HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agd Pkt 2008-11-19
TOWN OF TIBURON
Tiburon Town Hall
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Regular Meeting
Tiburon Town Council
~ovemberI9,2008
Reception - 6:30 p.m.
Regular Meeting -7:30 p.m.
Closed Session - following
regular meeting
AGENDA
TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL
RECEPTION FOR FIREFIGHTERS/PUBLIC SAFETY PERSON~EL
CALL TO ORDER A~D ROLL CALL
Councilmember Berger, Councilmember Collins, Councilmember Gram, Vice Mayor
Fredericks, Mayor Slavitz
ORAL COMMU~ICA TIONS
Persons wishing to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this
time. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended
discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to
the appropriate Commission, Board, Committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future
Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes.
CONSENT CALE~DAR
All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion of the Town Council unless
a request is made by a member of the Town Council, public or staff to remove an item for
separate discussion and consideration. If you wish to speak on a Consent Calendar item,
please seek recognition by the Mayor and do so at this time.
1. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of November 5,2008 meeting (Town Clerk
Crane Iacopi)
2. T own Investment Summary - Adopt report for September 2008 (Director of
Administrative Services Bigall)
3. Town Audit Report - Accept report for fiscal year ending June 30, 2008 (Director of
Administrative Services Bigall)
4. Marin Energy Authority - Consider ordinance establishing joint powers authority (Town
Manager Curran and Town Attorney Danforth) ~ Second reading and adoption of
ordinance
5. Angel Island Fire - Adopt resolution commending the brave men and women who fought
the fire (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi)
6. Agreement re: Annexation of 3630 Paradise Drive - Recommendation to approve and
authorize Town Manager to execute an Agreement regarding Annexation of Real
Property (Associate Planner Tyler)
Property Address:
Property Owner:
Assessor Parcel No.
3630 Paradise Drive
J ames and Shannon Israel
058~031~ 14
7. T own Attorney Contract - Approve fourth amendment to contract (Town Manager
Curran)
PRESENTATIO~
· Mayor Slavitz will present commendations regarding the Angel Island Fire
ACTION ITEMS
1. Variance Study Session - (Community Development Department)
TOWN COU~CIL REPORTS
TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT
WEEKLY DIGESTS
. Town Council Weekly Digest - November 7,2008
. Town Council Weekly Digest - November 14,2008
ADTOURNME~T ~ to a meeting of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency
TIBURO~ REDEVELOPME~T AGENCY
CALL TO ORDER A~D ROLL CALL
Boardmember Berger, Boardmember Collins, Boardmember Gram, Vice Chair Fredericks, Chair
Slavitz
ACTIO~ ITEMS
1. Adoption of Minutes - February 6, 2008 (Board Clerk Crane Iacopi)
2. Audit Report - Adopt report for fiscal year ending June 30, 2008 (Director of
Administrative Services Bigall)
ADTOURNME~T ~ to a meeting of the Tiburon Town Council
TIBURO~ TOWN COUNCIL
CALL TO ORDER A~D ROLL CALL
Councilmember Berger, Councilmember Collins, Councilmember Gram, Vice Mayor
Fredericks, Mayor Slavitz
CLOSED SESSIO~
CONFERE~CE WrrH LEGAL COU~SEL - EXISTING LITIGA TIO~
(Section 54956.9(a))
Wayne et al. v. Town ofTiburon
Gilles v. Town ofTiburon
ADTOURNMENT ~ to public session
ANNOUNCEME~T OF ACTIO~ TAKEN I~ CLOSED SESSIO~. IF A~Y
ADTOURNMENT ~ to next regular meeting
GE~ERAL PUBLIC I~FORMA TIO~
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) 4 35~
7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make
. reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
AVAILABILITY OF I~FORMA TIO~
Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and
inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere~ Tiburon Library located adjacent to
Town Hall. Agendas and staff reports are posted on the Town's website,
www.ci.tiburon.ca.us.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Town Council after
distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at Town Hall
during normal business hours.
Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate
alternative formats, or disability~related modification or accommodation, including
auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in
public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing
address, phone number and brief description of the requested materials and
preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the
meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above
address.
PUBLIC HEARI~GS
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 O~ AGE~DA
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.
Cc-/
TOWN COUNCIL
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
eeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m.
