town Hall. She said that the Committee had expressed a preference to remain at Town Hall. Mayor Slavitz asked whether the current status was that the Town would like the space. Town Manager McIntyre affirmed his statement and said that he had discussed this with Jt. Recreation Director Creamer. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Gram adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m., sine die. JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK Town Council Minutes # 04-2003 March 5, 2003 Page 8 . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM ~ . I -S::-\. O}-.LllJ ~. o~~.: "'~\O .... ,:(::.:::. ~ ~:==;~Y: ... ~~;~~dt;gf~:; . ^,IA'l'l . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council FROM: Heidi McVeigh, Director of Administrative Services ~ SUBJECT: Monthly Investment Summary - February 2003~ MEETING DATE: April 2, 2003 REVIEWED BY: ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . TOWN OF TIBURON Institution/Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Matu rity State of California Local Agency $9,083,361.98 1.945% Liquid Investment Fund (LAIF) Total Invested: $9,083,361.98 TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY . Institution/Agency Investment Amount Interest Rate Maturity State of California Local Agency $859,595.18 1.945% Liquid Investment Fund (LAIF) Bank of America Other $0 Total Invested: $859,595.18 Notes to Table Information: State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF): The interest rate represents the effective yield for the month referenced above. The State of California generally distributes investment data reports in the third week following the month ended. Acknowledgment: This summary report accurately reflects all pooled investments of the Town of Tiburon and the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, and is in conformity with State laws and the Investment Policy adopted by the Town Council. The investment program herein summarized provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet next month's estimated expenditures. . Heidi McVeigh cc: Town Treasurer February 28, 2003 1 of 1 LAIF Performance Report Page 1 of2 Phil Angelldes, Stale Treasurer ... Inside the State Treasurer's Office ~ Local Agency Investment Fund LAIF Performance Report 03/12/03 03/12/03 2.01% 1.93% 2.33% 178 Reporting Date: Effective Date: Quarter Yield: Daily: Year: Life: Quarter Ending 12/31102 Apportionment Rate: 2.31 % Earnings Ratio: .00006335889804137 Fair Value Factor: 1.004029581 Monthly Average For February: 1 .945% Pooled Money Investment Account Portfolio Composition $55.3 Billion 02/28103 Loans 9.84% Treasuries 11 .97% . Treasuries Commercial Paper 20.90% D Mortgages III Agencies . CD'sI8N's m Time Deposits Agencies IJll Bankers Acceptances 25.81 % . Repo . Commercial Paper D Corporate Bonds D Loans . Reverses Repo 0.90% CD'sI8N's 16.65% http://www.treasurer.ca.gov/laif/performance.htm . . . 3/1412003 " . '"4.-/ '/ . . . .! Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT 3 AGENDA ITEM ............. ........ ...... ...... .... TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council FROM: Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ SUBJECT: Proposed Bradley House Refinancing MEETING DATE: March 19,2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attached you will find a letter to the Marin Housing Authority outlining the terms and conditions of their proposal to refinance the existing Town held note on the Bradley House. The Marin Housing Authority is calling the loan from the Town in an effort to achieve a more attractive financing rate. Presently, the loan is at 9.01 % and is scheduled to increase to over 11 % in 2004. The original $300,000 loan deal was completed in 1992 in order to construct additional units at the Bradley House. Since the Town's present LAIF rate is below 2%, this proposed refinance certainly benefits the Marin Housing Authority as well as the Town. I met with Council member Gram and sought his input on the proposed terms and conditions of the deal. Recommendation It is recommended that you adopt that attached resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute all documents related to the proposed refinancing of the Bradley House note with the Marin Housing Authority with the terms and conditions noted in the attached correspondence. Please note that the Town Attorney will provide the actual resolution for your review prior to the Town Council meeting. Attachments . . . Town of Tiburon . 1505 Tiburon Boulevard' Tiburon, CA 94920' P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438' www.tiburon.org March 10, 2003 Mr. Maurice M. Wolohan Director, Housing Rehabilitation & Development Marin Housing Authority 4020 Civic Center Drive San Rafael, CA 94903-4173 Re: Refinance of Bradley House Note Dear Maurice: Thank you for your offer to the Town of Tiburon to refinance the outstanding note with the Town of Tiburon for the Bradley House. I understand that the Housing Authority wishes to benefit from the decrease in interest rates. However, after consulting with the Town Council's Finance Committee, I propose the following as a more equitable arrangement: The Town would like to secure its financial position with regards to its future investments and offers a floating rate of interest, starting at 5.25% per annum, fully amortized. This interest rate would be the minimum rate charged. We would adjust this rate in the future as needed to maintain the interest rate at a minimum of 2 points above the Local Agency Investment c Fund (LAIF) rate, computed monthly. Presently, the LAIF rate is 2.01 %. Principal Balance: Current Rate: Proposed Re-Fi Date: Accrued Interest: Principal and Interest: Proposed Re-Fi Amount: Proposed Interest Rate: $179,563.00 (as of 12/31/02) 9.010% per annum in "Year 12" (2003) April 1, 2003 $3,989 (from 1/01/03 to 4/01/03) $183,552 (as of 4/01/03) $183,552 5.25% per annum, adjustable, fully amortized (2 points above LAIF) 81 months April 1, 2003 December 1, 2009 $2,696.16 $34,837.07 $218,389.07 Term: First Payment: Final Payment: Monthly Payments: Total Interest Paid: Total of Payments: Maurice M. Wolohan March 10,2003 Page 2 of 2 The Marin Housing Authority would bear all expenses associated with the refinance (appraisal, title insurance, escrow costs and so forth) and would prepare all documents related to the refinance. Please note that this is a conditional offer, in that if the Marin Housing Authority agrees to accept the offer, I will need to obtain the approval of the full Town Council. I believe that this is a fair arrangement and that they will approve it. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Si cer Iy, Enclosure cc: Administrative Services Director ;... ~. . . . RESOLUTION NO. l*JI~ ll~M, 3 Q"R' 'A7-.,'F' T" . ~(~ \ . . ~ . - 2003 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING THE REFINANCE OF THE TOWN'S EXISTING BRADLEY HOUSE LOAN TO THE MARIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Town currently holds a 1992 note from the Marin County Housing Authority ("Authority") in the principal amount of$300,000 (three hundred thousand dollars, which was financed for the improvement of a low income development known as the "Bradley House" and which is secured by a deed of trust recorded against the Bradley House ("Original Note"); and WHEREAS, the outstanding balance on the Original Note is $183,552 (one hundred eighty- three thousand, five hundred and fifty-two dollars); the current rate of interest is approximately 9 % and the current maturation date is December 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, the Authority has advised the Town that it intends to repay the Original Note in advance of its maturation date, so as to take advantage of the low interest rates currently available; and WHEREAS, the Town currently receives only 2.0 I interest on its cash investments in the Local Agency Investment Fund ("LAIF") and therefore is willing to refinance the Original Note on the terms set forth in Exhibit A to this Resolution, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the Authority has likewise agreed to refinance the Original Note on the terms set forth in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon that the Town agrees to refinance the Original Note on the terms set forth in Exhibit A and to accept a deed of trust on the Bradley House as security for the new loan. The Town Manager is authorized to execute any documents that may be necessary or appropriate to complete this transaction, subject to the approval of the Town Attorney, including, without limitation, a certificate of acceptance accepting a security interest in the Bradley House. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town ofTiburon on March 19,2003 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: COUNCILMEMBERS: 01,,' ',~ Itt f;:T ..~ t1\~ B=~. M B JEFF SLA VITZ, MA YOR Town of Tiburon ( ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK " . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM-4-- ............................................ TO: MAYOR SLA VITZ AND MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: TOWN CLERK DIANE CRANE IACOPI SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO TOWN BOARDS, COMMISSIONS ~ COMMITTEES - HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION March 19,2003 REVIEWED BY: MEETING DATE: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BACKGROUND The Town received letters from the two incumbents on the Heritage & Arts Commission whose terms expired at the end of February. Both incumbents, Meg Winther Abbott and Diane Smith, have expressed their desire to be appointed to second, four-year terms. There were no other applicants for these positions. RECOMMENDATION That the Council reappoint the commissioners listed above to the Heritage & Arts Commission. EXHIBITS . Letters from Commissioners Abbott and Smith .7 Diane Crane lacopi From: Sent: alo: ~c: Subject: Meg Abbott [mwinther@ix.netcom.com] Tuesday, January 21,20038:14 AM Diane Crane lacopi Joan Palmero Heritage & Arts Term for Meg Abbott Dear Diane, ~ 1A~ ~ ~ :oo~ ~ TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON I received your letter of January 7th, advising me that my term on the Heritage & Arts Commission is expiring in February. I would very much like to be considered for reappointment for another four year term. I assume that this e-mail confirms that wish in writing. Please contact me at your convenience with any further instructions. Very truly yours, Meg Abbott Margaret Winther Abbott mwinther@ix.netcom.com . . 1 Town of Tiburon . 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Tiburon, CA 94920. P. 415.435.7373 F. 415.435.2438. www.tiburon.org Office of Town Clerk Diane Crane Iacopi/ 415-435-7377 Ms. Diane Smith 90 Lyford Drive, NO.3 Tiburon, CA 94920 . January 7,2003 SUBJECT: TERM EXPIRATION - HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION Dear Diane: " .~ . The Town Council will conduct interviews in February 2003 to fill vacancies on Town Boards and Commissions for terms expiring in the New Year. It has come to our attention that your term on the Heritage & Arts Commission will expire at the end of February. Pursuant to Town Council Resolution No. 3263 ("Appointments Procedure"), you are required to confirm in writing whether or not you are interested in being considered for reappointment to another, four-year term. If you are, I will advise the Town Council accordingly and they will be able to act upon your decision in a timely manner. The Town of Tiburon has certainly benefited from the time, energy and effort that you have spent during your tenure on the Board. We appreciate your dedication and service to the Tiburon community. cc: Town Manager Jthrt ~Lf~v:t ~v4,- 1/bU1~ 0< Diane Crane lacopi Town Clerk e-mail =dcrane@ci.tiburon.ca.us ~;;tiL.~l ~f ./ J\t1Pair.#U470 fLkL M ~ tZ:v&- an~~. ~ 'V...~L. . -n~ r .1/ //J~// . W\ . . . . . RESOLUTION NO. ~j)o. S' .. ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ENDORSING THE ANGEL ISLAND IMMIGRATION STATION AREA RESTORATION PROJECT LOCATED ON ANGEL ISLAND STATE PARK WHEREAS, most of Angel Island State Park is located within the Town Limits of the Town of Tiburon; and WHEREAS, the historic Immigration Station on Angel Island State Park is located entirely within the Town Limits of the Town ofTiburon; and WHEREAS, Angel Island State Park is recognized on the National Register of Historic Places as a site of historical significance to the United States; and . WHEREAS, the Immigration Station located on Angel Island State Park is a National Historic Landmark designated for its function as an Immigration Station for the Port of San Francisco and its function as a Prisoner of War encampment for German and Japanese Prisoners of War during W orId War II; and WHEREAS, the Angel Island Immigration Station processed approximately one million immigrants and emigrants between 1910 and 1940; and WHEREAS, the Angel Island Immigration Station enforced immigration laws such as the Chinese Exclusion Act which shaped the ethnic and social fabric of the West Coast of the United States; and WHEREAS, the Chinese detainees who were confined to the Detention Barracks for weeks, months or years carved elegant poems in the walls of the Barracks; and WHEREAS, there are a number of structures, features and landscaping remaining from the historic period of the site that are deteriorating and in need of preservation and rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Parks and Recreation, in partnership with the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation and the National Park Service have begun the effort to preserve and rehabilitate the 15 acre Immigration Station site on Angel Island State Park; and WHEREAS, the people of the State of California in 2000 passed a public bond which included $15 million in funding for the restoration of the Immigration Station; and WHEREAS, the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation has raised more than $500,000 in funds for the restoration ofthe Immigration Station; and WHEREAS, the cost of the entire restoration project is estimated to be approximately $32 million, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby endorse the efforts of the California Department of Parks and Recreation, the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation and the National Park Service to preserve and rehabilitate the Immigration Station on Angel Island State Park. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting ofthe Town Council on this xxth day of xxx 2003, by the following vote: COUNCILMEMBERS: AYES: JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK . . . \. . . \ State of California. The Resources Agency Gray Davis, Governor Ruth G. Coleman, Acting Director DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION @ ANGEL ISLAND STATE PARK P. O. Box 318, Tiburon, CA 94920 March 19, 2003 Tiburon Town Council Meeting Angel Island State Park Immigration Station Restoration Sianificance: The Angel Island Immigration Station is a National Historic Landmark because it illustrates a unique immigrant experience from 1910 to 1940 resulting from a series of racially prejudiced laws enacted against Asian immigrants in general and Chinese immigrants specifically beginning in 1882. It is also significant as the site of a Prisoner of War camp from 1941 to 1946. Partnership: A three way partnership between California State Parks, the National Park Service and the Angel Island Immigration Station Foundation has funded the planning for the restoration of the Immigration Station including Historic Structure Reports, a Cultural Landscape Report and a conservation treatment evaluation of the hundreds of carved poems left upon the walls by Chinese immigrants. This partnership also succeeded in securing $15 million in restoration funds from Proposition 12, the 2000 park bond. Current Proiect ($15 million): · Preservation and translation of the poetry · Stabilization and rehabilitation of the Detention Barracks, including interpretation and furnishing as a house museum · Re-establish the character of the landscape on the site through tree removal · Represent the "footprint" of the Administration Building that burned in 1940 . Repair the walks, walls and curbs · Upgrade the site utilities and interpretive exhibits · Abate hazardous materials (lead paint, asbestos, fuel oil) from the Power House Future Proiects (unfunded): · Restore the Hospital as a research library and family immigration information center · Restore the Mule Barn as a visitor orientation center . Restore the Power House as a museum/visitor comfort station . Reconstruct the wharf and baggage shed . Restore the WW II barracks for overnight, workshop and meeting space · Rehabilitate the POW Mess Hall for classroom use Contact: Nick Franco, Park Superintendent 415-435-1563 415-435-0850 fax nfran@parks.ca.gov Yellow highlightsindicate cutrentlyfunded project ~bIIlie~foiincl;llllln$;1'8 ~~~ra Repal~j>lJmp~ '- .... . ....biliie"iinil,reJ:>aii,',NorthGSrfi,so."lIlN1rd't(,we., ;'{~~~~d RIt~linrrtigratlOft suluoll'~id ,,~iII'"f"!~lli~we~ I ~1.ll'~. : PreSeMl PWE mess haD 'i:lgftr;J!~~~ I Angef,IslandState 'Park Immigration Station ~i~~tlhi~'~iiir~l,;irir; !=!~~!:'l::::: A~zebli#ckS ~in9'0\!lIl ~~~m~~:,,~,~.. '!~~,~~~t.t~", '1' . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM ~ ................................................ TO: Mayor and Members of the Town crr~c:~\ Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ Proposed Partial Activation of MERA System FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: March 19, 2003 . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Marin Emergency Radio Authority has found the ability to partially activate the MERA system for the northern portion of the County while waiting to complete the siting issues for the southern portion of the County. At its March 5, 2003 meeting, the Council received a report on the matter (attached). The Tiburon Town Council asked me to find out from the affected south County agencies how they intended to vote. I have a meeting with the affected agencies MERA board members scheduled on Monday, March 17, 2003 to further explore this question. I will report out of that meeting to the Council in our Council meeting. Depending on the results of my Monday meeting, I would cautiously recommend that, if the southern Marin agencies could buy complete assurance of MERA's continued interest in completing the southern portion of the county on a timely manner, then the northern portion should not be further delayed in connecting to the system. Unknown at this time is how that assurance will be guaranteed. Attachment 1 ? . . . MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY 27 Commercial Blvd., Suite C, Novato, CA 94949 Phone: (415) 883~9100 FAX: (415) 883-9155 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 20,2003 TO: MERABoard of Directors FROM: Martin 1. Nichols, Executive Officer SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM: TEMPORARY OPERATION OF MERA WITHOUT MT. TIBURON SITE Recommended Actions: 1. Authorize the temporary operation of the MERA system without the Mt. Tiburon site. 2. Authorize the Executive Director to execute a change order with Motorola, in the amount of $35,000, to reorient the microwave dishes at San Pedro and Big Rock to enable system operation without the Mt. Tiburon site, as a MERA bond expense. 3. Declare the eventual south county site(s) as a "spur site" and no longer a part of the microwave loop network. 4. Authorize the Executive Director to commence negotiations with Motorola to amend our agreement to provide new warranty, equipment, and construction completion provisions that reflect the delay in completing the south county site(s) and the whole MERA system. 5. Declare it to be MERA Board policy that there will be no change in the operational cost sharing formula for those agencies that choose to operate on MERA under the temporary configuration. Discussion: 1. Ternporary operation ofMERA without the Mt. Tiburon site. a. Technical feasibility: Motorola is preparing coverage maps to present to the Technical Advisory Committee on February 19 and your Board on February 20,2003. These maps will demonstrate countywide coverages at the contracted standard of a signal 97 percent of the time and at a 90 percent coverage guarantee. MERA Board of Directors F,'ebl'Uary20,2003 Page 2 " " -. The first map, at 97 percent, will identify those agencies that can achieve the designed coverage without the.Mt. Tiburon site. Individual MERA agencies would then be free to determine if they wish to switch to MERA or stay on their existing network. The second map at 90 percent coverage, will enable those agencies who would not achieve the contract coverage rates to determine if switching to the newMERA ' system at a 90 percent coverage guarantee is equal to or better than their current coverage (estimated to be about 80 percent). b. Reasons to authorize temporary operation under the temporary configuration: 1) Allow those agencies with critical emergency communication syste1ll problems (Le., San Rafael) to obtain a secure, modem system. 2) Provide an alternate to some members to operating the current system while continuing to pay for MERA. 3) . By operating the system, MERA's FCC license would be secured. Ouffederal licensed frequencies must be occupied and used to meet the requireme,nts of the license. 4) Operating the temporary system will enable system testing and training to proceed. 5) Avoid the added Motorola overhead costs that would otherwise be payable beginning in July. . c. Problems with the temporary operation: 1) We will need to negotiate new system warranty provisions with, Motorola because completion of the entire system will now be phased. 2) The County (MERA's biggest user - financial contributor) will not likely be able to utilize a system that cannot operate countywide. 3) Potential dispatch complications, especially for agencies who transferred to MERA and are served by the County Sheriff. 4) Perception that there will be less incentive to secure a south county site(s). 5) Potential financial equity questions regarding the operations ofMERA when some agencies are not being served but continue paying for MERA operations. 6) New costs to reconfigure to countywide system once a south countysite(s) are made operational. 7) Additional system-wide reliability risk with the south county site(s) operating as a "spur" and not part of the microwave loop system. . C:\WINN1\Profiles\amcintyre\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\Memo-BOD-Agenda Item-Operation ofMERA.doc " ", MERA Board of Directors February 20, 2003 Page 3 . 2. Authorize change order to operate without Mt. Tiburon: The benefits to MERA, as a system, by securing the FCC licensed frequencies and the ability to conduct system training and testing justifies this change order being paid for from MERA bond funds. 3. Declare the south site(s) as "spur sites:" By making the eventual south county site(s) a "spur" and not part of the microwave loop system will allow its future completion and operation possible, without any disruption to the rest of the then operating MERA backbone. As a "spur," the site(s) will not be a part of the microwave loop and therefore, not have the ability to communicate in two directions. This has a minor added risk to that site and the whole system reliability. 4. Motorola contract amendments: Once the temporary system is operational there will be an ambiguity in the Motorola contract regarding the start of the one-year warranty. We will want to assure ourselves that . we will also have the warranty on the south county site(s) once completed. We will also want clarity on Motorola's responsibilities to complete and optimize the south county site(s) and the wholesystem once they are completed. Finally, we want to assure our rights and set a price for the most current version of the mobiles and portables once we complete the system and become operational countywide. 5. Operational cost sharing: I strongly believe that the benefits to MERA, as a system, of the temporary operation justifies this action. There should be no change in the cost of operations sharing formula attached to any agency's ability to come up earlier than another member. For those members who cannot utilize MERA, in the temporary configuration, they are no more disadvantaged than they would otherwise be if we did not operate the system less than countywide. . C:\WINNT\Profiles\amcintyre\Temporary Internet Files\OLK6\Memo-BOD-Agenda Item-Operation ofMERA.doc ", \ a), ,J,"'E~~,\~ ~~1,"~ ,.ft, (,~ r~ t~,'~ r/ 1 ~ J\ . ~\'~.;~.! i~~" ; ~ l~l r :~ LJ)'. ,. "@;W L:: ~ U ~~~-=-:? MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO AUTHORITY 27 Commercial Blvd., Suite C, Novato, CA 94949 Phone: (415) 883-9100 FAX: (415) 883-9155 MEMORANDUM RECEIVED MAR 1 S 2003 SUBJECT: March 17, 2003 \ MERA Board of Directors \. ~ Martin J. Nichols, Executive o~~ AGENDA ITEM D: AUTHORIZATION TO TEMPORARIL YOPERA TE THE MERA SYSTEM WITHOUT THE MT. TIBURON SITE - SHARING OF OPERATING COSTS lQWN MANAGEA~ OF.rICt fOWN ElF TlBYRt-lN DATE: TO: FROM: The Executive Committee recommends that there be no change in the sharing formula for MERA operating costs under a temporary operation of the system without the Mt. Tiburon site, where some agencies are able to receive service and others remain without. The Committee finds that the current formula remains the most equitable to all MERA members because it applies to both operating and capital costs. As Executive Officer, I also recommend no change in the formula for the following reasons: 1. The most important reason for temporary operation is to occupy the MERA frequencies, which is a benefit to the whole membership. 2. If for those members who are not serviced, the current situation of paying the costs of a system not yet online remains unchanged. 3. The added capital costs in locating a south county site will be shared among all members according to the current formula. cc: David Byers Richard Chuck D:\Govemmental Solutions\Shared\MERA\Memo-BOD-AuthCTemp Op MERA,doc . . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council FROM: Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ SUBJECT: Reaffirmation of the Joint Oversight Committee Reorganization MEETING DATE: March 19,2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Backaround In 1998, MCCMC and the Board of Supervisors implemented an effort to review the operation of the many joint powers agencies operating in Marin County. A Joint Services Committee was formed and, in November 2000 issued the attached final report. That report was adopted by MCCMC, the Board of Supervisors and each city and town in Marin. One of the report's recommendations was the creation of a "Joint Services Authority Oversight Committee" comprised of elected officials from the County and each city/town. Tiburon's representative is Jeff Slavitz. This Committee has been working since October on implementing the first recommendation of the Joint Services Committee report - restructuring of the Marin Streetlight Acquisition Joint Powers Authority into a new "General Services JPA." Currently, the Joint Services Authority Oversight Committee is considering the following components of a new General Services JPA: · That the addition of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Management JPA and the Hazardous Materials Spills JPA to the functions of the General Services Agency, as a compromise to forming a separate "environmental management" JPA. · That the Joint Services Authority Committee serve as both the Board of Directors for the General Services JPA and continue in its other duties to oversee the implementation of the 2000 Joint Services Committee's report and monitor JPA activity. · That the Board of Directors for the new General Services Agency JPA be elected officials; notwithstanding the recommendation of the Joint Services Committee to give each member the choice of appointed or elected representation. l. Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Committee has been advised by its staff that his new JPA, with the duties and functions being discussed, will result in an estimated $41,000 in new annual costs: 1) Executive Director $79,500 2) New Operating Costs 4,500 $84,000 3) Offsetting Savings* (42,800) $41 ,200 *Elimination of Streetlight JPA and County Administration of Animal Control Contact Proposed General Services Aqencv There are two principle objectives in creating a "General Services Agency:" 1. To group several of these mostly unrelated functions into a single agency to: · Improve policy oversight · Strengthen fiscal and management control, and · Increase efficiency. 2. Provide a regional agency that can assume new duties, should that be become desirable. . The Marin Managers Association has discussed the formation of the General Services JPA and recommends restructuring the Marin Street Light Acquisition Joint Powers Authority into the Marin General Services Agency with the following functions: · Streetlight Management · Non-point Surface Discharge Prevention Program (MCSTOPP) · Abandoned Vehicle Abatement · Animal Control · Marin Parking Authority · Emergency Service Coordination · Energy Coordinator · Staff support for Joint Services Authority Oversight Committee · Taxicab Regulation General Services Aqencv (GSA) functions 1. Currently, the responsibility of the Street Light JPA (which would be eliminated when the new GSA is formed): · Street Light Management · Marin County Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPP) · Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program · Energy Coordination . March 13, 200 Page 2 of 4 . Town of Tiburon . STAFF REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Functions currently organized as a separate and independent JPA (also eliminated): · Animal Control The Animal Control JPA is currently an agreement to apportion shares of cost. The County has the contract with the Human Society and collects the member shares and revenues and pays the Human Society. The County adds the cost of 25 percent of an administrative analyst to the shared cost. If this service is made a function of the new GSA, it would increase member oversight in this $2 million per year cost and the expense for an administrative analyst could be redirected to the costs of the new GSA. The current agreement with the Human Society runs through FY 2003-2004. It would be convenient for the new agreement to be with the GeneralServices Agency starting July 1, 2004. · Parking Authority The parking authority operates out of the Sheriffs office. That staff is retiring soon and the GSA could assume these duties. Some portion of parking fine revenue . could be used to support the new agency. 3. Functions (not organized as a JPA) currently managed by the County: · Emergency services planning and training provided under an agreement between the County and the cities and towns. Inclusion in the GSA would provide policy oversight for this important function. Governance of New General Services JPA Since most of the actions required to govern this agency will be routine fiscal, contract or administrative management items, the Marin Managers Association recommend a small, easily assembled governing board. The membership would be five appointees from the following agencies or groups of agencies: · County of Marin (one representative) · City of San Rafael (one representative) · City of Novato (one representative) · Cities/Towns of Larkspur, Corte Madera, Ross, San Anselmo and Fairfax (one representative) · Cities/Towns of Sausalito, Mill Valley, Tiburon and Belvedere (one representative) . A quorum would be four members and it would take three affirmative votes for the agency to take action on an item. The JPA oversight responsibilities should be very minimal (there are no major problems or issues) and that the taxicab regulations be offset by license fees. Therefore, the new General Services JPA's new annual costs would be very small (less that $7,500 countywide). March 13,200 Page 3 of 4 [ Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendation It is recommended that the Town Council authorize a letter to the Joint Services Oversight Committee expressing your policy position to be as follows: 1. The Streetlight Acquisition JPA should be restructured into a new General Services JPA with minimal new costs and a streamlined governance structure. 2. The Hazardous and Solid Waste and the Hazardous Spills JPA's should remain independent authorities. 3. The oversight of the existing JPA's should be a small (once a year) duty of the new GSA. 4. Each member agency should retain the option of elected or appointed representation to the governing Board. 5. The recommendation of the November 2000, Joint Services Committee report should be followed. Attachment . . March 13, 200 Page 4 of 4 '~ . . . JOINT SERVICES COMMITTEE OF THE MARIN COUNTY COUNCIL OF MAYORS AND COUNCILMEMBERS November 21, 2000 Cityrrown Councils Board of Supervisors Marin County, California RE: Final Report and Recommended Actions to Improve Accountability and Operations of Marin Joint Powers Authorities RECOMMENDED ACTIONS REGARDING TillS REPORT: This report represents the efforts of the Joint Services Committee to review Marin County joint powers authorities. Later on in the report we recommend a process for the cities and towns and the Board of Supervisors to review and consider our recommendations. Therefore, our recommendations for this report are: A. That you receive the report, and B. That you approve and adopt the recommended review and adoption process. BACKGROUND In 1998 MCCMC and the Board of Supervisors received a consultant's report recommending the establishment of a joint services administrator to manage and oversee the many Marin County joint powers authorities (JPA's.) In response to this recommendation MCCMC established the Joint Services Committee with one representative from each city and town and the BOS. This Committee's charge was to review the work of the consultant and each of the existing JP A's and prepare recommendations regarding needed improvements to accountability and operational practices The Joint Services Committee began meeting in Feb. of 1999. Meeting monthly, the Committee has reviewed the operations of the major JP A's and subsequently met to develop these recommendations. The work of the Committee was staffed by Mr. Martin J. Nichols, in the Office of the County Administrator, utilizing the remaining funds of a grant from the Marin Community Foundation for purposes of studying JP A's. 2 , ^ FINDINGS: . The Joint Services Committee, based on our review of the major JP A's, makes the following findings: A. The JP A structure is necessary for effective local government in Marin County with its limited population, and numerous cities, towns and special districts. B. The JPA's are free of any major operational or administrative problems; however, there are areas for improvement, and a need to establish standard practices for the JPA's and consider some consolidation. C. The major JPA's are responsible for significant amounts of public funding. D. The major JPA's are responsible for important policy areas critical to health and safety of Marin residents. E. The work of the major JPA's is not well understood by local elected officials and the public. F. There is a need for improved understanding, accountability, and oversight of the major JPA's. G. There is a need to establish standardized practices for the distribution of JPA agendas, minutes, budgets, annual activity reports, audits and legislative actions. . H. There is a need for some organizational changes, possibly consolidation, for continued evaluation of duties between JPA's. I. There is a need to establish an oversight committee comprised of elected officials for continued evaluation and review of the JP A's, and to implement these recommendations, and discuss and recommend action on the policy issues confronting these agencies. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. JP A reorganizations. The Joint Services Committee does not find compelling reasons for major reorganization of the JP A's. We did find, however, that some consolidation and/or shifting of directions could be of benefit to the overall effectiveness and efficiency of these j oint efforts. We do recommend that some further staff evaluation be conducted regarding the benefits of combining some sub-functions of individual JPA's with another JPA so those activities may be more appropriately coordinated with public services of a like nature. To implement this recommendation, Mr. Nichols will prepare a report regarding the transfer of functions between JP A's for further consideration by this Committee, and present to the Joint Services Oversight Committee. . . . . 3 The Joint Services Committee further recommends that the Marin Street Light Acquisition JPA be renamed as the "General Services JPA." Presently, the Street Light JP A is comprised of several unrelated functions (i.e. street lights, abandon vehicles, metricom contract, geographic information system, non-point discharge prevention, and electric supply alternatives.) Also, we further recommend that Mr. Nichols prepare suggestions regarding the governance structure of the new General Services JP A. Additionally, Mr. Nichols will prepare a further report to the Joint Services Committee on what activities should be added or deleted from the General Services JP A. Finally, we recommend a detailed review of the existing joint power agreements by the Joint Services Oversight Committee and make amendments if necessary to reflect service or law changes in the individual JPA's areas of responsibility. 2. JP A staffing and oversight. The Joint Services Committee recommends that a permanent Joint Powers Authority Oversight Committee (comprised of elected officials) be established to periodically review the operations of our many JP A's, and provide a forum to discuss policy issues affecting their joint efforts. Mr. Nichols should be directed to prepare recommended operational and financing plans and membership of this oversight committee. We further recommend that a joint services manager position be established and report to the Joint Services Oversight Committee and be responsible for the following: a. Implement the recommendations of this report and those that are adopted by city/towns and County regarding JP A's b. Monitor the activities of the various JP A's for purposes of discussing and reporting to the elected bodies regarding major policy issues that should be considered at the elected level. c. Establish and maintain a directory of JP A services and their membership on www.marin.org., and d. Coordinate legislative issues affecting JP A activities. The position of Joint Services Manager should be combined with the duties of managing the new General Services Joint Powers Authority. The costs for the oversight responsibilities should be apportioned among the various JP A's. We recommend that the Marin Managers Association prepare recommendations as to how these costs should be levied. 3. JPA Standard Practices. We recommend that in the interest of better understanding and accountability, the following practices be implemented: a. Elected officials on certain Joint Powers Governing Boards. 4 Elected officials review of the activities of the JPA's activities is provided through the appointment of governing board members and the proposed establishment of the oversight committee. . We recommend that each appointing agency be given the discretion of appointing an elected official or a staff member to the advisory bodylboard to which they belong, excepting the Joint Powers Oversight Committee, which is to be comprised of only elected officials. b. Distribution of Agendas and Minutes. We recommend that agendas and minutes of each JP A (and their executive committee, if they have one) be routinely sent to city/town managers and the County Administrator if requested. We further recommend that each JP A establish a process by which they can send copies of agendas and minutes to individual elected officials, if so requested by that official. Finally, we further recommend that the Joint Services Manager implement procedures to make copies of agendas and minutes of the various JP A' s available on line at www.mann.org. c. Audits. We recommend that each individual JP A be given authority to determine the need for annual audits in lieu of the statutorily required bi-annual audit. One copy of each audit and management letter should be provided to each participating agency. . d. Minimum Insurance Requirements. We recommend that the individual JPA's determine their own individual insurance requirements based on an analysis of the risk potential associated with their individual functions. e. Standard Indemnification Clauses. We recommend that each JP A determine the indemnification requirements necessary for their individual areas of responsibility. f. Legislation We recommend that JPA's not take positions on legislation, but submit recommendations regarding pending legislation for consideration by the MCCMC Legislative Committee and the Board of Supervisors. We also believe county-wide coordination regarding legislative issues is a more effective way to achieve our policy objectives. g. By-laws. Each JP A should adopt by-laws that are referred for review to the appointing agencies bi-annually. . .. ~ , . . . 5 4. Staffing for Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers. We recommend that permanent staffing be established for MCCMC to coordinate the appointments, bylaw reviews, meeting coordination, and agendas. We recommend that this function be combined with the duties of the Joint Services Manager and that the Marin Managers Association prepare recommendations on how the cost of this function should be shared among the cities and towns. REVIEW AND ADOPTION PROCESS The Joint Services Committee recommends that this report be discussed before each city/town council and the Board of Supervisors. The chair or vice chair of the Joint Services Committee, assisted by Mr. Nichols, will be available to make presentations at each agency's meeting regarding this report. Based on the input we receive from this process, the Joint Services Committee will meet one last time to prepare final recommendations for consideration by the MCCMC and the Board of Supervisors. Dated: Harry Matthews, Chair Joint Services Committee Dated: Pat Eklund, Vice Chair Joint Services Committee FOR THE JOINT SERVICES COMMITTEE: Amy Belser, Sausalito Susan Brandborg, Fairfax Paul Chignell, San Anselmo John Dupar" Corte Madera John Gray, Ross Barbara Heller, San Rafael John Kress, County of Marin Joan Lubamersky, Larkspur Christopher Raker, Mill Valley Bruce Sams, Belvedere , ~' . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT .- . 1 · Of T/8v · \~;'/~~~; ~1_\1,. .(~ ,.~. ~2:;~ ,..""~~) V"'=:.;~.~~'V' ('/:-::;"'A.:~/o.'O ~o~/, ." R"'tnNC,. ". T . AGENDA ITEM + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Mayor and Members of the Town ~Cil Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager ~ Strategies for Revenue Enhancement (FY 2003-2004) FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: March 19, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Background Recognizing the downturn in the economy, during the recent Council/Staff retreat, staff presented to the Town Council a number of revenue enhancement ideas for consideration. The Town Council asked staff to explore 15 of the ideas and bring them back for further consideration. Without restating the obvious, between the State of California budget catastrophe and the considerable decline in the overall economy, it comes as no surprise that the Town faces revenue reductions resulting from both. Staff recently calculated revenue estimates for the current fiscal year and the coming year. Both are down. Further compounding the problem is that while the State's current budget shortfall is historically unmatched, there is no reason to believe that the State's 2004-2005 budget will be any better. In other words, this revenue enhancement exercise needs to particularly take into consideration the long view as well. The Town has an Operating Budget of approximately $5 million. The Town partially accomplishes its revenue enhancement goals by shifting the burden off of the Operating Budget to a restricted budget fund. For example, when the Town enacted a road impact fee, it essentially created a funding source that shifted road improvements from the Operating Budget to a separate funding stream - the end result being a reduction of demand on the Operating Budget. For the current fiscal year, we anticipate revenues closing a scant $200,000 above budgeted; typically, this gap would be larger. For example, in Fiscal Year 2000-2001, the Town closed its year $1.2 million above budgeted revenues, and in 2001-2002, the Town closed $620,000 above the adopted budget. While conservative budgeting will lend itself to this type of year end closing, we are getting "better" at anticipating revenues. For the coming year, we anticipate a 4% reduction in revenues from the current year. This is largely a result of the State budget and the anticipated loss of the vehicle license fee as well as the economy. While property values continue to increase, this is unfortunately undercut by the State's threat of taking away almost $350,000 in vehicle license fees. Other significant feared revenue declines are in the sales and transient occupancy taxes and building activity related fees. :) . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT .....1/1............. ............................ · Increase Business License tax - Exhibit H · Increase Transient Occupancy tax - Exhibit I · Increase Real Estate Transfer tax - Exhibit I .' Charging Joint Recreation Committee for space - Exhibit J I was tasked with exploring the first three revenues enhancement ideas - the balance are detailed in reports attached. Revenue audits The Town has not audited the funds it receives from other agencies or businesses. We accept the money on good will. While no one would accuse any of these agencies or businesses of purposely withholding funds from the Town, errors do occur. An audit would help correct any errors. Since the Town staff lacks the expertise or resources to do so, each of the revenue audits could be accomplished through the use of a consulting firm. I identified HdL Companies to undertake the audit. They have considerable experience doing so on behalf of public agencies. They would be able to review past years receipts and compare them with a number of databases from the State, Marin County and other resources. It is unknown at this point how much money would be discovered. HdL works similar to bounty hunters. They would share in whatever they find. Typically, it would be a fixed percentage of all monies found for a term. Because of our small size (and their lack of guarantee of discovery any money), a small charge would be levied for each audit undertaken. Acquisition of parkina lots Parking has been cited by many as a hindrance to visiting and shopping downtown. One of the problems is that the parking lots are privately owned and operated. I have not had a chance to talk to the owner of the pt. Tiburon parking lot. I did however meet with Ed Zelinsky, owner of the majority of the parking lots in the downtown. He was certainly open to hearing differing ideas on enhancing the parking opportunities downtown. While no figures were ever discussed, he indicated that he would be willing to continue to talk about different strategies of acquiring use of the downtown parking lots. Acquiring the parking lots would be expensive and represent a dramatic investment in the downtown. Over the past five years, the Town has invested heavily in downtown infrastructure (curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets, trees and landscaping, lighting and the ferry plaza). Acquiring the downtown parking 10t(s) could be a logical (if not expensive) extension of that investment. The parking lots have not been appraised nor has a program been suggested on what mechanism would be used to acquire, administer and allocate space. Parking Districts are not uncommon methodologies used to finance the acquisition, maintenance and operation of parking lots. Page 3 of 7 . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT . . . of Tie,. . ~""/~-!'~ ~/ ,0 .311\1.- .!~ .'~\. \~d~ "\~ ~~I'" ?('/~A: ~ 0.'0 ...:,('O"-~"~ . RNIA. 11'1(.. . I . Increase parkina fines According to the Police Chief, the Town could raise parking fines by up to 8% to remain "competitive" with neighboring communities. It is impossible to accurately predict what that might amount to since the issuance of parking citations cannot be estimated. However, based upon recent years parking revenues, increasing the fines would have generated an additional $5,600. The Town Council should consider raising parking fines and can do so through a resolution process. Implement a security appraisal fee Given the relative affluence of our residents, upon request, the Police Department historically has undertaken a security appraisal of residential and business properties without cost to the resident or business owner. The cost to do so is estimated at approximately $400 per business or home. This fee could generate approximately $1,000 annually. Implement an economic development proaram The Town's downtown economy needs help. The community complains that there are few "resident serving needs" downtown. With the relatively high disposable income of our residents, doing what we can to "capture" sales locally will only help our local economy. Encouraging downtown uses and actively pursuing such could payoff in the long run. Since we lack the staff expertise to successfully pursue this, the Town would need to spend resources on such an effort, either in the form of consultants or dedicated staff. As mentioned before, the Town has invested in its infrastructure and now faces the opportunity to invest in the economy in the downtown. The Community Development staff submitted a report with accompanying survey showing the efforts of economic development programs in communities our size. Any economic development program that the Town Council might consider needs to looked at in the long view. The investment in a staff professional might create better uses in the downtown generating both community interest and sales tax. I would suggest that the Town Council authorize staff to further pursue this by retaining a consultant to develop an economic development strategy. Enact a drainaae impact fee The Public Works Director has clearly described this concept in the attached report. Simply put, this would work similarly to the Town's Road Impact fee which is collected through the issuance of the building permit. Any proposed Drainage Impact fee would be issued in conjunction with creation of impervious surface. . The Town Council has the authority to create such a fee. Page 5 of 7 Town of Tiburon . STAFF REPORT .~J ................................................... Charaina the Joint Recreation Committee for space The staff of the Belvedere- Tiburon Joint Recreation Committee use space in the Tiburon Town Hall for office and recreational use. They have never been charged for the space and have received the space for in-kind services provided including the rental of the Town's community room. According to the Administrative Services Director, the space is valued at approximately $40,000 annually. Through the cost sharing formula with the City of Belvedere, these costs might need to be further reviewed by the Jt. Recreation Committee. Summary There are a number of ideas presented above that to truly be successful, require additional work. While exact figures are difficult to estimate, among the ideas above, I am confident that the Town would be able to better weather the financial storms ahead. . There remain a number of questions regarding how much effort should be expended on certain ideas. For example, the increases to the Business License tax, Transient Occupancy tax and the proposed Stormwater Runoff would require a vote of the public for each revenue proposal. Does the Town Council believe that such a campaign could be waged to enact these changes? Consideration needs to be made as to when these would be done. The Town has a Council election in November. Is that a good time to do it? Further, the annexation, economic development program, parking lot acquisition and law enforcement consolidation require significant additional work. While in the long term, they would likely be financially successful, the effort to do so would be great. Finally, some of the remaining items (audit, special events, administrative charges to assessment districts, raising parking fines, security appraisals, drainage impacts fees and Jt. Recreation charges) are implemented with relative ease yet might not generate sufficient funding to be warranted. Recommendation The Town Council should review each of these revenues and determine which they want staff to actively pursue. Attachments . Page 7 of 7 . . i' EXHIBIT~ro. A Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM " " 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 TO: MAYOR SLAVITZ AND MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: TOWN CLERK DIANE CRANE IACOPI CHIEF OF POLICE MATTHEW C. ODETTO REVENUE ENHANCEMENT IDEAS -SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION FEES SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: March 19, 2003 REVIEWED BY: 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 " . " " " " " " . BACKGROUND During the Town Council/Staff retreat in January, there was a brief discussion of the Town's special event permit application process and whether or not it might be appropriate to charge applicants a fee for processing permits, based upon the number of people in attendance at the permitted event. Staff informed Council that the events with high attendance (100+ participants) generally take more staff time to process than neighborhood block parties, for instance, or other types of special events on Town property. When processing special event permit applications, Town Staff takes into consider the following conditions, as set forth in the Town's Special Event Permit policy: 1) Impacts on Noise 2) Impacts on Traffic 3) Impacts on Parking 4) Impacts on General Environment Since the date of the retreat, Staff has received the following inquires or permit applications: 1. Three outdoor weddings at McKegney Green for 100 people or more; '. 