, in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard,
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
Berger, Collins, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz
PRESENT: EX OFFICIO:
Town Manager Curran, Town Attorney Danforth,
Director of Administrative Services Bigall, Director
of Community Development Anderson, Director of
Public Works/Town Engineer Nguyen, Chief of
Police Cronin, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi
Prior to meeting in regular session, beginning at 5:45 p.m., the Council met in closed session to
discuss the following:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9(a))
Town of Tiburon v. Sylvia; Sylvia v. Town of Tiburon
Wayne et al. v. Town ofTiburon
Bonander et al v. Town of Tiburon;
In re Del Mar Supplemental Utility Undergrounding District;
Mostyn v. Town ofTiburon et al.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
(Section 54956.9(b))
Claim of Bob Gilles
Claim of Sandra Esposito and Robert Malasky
PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
(Section 54957)
Title: Town Attorney
-.----.. ~
~own Council Minutes #18 -2008-_-
November 5,2008
~~ Page 1
INTERVIEW -7:15 p.m.
. Jane Jacobs, 44 Lyford Drive (Jt. Recreation Committee)
ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION" IF ANY
Mayor Slavitz said that there was nothing to report.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of October 15, 2008 meeting (Town Clerk Crane
Iacopi)
2. Business of the Year - Adopt resolution commending Larry Hadley and Ireland-Robinson
Hadley upon receipt of the Chamber of Commerce 2008 Business of the Year award
(Town Clerk Crane Iacopi)
3. Town Manager Contract - Adopt amended contract for FY 2008-09 (Town Attorney
Danforth)
4. Open Space Management Plan - Authorize Town Manager to negotiate and execute an
agreement with LSA Associates (Director of Community Development Anderson &
Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Nguyen)
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 through 4 above.
Gram, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
ACTION ITEMS
1. Appointments to Boards, Commissions & Committees - Consider appointment to fill
vacancy on J1. Recreation Committee (Town Clerk Crane Iacopi)
Councilmember Gram said that Ms. Jacobs was "exactly the kind of candidate" the Council was
looking for. He said that in addition to expressing her interest in the position, Ms. Jacobs had
met with the Recreation Director and had also attended a committee meeting. He suggested that
she should also meet with long-time committee member Jerry Riessen to gain some background
and history on the committee.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -20.08~--
November 5. 2008
~~ Page 2
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To appoint Jane Jacobs to the J1. Recreation Committee.
Gram, seconded by Berger
AYES: Unanimous
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.. Marin Clean Energy - Consider ordinance establishing joint powers authority (Town
Manager Curran and Town Attorney Danforth) - Introduction & first reading of ordinance
Town Manager Curran gave the report. She said that the issue before the Council was whether to
adopt an ordinance which would establish a joint powers authority to implement a Community
Choice Aggregation (CCA), as allowed under state law. This action would be a step towards two
goals: creation of an alternative energy supply for Marin residents and reduction of greenhouse
gas emISSIons.
The Town Manager said that over the past five years, the County of Marin and its 11 cities and
towns have worked together to explore implementation of a CCA program that would give
County residents a "greener" choice for their electrical energy needs. Meanwhile, in 2006, she
said the State adopted Assembly Bill 32 which instituted a state-wide program for reducing
greenhouse gases. The Marin County task force charged with developing the CCA program
decided to add AB 32 compliance to the new JP As mandate, according to Curran.
Town Manager Curran introduced members of the task force, County Planner Dawn Weisz,
attorney Greg Stepanicich of Richards, Watson Gershon, whose firm was retained by the County
to develop the ordinance and joint powers agreement, as well as Bill Monson, whose firm (MRW
Associates) was hired by the Marin Manager's Association to do an independent third-party
review of the JP A's business plan. She said that these experts were available to respond to any
questions submitted by the Council and the public.
Ms. Curran said that if the Town chose to join the JP A, Town residents would then be able to
choose to either buy energy from the new entity or stay with the current provider, PG&E. If the
Council chose not to join the JP A, Tiburon residents would not have a choice of providers. The
Town Manager also pointed out that PG&E would continue to provide the infrastructure under
the new JP A.
Town Manager Curran said that one of the "upsides" of joining the JPA now was that there was
an option to withdraw without penalty for a certain period of time; another "upside" was that
there was no liability for town resources under the JP A. Nevertheless, Ms. Curran acknowledged
that there were still questions that remained outstanding, a fact that she said was also noted by
Mr. Monson's firm. She said that these questions would be answered in the next nine months
and that the Council would still have the opportunity to withdraw, if it chose to do so.