2. A local family picnic (barbeque) for 100 people at McKegney Green; 3. A Lowell High School senior class picnic (barbeque) at McKegney Green for 500 people; 4. A classic car show on Paradise Drive in the vicinity of Shoreline Park for 500 people. 5. The RCP 5th Annual Tiburon Mile Open Water Swim in the vicinity of Shoreline Park for 650 participants. Based on the conditions of the Town's special event permit policy, the first three requests listed above were denied without application (see Exhibit 1 to Staff report). However, the other two applications remain in process, one of which will be discussed at tonight's Town Council meeting. ANAL YSIS . The time it takes Town Staff to process such applications is based on the following: Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT An applicant makes contact with Town Staff (usually the Town Clerk, Chief of Police or Public Works Department) to discuss the viability of the event and to request a permit application. After the initial telephone contact, applicants often make a,n appointment with the Police Department to present a logistical plan. The Police Chief or Lieutenant will make suggestions based upon past experience or other factors (listed in the permit policy), and request revisions or further action. Once these requests are satisfied, the permit application is brought to the weekly Staff meeting for further discussion or approval. If Town Staff continues to have questions, or senses that the impact of the event would have greater impact on the Town's residents than those in the immediate area of the event, Town Staff will often send the permit up to the Council level for approval. All told, the above process usually takes three or more (cumulative) hours of the Staff members' time listed below, based upon the following approved fee schedule: Town Manager Town Attorney Town Clerk Chief of Police Police Lieutenant Director of Community Development Deputy Director of Public Works $110.50 $ 98.71 $ 56.55 $ 94.89 $ 71.45 $ 85.89 $ 69.77 . Experience with Past Events Last year, Staff received the following special event permit applications for 100 or more people: 1. A barbeque at McKegney Green for the benefit of RotoPlast (Rotary Club Charity); 2. An outdoor movie night at McKegney Green for the benefit of the Reed Schools Foundation; 3. A classic car show on Main Street in downtown Tiburon; 4. Two charitable walk-a-thons commencing in Blackie's Pasture and along the Town's multi-use path; 5. The RCP Tiburon Mile Open Water Swim; 6. Tiburon Triathlon; 7. TPSL Annual Fall Kick-Off Tournament; 8. A "Tail Gate" fundraiser for the Bel-Tiburon Library for 250 participants at Zelinksy Park; 9. Chamber of Commerce Annual Holiday Parade and Street Party on Main Street. The organizers of the first two events listed above decided not to pursue their permit applications; the rest of the events took place with minimal impacts due, in large part, to successful logistical planning on behalf of the organizers, and the efforts of Staff working together with the applicants to ensure minimal impacts to the community. . page 2 of 4 Town of Tiburon . STAFF REPORT Fees and Costs The Town Attorney has advised Staff that if fees are to be charged, they can only be charged on the basis of actual cost recovery. The only fee currently charged for'the special events is an annual usage fee charged to the Tiburon Peninsula Soccer League for use (repair and maintenance) of the Green between the months of May and November. The TPSL is the only group that is regularly permitted to reserve the Green for sporting events. The annual fee is determined by the Public Works Department based upon the amount of time and money it costs the Town to restore the Green after such an intensity of use. Other fees collected by the Town, but which are not permit fees per se, are overtime charges by the Tiburon Police Department for use of its personnel for traffic control and security. These costs are paid directly to the Town by the organizers. No fees are currently charged for Staff time in planning and organizing; nor are any fees charged for Staff time such as the delivery of traffic cones and street closure signs (and pick-up) by the Public Works Department. . ltis important to consider, as well, that many of the large events on Town property are benefits for local agencies or charities. Often the Town is asked to waive any fees, for instance, when these agencies or charities rent the Town Council Chambers or Town facilities. Most times, Town Staff approaches process these applications in the spirit of community outreach and "mutual aid." Tiburon Municipal Code - Business License Fees Finally, it is important to note that the Town already has in place a system for charging for certain types of events on Town property, such as commercial filming. These permits are processed through the Town's business license administrator and fees are regularly collected based on the number of persons employed on location (Section 4-11 of the Town Code): 1-3 $150 per day 4-6 $300 per day 7 -9 $600 per day 10+ $1,000 per day The above fees are exclusive of charges for police overtime. In addition, Section 4-11 of the Town Code allows for fees charged for "Other Licenses," specifically, "Carnivals, Fairs and Circuses," in the amount of $400 for the first day and $300 for each additional day thereafter. . No one on Town Staff can recall ever having charged or collected for a carnival, fair or circus; but Council could in fact, invoke the above Code section and apply it to special event permit page 3 of 4 Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . applications, especially in the downtown area where the public is invited and a large number of participants are anticipated. Alternatively, Town Staff could charge applicants a fee for the time spent processing a special event permit application based upon the current hourly rate fee scheduled approved by Council in January 2003. Ostensibly, smaller events would cost less than events with greater numbers of participants. Provisions could also be made for fee waivers or reductions for the benefits of local charitable organizations or public agencies. Discretion could be vested in the Council or Town Manager, as appropriate. RECOMMENDATION That Council further discuss the idea of revenue enhancement through the Special Event Permit application process and give Staff appropriate direction. EXHIBITS · Town Council Policy concerning Special Event Permit Applications · Section 4-11 of the Tiburon Town Code . H:Wpdocsl/2003 Revenue Enhancement Staff Report. doc . page 4 of 4 . . . TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Policy & Procedure Number: Effective: Authority: 7 April 17, 2002 Town CounciVTown Manager I I SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT POLICY PURPOSE AND INTENT: This Town Council policy establishes the "Special Events Permit Policy" for the Town of Tiburon in accordance with the provisions of the Tiburon Municipal Code and State Law. This policy defines special events and specifies requirements and procedures for their approval. The Council has established these requirements and procedures for special events to ensure the general safety, health, and welfare of the community and to ensure that the temporary operation of each special event will be compatible with the neighborhood or area in which it is located. POLICY: State and Town law regulate the use of real property in the Town. . Generally, these laws establish both the structures that may be constructed on land and the activities that may be conducted thereon. The Town receives numerous requests to allow activities, and occasionally structures, on a "short term" basis. The Town has an interest in allowing certain types of conditionally allowed uses on a short term basis. Some of these types of uses may allow private individuals, businesses, or not-for- profit organizations to hold special events which may temporarily alter the character of a particular area. Permit Requirement No person shall conduct a special event on public or private property unless such person first obtains, and continues to maintain in full force and effect, a special event permit for such special event. For purposes of this policy, "special event" means a short term activity or other use of public property other than the customary use of the property. Special events may include weddings, carnivals, live music concerts, outdoor dining, street fairs, and athletic activities such as marathons, ~nP~lHl Fvp.nfc;:, Pp.nnit PnliC".v <cz~/'> PSlOP. 1 nf, r, swimming events, and organized "walk-a-thons." "Special Events" shall also include any short term use of private property that has the potential to affect the neighborhood and! or otherwise requires a permit under the Municipal Code (such as an event involving amplification, live music or valet parking). . Also, for purposes of this policy, the term "short term" shall mean either of the following: . Events on private property up to, but not exceeding, 12 hours . Events on public property, up to, but not exceeding 48 hours Events to be held on public or private property shall be limited in scope to activities which do not detrimentally impact the community. The Town Manager will evaluate the potential.impacts of a proposed event. Factors shall include, without limitation, the following: 1. Impacts on Noise 2. Impacts on Traffic 3. Impacts on Parking 4. Impacts on the General Environment The Town Manager will not consider as a factor the content of any constitutionally protected speech at the event, unless there is a threat of immediate harm to persons or property. Events held in Town parks or open space The Town has, in the past, adopted policies governing the use by the general public of its parks and open space. A list of Town parks and open space areas and policies are incorporated herein as Exhibit "A." These policies are in effect for the regular, non "special event" use of the affected areas. Such uses do not require a special event permit under this Town Council policy. . Permit Procedure A person or persons wishing to hold a special event must file a Special Event Permit application with the Town Manager at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of the proposed event. Notwithstanding the preceding, the Town Manager may accept a special event permit application less than 60 days in advance if the Town Manager determines (in his or her sole discretion) that there is adequate time for review of the application. A Special Event Permit application shall be on a form provided by the Town. At a minimum, the application shall contain the following information: 1. The name ofthe special event organizer and the organizer's contact person (if different); 2. A list of the special event permits requested by the organizer in the previous 12 months; 3. A detailed description of the proposed special event (including the hours it is to be conducted); 4. The location of the proposed special event; . ~nPr.i;ll FVl'!nt~ Pp.rmit PnliC'V P~ap. ? of ~ . . . 5. A precise diagram of the venue area and floor plan (if applicable) for the proposed special event; 6. A description of any special equipment or temporary buildings and structures, including tents, stages, "bounce machines," and vendor's booths, and their estimated delivery and set-up times; 7. The anticipated number of workers, participants and spectators at the proposed special event; 8. A traffic control plan (including any necessary directional devices and street closures) for the proposed special event. 9. Water facilities and sanitary measures (including toilets and trash containers) for the proposed special event; 10. A collection, recycling and disposal plan for garbage generated by the event; 11. A description of an arrangement to provide adequate parking for the people attending the event; 12. Security measures for the special event. The Town Manager may waive any of the above items ifhe or she fmds them inapplicable to the proposed event. Insurance Requirements The requirements of this paragraph shall be a condition of approval for any special event permit for a special event on Town-owned property. As a condition of permit approval, the special event permit holder shall obtain insurance, as required by the Town Attorney as set forth in this paragraph. The permit holder shall provide the Town Attorney with an endorsement showing that the Town has been added as an additional insured to the required insurance. The permit holder shall also sign an indemnification clause agreeing to defend and hold the Town of Tiburon, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, harmless from any claims, liabilities, losses or expenses arising from the special event. The permit holder shall submit the documents required by this paragraph no later than 10 business days prior to the special event. Alcoholic Bevera2es In the case where an "alcoholic beverage," as that term is defined by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act ofCalifomia, will be served and!or sold at the special event, the Town Manager shall be satisfied that appropriate security measures are being taken and the special event permit holder shall obtain a daily license from the State of California Alcohol and Beverage Control Board. Procedure for Review The Town Manager, upon receiving an application for a special event, shall do the following prior to issuance of the permit: ~nP:r.i~l Fvp.nt.;;:. Pp.rmit PnliMl PSlIop.lof" . Consult with Town Department heads on the request and solicit their input; . . Request any additional information from the applicant and impose any restrictions that he or she considers necessary or appropriate to evaluate the event's potential impacts on the community. For events anticipating 200 or more participants, or for events in areas of high density or potentially substantial impacts on the community, the Town Manager may: . Notify business owners and/or residents of properties within the proximity to the proposed venue of the proposed request in order to solicit written or oral comments on the proposed event; and! or . Agendize the permit application for Town Council review and comment at a public hearing. Decision on Application and Appeal of Decision Within 15 days of receipt of an application, the Town Manager shall advise the applicant in writing of the decision that either approves the request, conditionally approves the request, seeks additional information, or denies the request with the reasons for denial stated. The Town Manager's decision shall be final unless the applicant files a written appeal, with payment of applicable fees, within 10 days of the decision. . In the case of an appeal, the Town Council shall conduct a duly noticed public hearing within 30 days following the receipt of the written appeal. The Town Council shall consider the applications under the standards set forth in this chapter and sustain or overrule the decision of the Town Manager. The decision of the Town Council shall be final. Suspension of Permit The Town Manager or the Chief of Police shall have the power to suspend, and shall suspend, any special event permit if the applicant has done any. of the following: 1. Violated any provision or requirement of approval imposed upon the permit. 2. Violated any provisions of the law 3. With the actual conduct of the activity, threatened the preservation of the public peace, safety or general welfare, or unreasonably interfered with the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity ofthe activity. . ~nP.r.iSlI Fvp.nh:. Pp:nnit Polk'v PA"'" 4. "f~ . . . Other The Town Manager may delegate any or all of his authority under this Policy to his or her selected designee. APPROVED: Alex D. McIntyre, Town Manager Date ~nP.r.-i~1 P.vp:nt~ PP:TTnit Pnl1C'.v P"a" ~ nf~ TIBURON PARK & SPECIAL EVENT FACILITIES 1. McKegney Green - large, rectangular, grass covered playing field next to the Richardson Bay shoreline. Located 1/10 of a mile from the parking area at Blackie's Pasture. No vehicle access. Walk-in only. No barbecues or open fires permitted. No alcohol. No bottles. No cleats (except by Tiburon Peninsula Soccer League youth use). Dogs must be on leash. A permit is required for organized sporting events (call Tiburon Public Works, 435-7399). Other uses (other than as a public park) are limited. Contact Town Clerk Diane Crane lacopi, 435-7377 for more information. Like all of the Town's parks, the area is for public use primarily on a first-come, first served basis. . 1a. Little Lady Lorie Gazebo at McKegney Green is situated next to the water in a quiet spot with a beautiful view. The donor of this gazebo hopes it will be used for quiet reflection, possibly small weddings or other meaningful ceremonies. The gazebo holds about 4 people with space around it outside for 10 or so to stand. No bathroom, water or phone nearby. No vehicle access. 2. South-of-the-Knoll Park - just past McKegney Green along the bike path going toward downtown. Use of park is on first-come, first-served basis, but special events can be staged for larger groups subject to the Town's Special Event Permit application process. Area has two sets of children's play structures; one for tots and one for older children. There are two picnic benches located near the playgrounds. Rolling, grass-covered field adjacent. A portable toilet is located on the bike path at the edge of this park. Dogs must be on leash. . 