Ms. Curran turned the discussion over to Town Attorney Danforth.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008-_--
November 5, 2008
~~ Page 3
Ms. Danforth said that the town had a long history of working with county-wide JP As. She said
that provisions had been added to the proposed agreement to ensure that the entity would
conform to local land use authority.
Danforth reiterated that there was an "escape route" for the town during the 60-day review period
of the energy services contracts. She noted that the County of Marin had fronted the funds for
the initial study and other start-up costs which would eventually be recovered from the rate
payers if the program went forward, or not at all if it did not.
Ms. Danforth acknowledged that while it was unknown what the energy services agreements
(ESAs) would look like, this aspect would be worked out through the operating rules and
regulations. During this process, each member entity would have one vote, while the overall
voting structure of the JP A would be based on number of ratepayers.
Vice Mayor Fredericks posed a question about the use of eminent domain to avoid local land use
rules. Ms. Danforth referenced the section in the agreement that pertained to local land use,
requiring that local laws apply to JP A facilities. Ms. Fredericks stated that under this section, it
would be "useless" for an entity to try (to condemn a property). Ms. Danforth agreed.
Ms. Fredericks posed a question about the potential failure of Marin Clean Energy and whether
the [JP A] board could come up with another program without consulting its member
cities/towns.
Ms. Danforth said that the Board of Directors would be formed with members from each public
agency, and that theoretically, the members would seek the guidance of their individual councils
prior to taking action.
Ms. Fredericks said that this raised another interesting question about representation on regional
boards; whether the member spoke for the local councilor for the region.
Ms. Danforth also noted that even after the JP A is formed, the town could still withdraw.
Councilmember Berger said that he was in favor of the goals of the JP A. However, he said he
was concerned about whether recouping the start-up costs would drive up the rates if fewer cities
or towns joined.
Mr. Berger asked whether the "green light" energy rates would be comparable to the current
PG&E rates, and whether the ratepayers would be able to stay below the PG&E rates under the
CCA.
Ms. Weisz reiterated that the cost of payback was already factored into the plan at or below the
PG&E rate; she said that 50% was the "magic number" of ratepayers needed to make a go of the
plan; she said that 30% participation was also conceivable but that the CCA would not be able to
offer as many programs under that scenario.
- DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -20.08__-
November 5, 2008
~~ Page 4
Ms. Weisz said that Fairfax was the first city to have adopted the ordinance, along with the
County of Marin which comprised a quarter of the energy users. She said that the County and
seven or eight smaller cities would be a workable number, or the County and the City of San
Rafael.
Ms. Weisz said that the market would really prove if the plan was workable or not, and that no
one .would really know until the results came in from the RFPs.
Councilmember Berger asked whether the withdrawal period would be extended if the contracts
were not solidified under the current timeline. He also asked whether people who currently had
solar installations, or were contemplating their installation, would received credit or rebates after
the fact. Ms. Weisz said that their meters would be taken over by Marin Clean Energy, if they
elected that option. She said that additional incentives had been discussed, in addition to state
and federal rebates.
Councilmember Gram asked Mr. Stepanicich if there was any possible scenario that would make
the town liable by joining the JP A. Mr. Stepanicich said "not at this time," adding that the JP A
was a separate entity that would absorb potential exposures. He also noted that additional
language had been proposed to indemnify individual agencies and hold them harmless.
Town Manager Curran said that this language was in an errata sheet provided to the Council and
the public.
Mr. Gram asked whether liability insurance was being requested of the RFP recipients. Ms.
Weisz said that CCAs outside of California (in Ohio and Massachusetts) had not asked for
insurance, and that in California, the San Joaquin Valley Energy Authority had not asked for it
either. She said that essentially the ratepayers were the "backstop."
Mr. Gram asked Mr. Stepanicich about the section of the agreement pertaining to disposition of
assets. Mr. Stepanicich clarified that no actual monetary contributions were sought from the
member agencies to purchase assets.
Mr. Gram asked which (energy) companies would receive RFPs. Ms. Weisz said all kinds,
including non-profits, current providers to municipalities, corporate providers, and PG&E. She
noted that it would "be to our benefit" if PG&E responded affirmatively to the RFP.
Mr. Gram asked whether any Wall Street firms would be involved and expressed concern
because of the recent failure of some of these firms. Ms. Weisz said that Citigroup had done well
and that MCE might look at other firms, as well.