3. Belvedere Park - located next to the Belvedere City Hall on Community Road in Blevedere. Use of park is on a first-come, first-served basis. Basketball standard. Children's play structures in an enclosed area. Benches. No picnic tables. Gazebo. Grass field area adjacent. However, if you wish to have anything else such as a bounce machine or pony rides, please contact Art Gibney, Belvedere Public Works, at 435-3838 to discuss this type of activity. 3a. Rooms at the Belvedere Community Center are also available.for functions. Call Jt. Recreation (435-4355) for more information. 4. Paradise Park - Paradise Drive - Rolling green fields along the hillside. This is a County Park, which is open to all groups, generally on a first come-first served basis. Public bathrooms and telephone. 46 + picnic benches, most with adjacent barbeque grills. Pier for fishing. Small beach and fresh-water shower at shoreline for removing sand and salt water. Two parking areas and paved paths leading down into the park. If you want to reserve.a specific area, you must call the Marin County Open Space District to discuss details for reservation. Park fees are: weekdays - $5.00 per car; weekends - $7.00 per car; Walkers, . Bicyclists and Boaters - $2.00 per person. No motorized launches allowed to come ashore. (If you will be a frequent user of any of the County Parks, you can . buy a Year Pass for $50 which entitles you to entry to any of their other park facilities including 2 boat launching ramps.) Call 499-6387. w .~ ( '"" ~ D/.Jl . . . 5. Shoreline Park - Strip of grass running along the Tiburon shoreline between the corner of Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive and the corner of Paradise Drive and Mar West Street. This is a public park. No barbeques. No bottles. Dogs must be on leash. $5.00 parking lot across the street at pt. Tiburon Plaza. 6. The Cypress Garden Park ("pocket park") is located at the corner of Tiburon Boulevard and San Rafael Avenue just off the bike path under the cypress trees. There is a tiny landscaped area with a bench and a beautiful view of Richardson Bay and Sausalito. Excellent for a small ceremony with no more than about 8 people. No parking. 7. Zelinsky Park (behind the Library and Town Hall) is the newest addition to the Town's parks system. It is named after the family who donated the land for the Library and Town Hall. The park contains a paved path and several benches, along with a grassy area, and is appropriate for passive use by individuals or small groups. Large groups (of 50 -100 people) can contact the Town for rental information subject to the Town's Special Event Permit application process. Contact 435-7377 for more information. 8. Angel Island State Park - reached from Tiburon by the Angel Island Ferry (435- 2131) or from San Francisco (546-2815). This is a wonderful natural and historical resource with structures dating back to Civil War days. It has unparalleled views of the San Francisco Bay. There are beaches, picnic facilities, hiking trails and roads for bicycling. Historical structures have been restored by the Angel Island Association. Docents at the facilities give the history. Call 435-1915 for Park Information. Additional "nature-related" information: A. Richardson Bay Audubon Center, bird sanctuary offering education and advocacy. Located on grounds of Lyford House at 376 Greenwood Beach Rd., in Tiburon. For information on classes and activities, call 388-2524. The historic Lyford House is also used for special events, such as weddings. B. Tiburon Romberg Center - Marine and estuarine research center and educational facility. Conference center available for environmentally-related organizations. Call 338-6063 for Marine Center info and 338-3543 for information on conference center. C. Ring Mountain Preserve Nature Conservancy - offers pamphlets for self-guided hikes of the Ring Mountain Preserve where plant species native only to Ring Mountain can be found as well as prehistoric petroglyphs. Call 435-6465 for information. D. St. Hilary's Open Space Preserve. Open space area with fire road and trails. Maintained by County of Marin Open Space District. No fires or vehicle access. Also features historic Old St. Hilary's Church. Contact the Landmarks Society (435-1853) to rent church or for information on other Landmarks' properties. E. Town Hall has free copies of the Tiburon Ridge Trail Map. Call 435-7373 or come in to Town Hall at 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. . S:/Parklist2.JP.doc - January 2003 . . . . . .. EXHIBIT ~ro,~ Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Mayor and Members of the Town Council FROM: Scott Anderson, Community Development Director ~ . Kevin Bryant, Advance Planner SUBJECT: Revenue Enhancement Studies: Annexation DATE: March 14, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BACKGROUND As part of an effort to identify potential revenue enhancements for the Town, the Town Council has asked to look at the potential annexation of four areas which are contiguous to the Town of Tiburon. Those areas are Unincorporated Paradise Drive, the Alto area (north of Tiburon Boulevard between Highway 101 and Tiburon), Greenwood Cove Drive, and the Boardwalk Shopping Center (Belvedere portion). PROCESS The decision to annex property would be a lengthy process. In addition, there are many intermediate steps to be taken, after each of which the pursuit of annexation might no longer be desirable or feasible. Below is a brief description of the recommended process for the consideration of annexation as a revenue enhancement tool. 1. Consultation with LAFCO As the agency with the authority to approve or disapprove any application for annexation or other boundary change, the first step would be to consult with LAFCO staff to discuss the likelihood of LAFCO support for annexation and, if support can be obtained, to help define appropriate boundaries for the annexation request. Representatives from Marin County would need to be included in this consultation as well. 2. Cost/Revenue Analysis After initial consultation with LAFCO has further clarified appropriate boundaries, the Town would need to conduct a comprehensive cost-revenue analysis. The analysis would need to weigh the additional revenues which would flow to the Town as a result of annexatior), including additional property and sales tax revenue, against the additional costs which would be borne by the Town, including providing Town services, including police and public works, to the new areas. 3. Resident/Property Owner Interest For areas in which the cost/revenue analysis demonstrated a fiscal benefit for the Town, the resident and property owner interest would need to be determined. It would not be in the Town's interest to aggressively pursue annexation in areas where there was inadequate resident and property owner support. 4. Formal Application to LAFCO The final step would be to submit a formal application to LAFCO for new jurisdiction boundaries. LAFCO will require that the Town submit a "Plan for Services" that demonstrates the Town's ability to feasibly extend services to the areas proposed for annexation. Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . This process would likely take 1 - 2 years to complete, with costs running into the tens of thousands of dollars in consultant services for the cost/revenue analysis and environmental review, and application to LAFCO. POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREAS Below is a map which shows the three unincorporated areas which are under potential consideration. Included in the map is information intended to provide some of the facts about the places, with respect to size, population, and value 1. .) ,,,I 1/,,--1 ,~ I 11 I _,'" ~IALTO/EAGLE ROCK/BAY VISTA Acres: 151 Residential Units: 280 Population (2000): 733 Property Valuation (2002): $90,397,943 Approx. Potential Tax Revnue: $81,400 i Z~, r-PARADISE-oRiVE----------------- I Acres: 723 Residential Units: 410 I Population (2000): 879 J i Property Valuation (2002): $286,961,059 . ~prox. Potential Tax Revenue: $258.300 I[ / I / I ! \ / I ! I[ / I / ! , . Paradise Drive The Paradise Drive area is by far the largest under consideration. It is also the most logical and will almost certainly be kept in the Town's sphere of influence by LAFCO. The area is isolated from other unincorporated areas and is interspersed with properties which are in the Town of . Tiburon. 1 Potential property tax revenue is based on the revenue generated in three recent annexations. March 14,2003 Page 2 of 6 . . . Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . .. . " . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . " . .. . . .. . .. .. .. .. " .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. The largest financial liability of this area is the maintenance of Paradise Drive. Public infrastructure in this area is generally substandard, including Paradise Drive, water pressure, sewer capacity, and drainage systems. A study prepared in 1996 for the Town of Tiburon by International Planning Associates (the "Hochstrasser Report") concluded that the cost to the Town of Tiburon of annexation of the entire Paradise Drive area would be in the millions of dollars over the next 20 years. The study is dated and will need to be redone, but it is expected that the conclusion that revenues generated by annexation would not off-set costs of providing Town services to the area, . especially the maintenance of Paradise Drive, would remain unchanged. Historically, Staff believes that most residents of the Paradise Drive area have opposed annexation to the Town of Tiburon, although such opposition seems to have diminished somewhat over the decades. The entire area already has Tiburon postal addresses. Alto/Eagle Rock/Bay Vista This area has a mix of commercial properties (approximately nine total), which front Tiburon Boulevard and the Redwood Highway Frontage Road; multi-family and single-family residential uses; and two large undeveloped sites zoned for fairly low residential density. The potential benefits of annexation of this area would be to add commercial properties which would increase sales tax revenue for the Town. However, access and visibility improvements would probably need to be made for these properties to reach their full commercial potential. Residents on Bay Vista Court, immediately west of Bay Vista Drive, requested that the Town consider annexing their seven (7) residential properties. The request came at the same time that the Town was considering the Cypress Hollow/Rancho Drive annexation. Due to the substandard conditions of the public improvements on Bay Vista Court, the Town Council was unwilling to consider annexation unless the public facilities were upgraded to meet current Town standards. Substantial portions of the Alto/Eagle Rock/Bay Vista area have similar public infrastructure deficiencies. Staff is unaware of resident/property owner sentiment in this area, as little contact has been made over the years. In 1987, an attempt to annex this area (including the then-undeveloped Deffebach/Cypress Hollow property) as far west as North Knoll Road failed due to lack of property owner support. This area currently has Mill Valley postal addresses. Greenwood Cove The Greenwood Cove area is primarily multi-family residential, with a gas station and church/nursery school located along Tiburon Boulevard. These properties, which are very high density residential, have a high property tax valuation over a relatively small area. The only public street in the area is Greenwood Cove Drive. For these reasons, this area may be more March 14,2003 Page 3 of 6 Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. likely to represent a potential revenue enhancement for the Town, as well as resulting in more logical boundaries. Resident and property owner interest in annexation to Tiburon is not known. The area already has Tiburon postal addresses, and based on phone calls in past years, some residents of the area believe they are already in the Town of Tiburon. Boardwalk Shopping Center Annexation of the Belvedere portion of the Boardwalk Shopping Center would consist of an "adjustment" of the municipal boundaries of the Town of Tiburon and the City of Belvedere, which currently split the shopping center parcel through buildings. The process through LAFCO would involve "detachment" of the portion of the site from the City of Belvedere and annexation to the Town of Tiburon. It is not known whether the City of Belvedere would consider such a proposal, as most cities are reluctant to shrink their boundaries and/or relinquish land use control over property to another municipality. At a minimum, this process would need to be revenue-neutral, as Belvedere would be unlikely to cede their tax revenues to Tiburon. However, acorrection of the border to include the entire Boardwalk Shopping Center within Tiburon would allow the center to benefit from any economic development program that the Town may establish for Downtown and allow for a more clear development review process should the Center ever seek expansion or major change. . POTENTIAL REVENUE ENHANCEMENT Paradise Drive Property tax revenue from annexation of the 723-acre area would generate about $260,000 in annual property tax revenue should the annexation occur today. Smaller revenues would be secured through gas tax monies, state subventions, per capita allocations, and miscellaneous sources such as real estate transfer taxes. Property tax reassessments from sales, new construction, and remodels of homes would probably increase the property tax revenue slowly over time. Assuming the structure of taxes statewide remains the same, Staff sees the "revenue enhancement potential" of annexation of the Paradise Drive area to be small, and quite possibly negative, without substantial ongoing maintenance and repair costs for Paradise Drive being absorbed by the County of Marin. Annexation would add about 410 housing units and roughly 879 people to the Town's 3,900 dwelling units and population of 8,800. These increases translate into 10.5% for housing units and 10% for population. . March 14, 2003 Page 4 of 6 .' . . Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alto/Eagle Rock/Bay Vista Property tax revenue from annexation of the 151-acre area would generate about $82,000 in annual property tax revenue should the annexation occur today. Smaller revenues would be secured through gas tax monies, state subventions, per capita allocations, and miscellaneous sources such as real estate transfer taxes. Property tax reassessments from sales, new construction, and remodels of homes would probably increase the property tax revenue slowly over time. Sales tax revenue from the commercial properties in the area could increase over time, although there are serious obstacles to overcome, including a very limited number of commercial parcels, poor vehicular access to the area, and potential land use conflicts with surrounding residential uses. Assuming the structure of taxes statewide remains the same, Staff sees the "revenue enhancement potential" of annexation of the Alto/Eagle Rock/Bay Vista area to be small, and quite possibly negative, depending on projected costs of infrastructure maintenance, repair and replacement and the costs of providing police services to the area. Annexation would add about 280 housing units and roughly 733 people to the Town's 3,900 dwelling units and population of 8,800. These increases translate into 7% for housing units and 8% for population. Greenwood Cove Property tax revenue from annexation of the 25-acre area would generate about $67,000 in annual property tax revenue should the annexation occur today. Smaller revenues would be secured through gas tax monies, state subventions, per capita allocations, and miscellaneous sources such as real estate transfer taxes. Property tax reassessments from sales, new construction, and remodels of homes would probably increase the property tax revenue slowly over time. The service station is the only commercially-zoned parcel in the area and the only known sales tax generator. Public infrastructure costs would likely be relatively small. Assuming the structure of taxes statewide remains essentially unchanged, Staff sees the "revenue enhancement potential" of annexation of the Greenwood Cove area to be small, as would be the new costs to the Town small. Annexation would add about 333 housing units and roughly 500 people to the Town's 3,900 dwelling units and population of 8,800. These increases translate into 8.5% for housing units and 5.5% for population. Boardwalk Shopping Center While boundary adjustments at the Boardwalk Shopping Center would probably be revenue- neutral, future expansion, redevelopment, or changes in use at the Center could potentially March 14,2003 Page 5 of 6 Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . generate substantially more revenue than is currently generated. It would be purely speculative for Staff to attempt any quantification of potential revenue enhancement at this time. RECOMMENDATION This memo is meant as a brief introduction to the annexation process and the areas which may be beneficial to .the long-term fiscal health of the Town. The Town Council should consider whether it desires to take the next step forward with any of the above annexation areas, and direct Staff accordingly. Due to the complexities of estimating both future revenues and future costs associated with annexation or boundary adjustment of these areas, Staff would recommend that a consulting firm with experience in such analyses be retained. Depending on the extent of the annexation area(s) involved, costs for the consultant would vary widely. \scott\Annexation2.doc . . March 14,2003 Page 6 of 6 ::- EXHIBIT NO, ~ Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: ALEX D. MCINTYRE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: MATTHEW C. ODETTO, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATION OF POLICE SERVICES DATE: March 14, 2003 . . . .. ............................................. During the Town Council/Staff retreat in January, there was a brief discussion on the idea of contract services with the police department. On the peninsula, there are three separate agencies providing similar law enforcement functions to the approximately twelve thousand residents in the incorporated and unincorporated areas of this community. Those agencies are the Tiburon Police Dept., Belvedere Police Dept. and the Marin County Sheriff's Office. Often times we are called upon to assist one another in providing back up on calls, conducting investigations, traffic accidents and various other law enforcement functions. Analysis . Although there are separate and distinct political boundaries, the agencies often duplicate services provided to the community. This is an inefficient use of tax payer's money. There are instances where our allied law enforcement agencies are hampered by inadequate staffing, budget short falls or investigative matters which exhaust those particular agencies' resources. It is feasible that the Tiburon Police Dept. could generate some funds and gain certain efficiencies by providing law enforcement services to the areas outside of our jurisdictional boundaries without increasing our existing staffing levels. . EXHIBITNO.~ Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . .... .... ......... .... ... ........... .... ... ... TO: ALEX D. MCINTYRE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: MATTHEW C. ODETTO, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: INCREASE PARKING FINES DATE: March 14,2003 . . . ". ."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" During the Town Council/Staff retreat in January, there was brief discussion of the parking fine fees charged by the Town. A question was raised as to whether the Town's parking fee / bail schedule was consistent to those charged by other municipalities in Marin County. Analysis The Police Department staff conducted a survey of the parking fees charged by local and other municipalities. The survey indicated that the Town's parking fees are approximately five to eight percent behind that of other local agencies. It is estimated that an eight percent increase in the parking fine fee schedule would generate an additional $5600 dollars in revenue annually. The Town Council would be required to adopt a(new parking fine fee schedule by resolution. The resolution and subsequent new parking fee schedule would be forwarded to the Marin County Superior Court Traffic Division. Exhibit Proposed bail schedule for parking citations. Violation Tiburon Mill Vallev Fairfax Twin Cities Belvedere San Rafael San Francisco Sausalito Petaluma Imorooer Parkino $20.00 N/A N/A $20.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Imoroo. Parked in marked space $20.00 $20.00 N/A $20.00 N/A $20.00 $23.00 $15.00 N/A Red Zone $20.00 $35.00 $25.00 $20.00 $25.00 $50.00 $50.00 $25.00 $35.00 Green Zone $20.00 N/A N/A $20.00 $25.00 $20.00 $23.00 $20.00 N/A Failure to curb wheels $50.00 $25.00 $25.00 $25.00 N/A N/,A. $23.00 N/A N/A Abandoned vehicle ; $105.00 N/A $270.00 N/A $270.00 $150.00 $53.00 N/A N/A loadino Zone $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $25.00 $20.00 $50.00 $20.00 $25.00 Overtime Parkino $20.00 $15.00 $15.00 N/A N/A $18.00 $23.00 $15.00 $20.00 Parked at an intersection $20.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $50.00 $27.00 N/A Parked within 15ft. Of fire drivewv $20.00 $20.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A $23.00 N/A N/A Blue Zone $275.00 $275.00 $275.00 $275.00 $275.00 . $275.00 $275.00 $280.00 $275.00 No parkino on crosswalk $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 N/A $27.00 N/A No parkina on sidewalk $20.00 N/A N/A $20.00 N/A $20.00 $50.00 N/A N/A Parked 18" from right curb $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $23.00 $25.00 N/A Parked within 15ft of fire hvdrant $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $20.00 $150.00 $50.00 $35.00 N/A Double Parked $20.00 $20.00 N/A N/A $20.00 $20.00 $50.00 $27.00 N/A Bus Stoo $250.00 $250.00 $250.00 N/A $20.00 $250.00 $250.00 $27.00 N/A Obstructina Traffic $20.00 $50.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Vehicle Abandoned $275.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $53.00 N/A $103.00 Current tab imoroperly attatched $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $76.00 $135.00 $76.00 $25.00 $27.00 $25.00 . TOWN OF TIBURON PRO. BAil SC lE FOR PARKING CITATIONS TOWN MANAGERS OFFICE TQWN OF TI6l.JRllN U fill.... ~ .... B MAR. 2003 v ... I!J' EXHIP-rr j\~O E Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: ALEX D. MCINTYRE, TOWN MANAGER FROM: MATTHEW C. ODETTO, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: SECURITY APPRAISAL FEES DATE: March 14,2003 . . . .. ......................................... During the Town Council/Staff retreat in January, there was a discussion of the Police Department charging for home security / business security appraisals. The Police Department is often called upon by home owners and business owners to appraise residential and business properties to access the following: 1. Effectiveness of the home/ business Alarm System. 2. Effectiveness of the home/ business door and window locks. 3. Effectiveness of the home / business lighting system. 4. To provide recommendations as to the landscaping related to visibility of the home or business. . The police department has not charged for this service in the past as this service was related to the Community Policing Program. However, the requests for this service have increased due to the insurance companies requiring the appraisal as a condition of the homeowners / business insurance policy. ANAL YSIS The time it takes the Police Department personnel to process and appraise each residential and commercial property varies due to the size. The process is as follows: 1. The Police Department receives a request to conduct a security appraisal of the property. 2. The request is forwarded to the Police Lieutenant for assignment. 3. The Officer is assigned to appraise the property and to prepare a written report with recommendations as to any improvements. 4. The Police clerical staff processes the report and provides a copy to the home-owner or business owner. As indicated above, the time to conduct the appraisal varies due to the size of the property. It is estimated that it will take the police department staff more than three hours (cumulative) to process, prepare and provide the home/ business owner with a written security appraisal. . The Town Attorney has advised the Police Department staff that if fees are to be charged, they must be based on the actual cost recovery. The Police Department currently conducts two to three business and home security appraisals annually. It is estimated that the cost of conducting these security appraisals may vary between $300 - $ 400 dollars each depending on the size of the property. Total annual revenue would be in excess of $1,000. . . . IXHIElT l'ro. F Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Revenue Enhancement Studies: Economic Development Program DATE: March 14,2003 BACKGROUND As part of an effort to identify potential revenue enhancements for the Town, the Town Council has requested that Staff further investigate the establishment of an economic development program for the Town of Tiburon. The program would focus on the commercial areas of Tiburon, primarily Downtown and to a lesser extent, the Cove Shopping Center. Benefits from an economic development program are generally increased revenue (sales tax, transient occupancy tax, business license revenues, etc); more successful businesses; more satisfied citizens; and greater commercial vitality. Economic development programs can run the gamut from independent economic development departments with full-time personnel and promotional and advertising campaigns, to informal efforts by existing staff on an as-needed basis. Every municipality is unique in one or more respects, and our initial research indicates that there is no cookie-cutter approach to an economic development program that fits a community of Tiburon's size and characteristics. This report provides the results of a survey on economic development practices by other relatively small municipalities in the San Francisco Bay Area, and offers possible next steps should the Town Council wish to further pursue an .economic development program. ANAL YSIS Summary of Economic Development Proaram Survey Results Planning Division Staff conducted a survey of small cities in the Bay Area in February 2003 to determine the presence and extent of economic development programs in these cities. A total of eighteen (18) cities were surveyed, ranging in population from 2,145 (Belvedere) to 38,754 (Pacifica). Specific survey results are set forth in attached Exhibit A. The major findings from the survey are as follows: Finding #1. Most small Bay Area cities do not have a formal economic development program. There may be several reasons why formal programs do not exist in small cities. In some of the municipalities surveyed, the lack of a program reflects the predominantly residential nature of Tiburon Town Council Staff Report 3/19/2003 MEMORANDUM Town of Tiburon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the community (i.e. a small Downtown) and lack of funding for such a program. In other cases, it may simply be that the Downtown area and/or commercial sector of the community are healthy and no formal economic development program is needed. In other instances, a strong Chamber of Commerce or Merchant's Association may fill this role and obviate the need for a municipally-sponsored economic development program. Finding #2. Cities that are more active in economic development are generally at least twice the size of Tiburon (such as Orinda, Pop. 17,833; and Albany, Pop. 16,756). Of those surveyed, only the larger cities (Pacifica, Pop. 38,754; and Los Altos, Pop. 27,870) have detailed economic development programs; locally, these cities would be most equivalent to San Rafael and Novato. Only Los Altos (population 27,870) employs an Economic Development Coordinator. That person works half-time on economic development issues. For most other cities, the economic development responsibilities, on an informal basis, are the responsibility of the City Manager and/or Community Development Director. Finding #3. The economic development activities of cities with the population of Tiburon are informal and are mostly reactive. Some cities have established working relationships with their Chambers of Commerce, commercial real estate brokers, and major commercial property owners, allowing them to work cooperatively when properties become vacant or available. In some cases, the cities have at least prepared a "wish list" of desirable businesses to attract when vacancies occur, and have tried to address regulatory constraints that act to discourage desired businesses. . Prior Efforts In 1996 the Town Council appointed a Downtown Revitalization Task Force (DRTF) in response to a perceived slump in Downtown economic vitality and the presence of several major vacancies in the Downtown area. The firm of Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. was retained to prepare a retail economic analysis of the Downtown area; that study was completed in March 1998. Copies are available for review upon request. The DRTF presented its final report to a joint meeting of the Belvedere City Council and Tiburon Town Council in September 1998. The findings and recommended strategies of the DRTF are attached as Exhibit B. A major conclusion of the DRTF was that the success of the recommended strategies was totally dependent upon the support and cooperation of the major Downtown property owners. At the time, such support did not appear to be present, and the DRTF was subsequently disbanded without any of its recommendations being implemented. Clearly, Town-initiated economic development issues must be approached very delicately, so as not to create "turf wars" or other misunderstandings that may doom the effort. To this end, any substantial Town-initiated economic development program should have a mutually agreed-upon set of goals and strategies with the property owners and business community. . March 14, 2003 Page 2 of 9 . Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Opportunities and Constraints Staff has identified the following opportunities and constraints for an economic development program in Tiburon: Opportunities Constraints Relatively few major property owners Inherent appeal of Downtown (views, etc., etc) Ferry access History of Town & Chamber cooperation Some sites available in near future Low spending in trade area (increase) Waterfront location Small Downtown area/limited population Limited sites for new construction Public fear of congestion/parking problems Limited potential to increase "service area" Initial capital outlay required; staffing costs Geography (end of Peninsula location) Could result in unintended negative impacts Restrictive regulatory framework OPTIONS . A wide range of options exists for components of an economic development program. Relationship with Property Owners & Merchants The Town is blessed with established relationships with the Chamber of Commerce and many of the major commercial property owners and business proprietors. Efforts could be made to focus attention on business retention and recruitment, to be ready for action when vacancies occur, leases near expiration, or other opportunities arise. The Town could also establish a relationship with local commercial real estate brokers to be prepared to attract new businesses on such occasions. Changes to the Regulatory Framework The Town currently has a regulatory framework that is not particularly quick or friendly to major tenant changes or to new development in its commercial areas. The Town is in the process of reviewing whether modifications should be made to the general plan and zoning regulations for commercial areas in Tiburon. The current 0.17 floor area ratio for downtown is being examined and Staff is recommending some increases, as the current inability to construct any new building floor area of significance in the Town's limited commercial area may discourage new businesses and property investment. Subsequent to the general plan update, the Town may also wish to review the list of conditionally permitted uses in the commercial zones to place more emphasis on highly desirable types of businesses. . The Town could attempt to identify desired types of businesses (and discouraged types of businesses) in Downtown and the Cove Shopping Center. This identification would help focus efforts on quickly attracting new businesses when vacancies occur, and should be cooperatively March 14, 2003 Page 3 of 9 Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM communicated to the appropriate property owners ahead of time. For instance, the draft Downtown Element of the General Plan is encouraging a drug store and another hotel or bed & breakfast use. Promotional Efforts The Town could begin its own efforts to promote Tiburon as a location for businesses or visitation. This could involve inexpensive efforts such as listing the Town with outside firms that identify business opportunities, and adding business promotion information to the Town's website. More extensive efforts could include conducting a more formalized business promotion campaign to increase awareness of existing businesses and potential commercial opportunities; such promotional activities are more generally used by larger cities, however, and may provide little return for their cost for a smaller town such as Tiburon. Staffing One Staff position could be created (or designated) to be responsible for economic development efforts, to provide continuity and a single contact for businesses and property owners. It would be desirable to have one half-time position devoted to economic development if a serious effort is to be undertaken. Although there may not be sufficient new businesses recruitment activity to justify a new position at this time, this person could also be involved in marketing efforts to help keep or enhance the businesses currently in Tiburon. Further, such an appointment would send a message to the business community that the Town is committed to preserving and enhancing the commercial environment in Tiburon. . Updated Analysis of the Commercial Sector The Town may wish to consider an update/expansion of the 1998 Keyser Marston report, possibly in conjunction with property owners and merchants. This study could provide a factual and informational basis for future decisions regarding an economic development program. PROGNOSIS The financial benefits from a formalized economic development program are speculative. If such a program is a success, the benefits could be substantial and long-term. Benefits could include additional sales tax, transient occupancy tax, increased business license taxes, or other revenues. A healthier and more vibrant commercial sector could also be a result. Any such benefits would likely be realized over a medium to long term, as opposed to the immediate future. Any initial or ongoing capital outlay could, with success, be recouped (and more) over time. In addition to revenue enhancement, there may be other worthy reasons to establish an economic development program in Tiburon. Downtown could become more of a destination for local residents than is currently the case, and could help foster an enhanced "sense of community". On the other hand, if the program is not a success, expenditures in support of it would not be recouped. . March 14, 2003 Page 4 of 9 Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Highly successful economic development programs can sometimes result in undesirable side effects, such as traffic and parking congestion, or a sense of displacement or inconvenience for local citizens. Careful monitoring of potentially undesirable impacts would need to be an ongoing part of any program established in Tiburon. EXHIBITS A. Economic Development Program Survey Results B. Downtown Revitalization Task Force findings, September 1998. . . March 14,2003 Page 5 of 9 Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXHIBIT A Economic Development Program Survey A survey of small cities in the Bay Area was conducted by Planning Division Staff in February 2003 to determine the presence and extent of economic development programs in these cities. A total of 18 cities were surveyed, ranging in population from 2,145 (Belvedere) to 38,754 (Pacifica). The responses to the survey, along with the Staff member responding for each city, are listed below. Albanv (Pop. 16,756; Beth Pollard, City Administrator) According to the City's website, "the City Administrator's office directly manages the City's economic development program." The first "City Council Goal" listed on the website is "Enhance Economic Development in a Manner Which Emphasizes Sustainable Urban Development and Positively Impacts the Physical Environment." Each year, progress on this goal is reviewed and updated by the City Council. In recent years, the City has undertaken extensive infrastructure and streetscape improvement programs in commercial area; marketed redevelopment project areas to developers; working with the University of California to create commercial development; conducted an Economic, Land Use, and Market Analysis of San Pablo Avenue; developed and implemented a "Business to Business" database and marketing campaign; and amended its general plan to reflect more appropriate land use designations and policies to encourage businesses. . Belvedere (Pop. 2,145; Becky Eastman, Assistant Finance Director) No economic development program. Calistoqa (Pop. 5,229; Angela Smith, Administrative Secretary) No economic development program. Corte Madera (Pop. 9,425) No economic development program. Half Moon Bav (Pop. 12,169; Siobhan Giusti, Deputy City Clerk) No economic development program. Larkspur (Pop. 12,078; Ernie Hutchings, Finance Director) No economic development program. . March 14, 2003 Page 6 of 9 . . . Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Los Altos (Pop. 27,870; Abby Veeser, Economic Development Coordinator) The City has an Economic Development Division of the Community Development Department. Staffing consists of an Economic Development Coordinator, in a position that is half-time (other half is as a Management Analyst). The Economic Development Coordinator works with the Los Altos Village Association and the Chamber of Commerce on issues related to Downtown, attends Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee meetings and works with the committee to promote the economic climate within the City. The Coordinator also assists with the review of development applications and prepares reports evaluating potential financial impacts to the City as a result of those developments. Los Altos has seven business areas consisting primarily of retail and office uses. The City maintains an inventory of available commercial space in all seven business areas. The City's Available Properties Coordinator updates the inventory on a quarterly basis with the help of commercial brokers and property owners in the area. The Los Altos General Plan includes an Economic Development Element, but there is no separate master plan for economic development. The current program has gone through several permutations over the years, previously focusing on recruitment of businesses. As the economy has changed, so has the program to its current state. They recommend that any city adopt a vision statement for economic development, but make it flexible to adapt to changing conditions. Los Altos Hills, (Pop. 8,007; Carl Cahill, Planning Director) No economic development program. The town is nearly 100% residential, and there have been no opportunities or interest in establishing such a program. (The Town is thinking of adopting a View Ordinance based on the Tiburon ordinance, however). Mill Valley (Pop. 13,704; Rory Walsh, Planning Director) No economic development program. Orinda (Pop. 17,833; Melanie Hobden, Community Development Director) No economic development program. The City has a Downtown Vision Plan, and has mostly local-serving businesses. The City Manager and Community Development Director work together on a case-by-case basis when properties become available. They keep in touch with commercial real estate brokers regarding potential business opportunities, and stay active with the Chamber of Commerce and local property owners to stay abreast of the current situations. March 14, 2003 Page 7 of 9 Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM Pacifica (Pop. 38,754; Michael Crabtree, Planning Director) The City's economic development program is handled by the Planning and Economic Development Department. There is no separate staffing; the City Administrator and the Planning Director combine their efforts on the program. Although the previous Community Development Director put together a 26-page program document that was blessed by the City Council, the City currently has no formal plan for the program, but has a general policy of attempting to be supportive of new business activity. The range of activities for the program are limited; in most cases, the City works with the Chamber of Commerce and local property owners whenever a "hot site" becomes available. A Council-appointed Economic Development Committee is currently on hiatus. The advice given to Tiburon is that an economic development program needs a separate staff person (minimum Y:z time) dedicated to the program to make it work; the program cannot just be assigned to an existing staff member. Piedmont (Pop. 11,138; Kate Black, City Planner) No economic development program. There are only 11 commercial buildings in town, several with long-tem leases. The City currently requires a conditional use permit for all businesses, . which the City Planner feels may be an impediment to attracting business. Portola Vallev (Pop. 4,507; Leslie Lambert, Planning Department) No economic development program. The town is almost wholly residential, with only a small retail commercial area. Ross (Pop. 2,353; Gary Broad, Town Administrator/Planning Director) No economic development program. St. Helena (Pop. 6,019; Pat Lambert, Administrative Assistant) No economic development program. The Chamber of Commerce does some work for business outreach, but not the City. San Anselmo (Pop. 12,409; Debra Stutsman, Town Administrator) No economic development program. The Town Administrator and Planning Director have had a few meetings with the Chamber of Commerce on ways to attract business, but there has been no concerted effort thus far. Sausalito (Pop. 7,380; Drummond Buckley, Planning Director) No economic development program. The City is currently conducting a visioning process; the . process started out as an economic development program, asking what type of commercial March 14,2003 Page 8 of 9 . . . Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM uses people want in Sausalito. The process has since expanded into a community-wide approach. Woodside (Pop. 5,388) No economic development program. March 14,2003 Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT NO B -.. ~ -' "-".-- ~ DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION TASK FORCE GOAL: To create a viable downtown community which serves resident's needs by: . 1. Assessing community needs, desirable uses, merchant and resident perceptions; 2. IdentifYing problems and possible solutions. July 18.1996 Our research consisted of: 1. interviews with merchants and the three major retail landlords; 2. anecdotal conversations with citizens; 3. the Keyser-Marston Associates, Inc. retail economic analysis; 4. supplemental studies (i.e., Ark survey, study of nationwide shopping properties of all sizes); 5. the shared professional experience oftaSk force members inthe fields of developing, retailing, marketing and communications. FINDINGS: . · Finding # 1 Belvedere and Tiburon residents spend only 35% of their retail dollarS in the trade area, whereas the standard for Bay Area communities is between 45% and 65%. · Finding #2 The trade area lacks stores considered essential in a healthy retail mix. These include general merchandise, specialty retail, home furnishings & appliances, and drugstores. Existing square footage devoted to these categories is far below normal. (Keyser Marston, table 14) · Finding #3 Existing stores in the trade area significantly underperform industry averages with the exception of "eating and drinking",which appear to do well. A typical Bay Area retail outlet should average sales of $250-$300 per square foot but those in the Belvedere-Tiburon trade area average $170 per square foot. (Keyser Marston, table 11 a). · Finding #4 Retail stores are arranged in distinct groupings so as to be non-contiguous to each other which is not conducive to retail traffic. . . . . . Finding #5 The absence of a merchandising plan has led to an oversupply of some categories of merchandise while at the same time pennitting an under-representation in other important categories. RECOMMENDATION: To seriously address all of the following issues: · Strategy # 1 With the support of key landlords, the City of Belvedere, Town of Tiburon and the Chamber of Commerce, create a comprehensive merchandising plan for downtown and market to lure under-represented categories of merchants. Encourage property owners to engage specialized retail brokers to achieve the merchandising plan. . Strategy #2 Consider the introduction of a centralized retail management plan and if necessary create an improvement district. Include such matters as common promotion and advertising, common hours of operation, parking, landscaping, signage, lighting, etc. · Strategy #3 Seek urban design professionals to. assist in making the downtown a more cohesive and integrated retail environment. EXHIBIT Nn B-_ Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Alex Mcintyre, Town Manager FROM: Pat Echols, Director of Public WorkslTown Engineer SUBJECT: Potential Revenue Enhancement Relating to Drainage and Stormwater Runoff DATE: March 14, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BACKGROUND At the recent Council-Staff retreat, many revenue enhancement ideas were discussed. Based on feedback from the Councilmembers, the Department of Public Works was directed to further explore two potential concepts, a drainage impact fee and a stormwater pollution prevention program fee. Each is discussed in detail below. DISCUSSION & ANALYSIS .1. Drainage Impact Fee The concept of a drainage impact fee is similar to the Town's existing street impact fee. The intent is to capture revenue which offsets the cumulative impact of new impervious surfaces created by building construction projects throughout the Town of Tiburon. Town maintained streets and storm drain facilities have been impacted by the effects of cumulative runoff increases over the years, requiring storm drain upgrades/improvements and street re-contouring to convey/control the increased flows. The Centro West-Racoon Lane storm drain improvement project (which cost the Town over $100,000) is a recent example. Current deficiencies include Spanish Trail near Vistazo West, where increased runoff cannot be contained by existing facilities during heavy rains. . Since the Town has no dedicated drainage-related revenue source, the Town has typically used General Fund revenues to pay for these storm drain improvements. With the establishment of a drainage impact fee, the cost for storm drain facility upgrades could be shifted away from General Fund revenues. Staff has consulted town, cities, and counties throughout California to ascertain if other agencies have implemented such a fee. To date, staff has learned that several agencies, including Contra Costa County and the City of Watsonville, have adopted drainage impact fees. The fee amount is based on the area (in square feet) of new impervious surface created by new construction and ranges between $0.35 (Watsonville) and $0.98 (Contra Costa County) per square foot. Using this range of fee rates and assuming that approximately 100,000 square feet of impervious surfaces are created by construction activities in a year, the Town could expect annual revenues ranging between $35,000 and $98,000. Over time these revenues would slowly decrease as available area for new construction dwindles. j Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Staff believes that since this is an impact fee, it would not be subject to voter approval pursuant to Proposition 218. It would likely need to follow the procedures and criteria outlined in Government Code 9 66000 et seq. The Town would have to set forth the reasonable relationship between the fee, the development subject to the fee and the need for drainage improvements. The fee would take effect 60 days after adoption by the Council. If the Council elects to move forward with adoption of a fee, staff would prepare a more detailed derivation of the fee assessment amount and prepare a fee ordinance for Town Council consideration. 2. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Fee As required by the Clean Water Act, and the State Water Resources Control Board, Town was required to develop a stormwater pollution prevention program. The Town complied with these requirements by joining the Marin County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (MCSTOPPP) and adopting an Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention ordinance in 1994. MCSTOPPP is jointly funded through a countywide Joint Powers Authority (JPA) and the Town's share of that cost is approximately $25,000 per year. This cost is expected to rise by 10 to 20 percent in the next year or so. Under authority of the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its Regional Boards have been delegated the authority to issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permits and waste discharge requirements for municipal stormwater discharges. The County of Marin, all Marin municipalities, and the Marin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (District) are also now required by the EPA and the SWRCB to apply for coverage under a Phase 2 General Permit. The county, all Marin municipalities, and the District have applied as co-permittees through MCSTOPPP. The Town was required to pay $1,000 this year for coverage under the General Permit. Staff has been advised by the Regional Board that this fee is likely to triple or quadruple next year. At the time MCSTOPPP was formed, some Marin municipalities (such as Mill Valley) elected to adopt a fee to cover the cost of participating in MCSTOPPP and implementing their local stormwater program. A copy of Mill Valley's fee ordinance is attached for reference. The Town of Tiburon did not adopt a fee at that time. Since that time, California voter approved Proposition 218 which requires a 2/3 majority voter approval in order to enact such a fee. . Using the Mill Valley fee ordinance as an example, staff has estimated potential revenues of over $110,000 annually. There will be a series of steps necessary for the Town to pursue implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program fee, including development of a detailed staff report and a ballot measure. . . March 14, 2003 Page 2 of 3 . . . lii'YTJ"r'p.,.:'\.' , II b.."L..~1-,'1! 1\0, rt TOWN OF TIBURON MEMORANDUM TO: Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager FROM: Heidi McVeigh, Director of Administrative Services ~ SUBJECT: Revenue Enhancements - Increase Business License Tax DATE: March 10,2003 BACKGROUND The Town charges all businesses located within the Town, or coming into the Town to conduct business, an annual business license tax. The primary purpose of imposing a business license tax is to raise revenue and is not intended for regulation. Business license taxes are a general fund revenue and used for the purpose of funding overall Town operations. The function of business license administration is performed by the Administrative Services Department staff. The Town last revised its business license fee structure in 1988. The Town has two business license categories in the revenue section of the budget. They are business licenses related to construction and regular business. licenses. The difference is that contractors pay on a per job basis and all others pay based on an annual renewal schedule. This fiscal year the Town budgeted $58,000 from the construction category and $175,000 from the regular annual renewal process, for a total of $233,000 Contractor's business license fees are based on the value of the project and fees range from the minimum of $15 to a maximum of .0012 of the project value. Regular business license renewal fees are based on three categories: gross receipts for any business located within the Town; delivery vehicles for all businesses coming into the Town to conduct business; and living accommodations for rental of residential property. Those businesses falling into the gross receipt category pay a minimum license fee of $15 up to a maximum of .0012 of gross receipts. Businesses in the delivery vehicle category pay a minimum license tax of $22.50 up to a maximum of $200, based on the weight of the vehicle used to conduct business in the Town. Living accommodations pay an annual business license tax of $20 for each rental unit. In addition to the annual renewal tax, each licensee pays an annual administration fee of $10 per license. The Town issues approximately 600 renewal licenses each year. ANAL YSIS Any change to the Town's business license tax structure would require a majority vote of the citizenry. Each percentage increase to the Town's business license rate would generate $2,230 annually. An across-the-board ten percent increase would translate into a $1.50 per year increase for the lowest rate up to $600 for the highest rate, and $22,300 in general fund revenues. . Staff has reviewed the business license tax structure of other local jurisdictions. The cities of Sausalito, Mill Valley and the County of Marin have an almost identical rate structure to the Town's. . There is a major inequity and structural flaw with the Town's current business license rate structure associated with the first level fees. Another inequity also exists in the administrative fee charged each licensee. The $10.00 administrative fee was established in 1988 and has not been increased. It is estimated that 300 hours of staff time are spent each year administering the business license program. The Office Assistant II, Account Clerk and Director of Administrative Services are all involved with the business license administration program. Based on the recently adopted cost recovery rates, the average hourly rate for the three positions is $49.95. This translates into an annual . administration cost of $14,985 or $24.98 per licensee. Other costs associated with the business license program are forms, computer software and hardware maintenance and licensing, and postage. Staff estimates these costs to be . $6,424 annually, or $10.71 per licensee. Therefore, the annual administrative cost for the business license program is approximately $35.96 per licensee per year. For comparison purposes, the City of Sausalito charges in addition to the annual tax a $100 per year registration fee. Any change to the current business license tax rates would require voter approval. It is uncertain at this time whether the administrative fee can be increased simply by resolution of the Town Councilor would be subject to the election process. The Town Attorney is researching the matter and can advise Staff in the next few days. If, at the least, the minimum business license tax was increased to $50 per year and the administrative fee to $35, Staff estimates an additional $30,000 would be generated each year. . EXHIBIT ~ro. % Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL FROM: ANN R. DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY SUBJECT: REVENUE ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES TRANSIT OCCUPANCY TAX AND REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX DATE: March 14, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BACKGROUND During the Council/Staff retreat, the Council indicated that it wished to explore a series of measures to enhance the Town's revenue. These measures included raising the Town's Transfer Occupancy Tax and Real Estate Transfer Tax. This memorandum addresses those two possibilities. ANALYSIS . The Town currently imposes a transient occupancy tax of ten percent. This is the same amount imposed by Marin County and the Cities of Sausalito, Larkspur, San Rafael, Mill Valley and Corte Madera. The City of Fairfax charges four percent. San Francisco charges 14 percent. Novato charges eight percent. State law does not limit the amount of transient occupancy tax that may be imposed. Therefore, the Town could increase its tax by resolution or ordinance. For each percentage that the Town raised the tax, it could expect to receive approximately $40,000 in new revenue. State law does limit the amount of real estate transfer tax that cities and counties may impose. Cities may impose a maximum of fifty-five cents for each thousand dollars (or fraction thereof) of the consideration or value of the property conveyed. The Town already imposes the maximum tax, therefore cannot increase it. If the Council wishes to pursue increasing the transient occupancy tax, it must follow the procedural steps mandated by Propositions 62 and 218. The exact process depends on whether the tax is a general tax or a specific tax. A general tax is a tax imposes for general government purposes. A special tax is one imposed for a specific purpose, even if the proceeds are placed in the general fund. At present, the transient occupancy tax is a general tax. The steps to impose or increase a general tax are as follows: . 1. The Town must schedule both a public meeting and a public hearing on the proposed new or increased tax. The public hearing must occur no sooner than seven days after the public meeting. Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. At least 45 days before the public hearing, the Town must provide public notice of both the public meeting and the public hearing. The notice must provide detailed information regarding the proposal. 3. The Town must hold at least one public meeting at which local officials shall allow public testimony regarding the proposed new or increased general tax. 4. The Council must hold a public hearing regarding the proposed new or increased general tax. To enact the tax, the Council must pass a resolution or ordinance specifying the type of tax, the rate of tax and the method of collection. The measure could include a range of rates or amounts that the Council could impose. The Council must pass the measure by two-thirds vote. 5. The measure would then require approval by a majority of Town voters, at the next regularly-scheduled general Council election (November of 2003). If the Council wishes to increase the tax to fund a particular purpose, it could do so by imposing a special tax. The steps to impose a special tax are as follows: 1. The Council holds a notice public hearing to consider whether to propose or increase the . special tax. 2. At this hearing, the Council passes an ordinance or resolution setting the new tax or increased tax before the voters. The ordinance or resolution must include the type of tax and rate of tax to be levied, the method of collection, and the date upon which an election shall be held to approve the levy of the tax. Only majority approval is required. 3. The voters must approve the measures by two-thirds vote. CONCLUSION The Council should consider whether it wishes to initiative the process to increase the transient occupancy tax. If the answer to that question is affirmative, the Council should consider whether it wishes to raise the additional revenue for general governmental purposes or for a specific purpose. Lastly, the Council should determine how large an increase it wishes to ask the voters to improve. Staff recommends that, if the Council decides to proceed with this revenue-raising process, it should ask the votes to authorize the Council to adopt a range of increases (i.e., from 12 to 15 percent). . March 14, 2002 Page 2 of 2 -:r EXHIBIT }\,70. Town of Tiburon . MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO: Alex D. Mcintyre, Town Manager FROM: Heidi McVeigh, Director of Administrative Services # SUBJECT: Revenue Enhancement - Cost Sharing with Joint Recreation Department DATE: March 14, 2003 . . . .. ............................................. The Belvedere- Tiburon Joint Recreation Committee (BT JRC) was established in 1975 under a Joint Powers Agreement between the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere. The BT JRC is primarily responsible for operating recreational and educational programs for the primary benefit of residents of Tiburon and Belvedere, and administering and maintaining recreational facilities designated by the Town and City. The BT JRC is self supporting through fees charged. This self support does not include any "in- kind" services provided by the Town of Tiburon or City of Belvedere. The BT JRC staff is currently housed in the Tiburon Town Hall offices and occupies approximately 1,100 sq. ft., or 15% of the Town's 7,300 sq. ft. building space. In addition to providing office space, the Town pays for all utilities, parking, and cleaning services on behalf of the BT JRC. The Town also provides, without charge, the use of the Community Room for the purpose of recreation program. Under the JPA, financial responsibility for the BT JRC is shared between the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere on a 75%/25% ratio. Section 11, Office Space and Services, the JPA states the "BT JRC shall pay for services rendered to or on behalf of it or for space or facilities provided to it by the parties at the parties' cost or for that compensation which is agreed to by the Committee and the party rendering the service or providing the space, or facility, whichever is less". The City of Belvedere provides the BT JRC space in its Community Center for recreation programs along with use of Belvedere Park for Summer Camps. Belvedere also splits on a 50/50 basis any rental fees collected by the BT JRC for the 'rental of their Community Room, which is administered by the BT JRC. It is anticipated the BT JRC will receive $15,000 in revenue from the rental of the Belvedere Community Room this fiscal year. The BT JRC is responsible for administering the rental of the Tiburon Community Room, but all revenues are returned to the Town. The Town receives approximately $1,800 per year for the rental of the Community Room. The City of Belvedere provides the BT JRC bookkeeping support in the form of accounts payable and payroll services. For such services the BT JRC pays the City of Belvedere $465 per month. The purpose of this memorandum is to place a value on the "in-kind" support the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere provides the BT JRC. Below outlines such support: .:;.': Town of Tiburon MEMORANDUM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOWN OF TIBURON D~si;ri#il()n,' 143 . " ',', ",' : - :' \.' ~ " .: '. .:' . " .. .. -' '. '. . , ',~, ,..., ",: .' ' .. ' ,., . OfficeSpaC~:(1, 10Q:~~<ft.:@~~.~0/sq;ft:9' Utilitie$(15%~f $2,2~J;~~Krn~lJt~J . . . .' . . ..'-'.,' '.',' .,..'..'<'."..:,-.....- -'..' ..... parkingJ!i'.~~~~eS'~'$:1~~#oi."".."',':." :. .. -, ',', ,.: : .~:-, ' ;'';'.','-.-, -,:"'/ .' " '"""",-' .....,.,'... .......''':...".. '.' ." ,......". . , .. . . . " , '" . ,. .... ".': .,. .'!"., .,,-0 , . "",. ,__ ,..' __,' '. .. .~' ., ", .' . '.,' - .': ;:< ,:,.-:, "'",'" ..:.:" ,':,,-:, ',)-' ,:, '" "','- '-.',:':! ."'_ ;~;:..~!':.,,~>,i:':':::>' ;;.,:".',.::~~:'::'/.;:.:- -, Cleaning Serv'lces.($.:.13;per'$q~ft);:... . >:.,.. ,. . .,.. . . . , .' , . : ".. " :.' , '.: .-:,':', . -- ....- ;---~ ,: . ,",. , " ' .. . ' LESSREE"N:TALJNCCiME:'GEN€RA:7fEf)' "... '.,.. -. . ,,,..,..,...,,....,.,:,.. -. :,-'C' '--i"" $3,'~93 . (150) " '''''''.'.'' """... ',..,...,'" TOT Ai. sUPPORT' ,.',::'. i<'i~-) "",'"" . CITY OF BEL VEDERE . ." '''. .' . , ; '. . . " . ; - i' ,;, .. ~ . ,'-' ~' .:, " '. ',',';.." , :\;':t-;:':,~\'!".~'},:. :;::<; :.;..., ,... ,'!,:,~"...,. '/'~.~)1~;':::"'" ,rJescription . ...... .......,j; '. .':' . ' :, '. .' ... ..... o' '., ~.', "--':", "i " . """_' :_,i', ::,.\ ;,' '. .' . ': " . ,"', 0 Rental Ihcofuefr6~B~/ved,~rJ';comm~hity Ro~m' .. : . ,...' ".. '.;. , ," --. -', -' "', ,., ..:" ',' .... ,',,,:;' ). ,',' ',," "--: :.',. ;. 'j '::: ": ~.: :-:. . .". , , ..... ".-:": ',~ ;'-C";',.." , '; <, : "...., ,.,....,.,., "..,..". M6rlij,/v, Atrioiint. , TOTAL suPPokt . :,.'..,-" ,:';';', 'i ',' /' .', ~" ',..: "-::".:' " '..'::':,', .' $1,250' ,(465) . .... . ..$ 785 '. -. , . . " ','..' ,." ,:;- .. '-' .;, ""'. ..- -.... ',,;. ,', ,,';"'; - . Lesst3(Jo.k!re(fpi'fg$~i:Vi~ei: .' The Town and City provides approximately $3,928 per month in support to the BT JRC. Based on the 75/25 cost sharing, the Town's portion should be $2,946 and Belvedere $982. The difference between actual and agree cost sharing is $197 per month. Given this information, the Town may wish to consider charging the BT JRC for parking and cleaning services. This would total $213 per month, and are costs the Town would not bear if the Recreation Department was not housed in Town Hall. . March 14,2003 Page 2 of 2 ~/ . . . Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM ~ TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL FROM: ANN DANFORTH, TOWN ATTORNEY j~. SCOTT ANDERSON, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY~ DEVELOPMENT SUBJECT: REPEAL OF APPROVALS FOR THE MERA WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 145 SUGARLOAF Dm MEETING DATE: MARCH 19,2003 REVIEWED BY:~ REPORT DATE: MARCH 10,2003 BACKGROUND In September 2002, Marin Superior Court Judge Michael Dufficy ruled against the Town of Tiburon regarding its expedited approval of a wireless communications facility for the Marin Emergency Radio Authority (MERA) to be located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive. The Town Council had approved the project through adoption of Ordinance No. 469 N. S. on June 19, 2002 and by adoption of Resolution No. 51-2002 on July 31, 2002. As part of the Judge's final ruling, the Town was ordered to repeal the ordinance and rescind the resolution. The repeal and rescission now come before the Town Council for action. ANAL YSIS Repeal of an o'rdinance involves adoption of a subsequent ordinance essentially reversing the prior action. A draft ordinance to this effect is attached as Exhibit 1. Rescission of a resolution is a similar action. A draft resolution rescinding the prior resolution is attached as Exhibit 2. Notice of public hearing has been provided as required by law. Repeal of the prior approvals means that should the Sugarloaf site ever be reconsidered for a MERA-related wireless facility by the Town of Tiburon, the entire approval process would need to start anew, including (according to the court decision) the preparation of a supplemental environmental impact report to augment the Final EIR previously certified by MERA. Town Council Staff Report 1 3/19/2003 Town of Tiburon STAFF REPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RECOMMENDATION 1. Conduct a public hearing and take testimony from all interested persons. 2. Move, second and pass a motion to read the ordinance by title only. 3. Read the ordinance by title only. 4. Hold a roll call vote on introduction and first reading of the ordinance. 5. Adopt the Resolution rescinding Resolution 51-2002. 6. Continue the public hearing to April 2, 2003 for second reading and adoption of the ordinance. EXHIBITS 1. Draft Ordinance repealing Ordinance No. 469 N. S. 2. Draft Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 51-2002. \scott\mera repeal report. doc . . Town Council Staff Report 3/19/2003 2 ./ . . . RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 51-2002 THAT APPROVED THE SOUTHERN MARIN EMERGENCY RADIO FACILITY AT 145 SUGARLOAF DRIVE (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 058-351-31) BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon as follows: Section 1. FindinQs. A. On July 31,2002, the Town of Tiburon adopted Resolution No. 51-2002 approving the construction, installation, and operation of an emergencyradio facility to be located at 245 Sugarloaf Drive. B. Adoption of Resolution No. 51-2002 was subsequently ruled unlawful by a Marin Superior Court judge and the Town was ordered to rescind said Resolution. The Town Council finds that rescission of the previous approval is therefore appropriate and necessary. C. The Town Council held a duly-noticed public hearing on March _, 2003 to hear any testimony regarding the proposed rescission, and considered all testimony received thereat. Section 2. Rescission of Resolution No. 51-2002. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby rescind Resolution No. 51-2002 approving the Southern Marin Emergency Radio Facility at 145 Sugarloaf Drive. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on , 2003, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. -2003 1 E}r..RIB.IT l';O.~ ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON Sugarloaf reso rescind.doc Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. -2003 ; ..t, \. . . 2 . " ) ORDINANCE NO. . AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 469 N.S. THAT ESTABLISHED STREAMLINED PERMIT REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITY LOCATED AT 145 SUGARLOAF DRIVE (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 058-351-31) BE IT ORDAINED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon as follows: Section 1. FindinQs. A. On June 19, 2002, the Town of Tiburon adopted Ordinance No. 469 N.S. establishing streamlined permit review procedures for an emergency wireless communications facility to be located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive. B. Adoption of Ordinance No. 469 N. S. was subsequently ruled unlawful by a Marin Superior Court judge and the Town was ordered to repeal the ordinance. The Town Council finds that repeal of the previous approvals is therefore appropriate and necessary. C. On March _' 2003, the Town Council introduced and passed first reading of this Ordinance at a duly-noticed public hearing on March _, 2003. On March _' 2003, the Council held a second duly-noticed public hearing and after considering all testimony received, adopted this Ordinance to repeal Ordinance No. 469 N. S. . . Section 2. Repeal. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon does hereby repeal Ordinance No. 469 N. S. establishing streamlined permit review procedures for an emergency wireless communication facility at 145 Sugarloaf Drive. Section 3. Severabilitv. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. T.he Town Council of the Town of Tiburon hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. . EXHIBIT l\'(LJ_ .. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days after the date of passage, and before the expiration of fifteen (15) days after passage by the Town Council, a copy of the ordinance shall be published with the names of the members voting for and against it at least once in a newspaper of general qirculation published in the Town of Tiburon. This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on ,2003, and was adopted at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on ; 2003, which was noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 50022.3, by the. following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON J. ATTEST: DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON Sugarloaf ord repeal.doc Town of Tiburon Ordinance No. N.S. Effective --/--/2003 2 \J . . .