Councilmember Collins asked if there was a "back up plan" in the event of a firm's failure.
Ms. Weisz said that the experts would help craft the contracts, possibly to require bidders or
providers to purchase insurance.
- DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008_--
November 5,2008
~~ Page 5
Mr. Collins asked if there would be any detriment to local customers [of MCE] if the town
withdrew. Ms. Weisz said that the PUC rules said that all customers would return to PG&E with
no break in service; and that a bond would be posted with PG&E at the inception to insure this.
Councilmember Collins asked when the operating rules and regulations would be available for
review. Mr. Stepanicich said that it would be early on in the process, within 60 to 90 days after
formation of the JP A.
Vice Mayor Fredericks said that once service was "rolled out," and if the town chose to withdraw
from the JP A, could its member residents remain in MCE. Ms. Weisz answered affirmatively.
Mayor Slavitz said that the way he viewed the action of joining the JP A at this time was that it
was like "dating" and that no commitment had been made. He said it appeared that the town
would have a "free ride" until the RPF was issued and responses were received.
Mayor Slavitz opened the public hearing.
Andy Harris, Via Capistrano, regulatory case manager for PG&E, said he was not representing
PG&E in his statement but asked the Council to consider four things in its deliberations:
1. whether there was an inviolate "off ramp" for the Town;
2. whether AB32 goals were attainable because he said the requirements were very strict and
that penalties would accrue;
3. no cross-subsidization by non-rate payers;
4. development of proper hedging strategies.
Councilmember Collins asked Mr. Harris ifhe was in favor ofMCE. Mr. Harris said that in
general, he was in favor of having a choice, however, he said that he had not read the business
plan.
Ms. Weisz responded to Mr. Harris' questions by stating that the PUC had ruled that it was not
legal for PG&E to add the burden of cost to the ratepayers if they were reabsorbed.
As to the hedge question, Ms. Weisz said that no matter who the energy provider proved to be,
the ratepayers needed this kind of expertise.
Jay Hooker, Vistazo West, asked if San Francisco had recently undertaken a similar program
which had failed as a ballot measure. Councilmember Berger said the measure was something
different, along the lines of the City wanting to cancel their lease with PG&E and sell themselves
their own power.
Mr. Hooker said the [MCE] program seemed like a good idea and asked if anyone on the Council
saw a downside.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008-_--
November 5,2008
--=:.- Page 6
Holly Hooker, also ofVistazo West, said that she was interested in the idea of solar assist
programs. She asked if any studies had been done to see if there were enough rooftops in Marin
County to provide enough energy to the grid.
Ms. Weisz said that an energy needs analysis had been done to assist the task force. She said that
the County needed 240 megawatts of power annually and that 80 megawatts could be generated
by solar alone. (She also noted that 5 megawatts were generated now through solar installations.)
Ms. Weisz said that there was no need to wait on individual installations but that there would
also be outreach in the future.
Councilmember Berger noted that the County survey took into account "big rooftops." He said
that Tiburon was unique in its geography and that the town as a whole was a "gigantic south-
facing slope." He suggested that an advantage might be made of this fact for individual and
community power generation.
Resident David Bach, [street?], expressed his concerns about the following:
. process; lack of information on the MCE website and not much public comment or
understanding;
. oversight; going from a highly regulated PUC to a JP A that would be subject to political
"vagaries," not unlike a local health care board;
. risks; all contracts come to an end and there are no future guarantees; he stated that there
were significant risks in this environment;
. econo~ics; said that he had experience in forecasting and that price forecasts are "not
worth the paper they're written on;" the volatility of the commodities market;
. his belief that the programs in the draft business plan were woefully underfunded.
He said that the upside is that the CCA would reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and give us a
more stable price over time, however, it would also create a bureaucracy.
Councilmember Collins asked Mr. Bach whether he was in the energy business. Mr. Bach said
that he had been in the past.
John Kunzweiler, Norman Way, agreed that it was a "big idea" but said he supported it. He said
that it was complicated but got us going in the right direction and that it was a concrete way to
address global warming.
Mr. Kunzweiler said that in his opinion it was not a risk-free plan; that there was some
"squishiness" in the business plan. He talked of his experience in outsourcing and said that
expertise was needed to make a go of this, particularly because Marin is small and it could end
up being a "David and Goliath" negotiating situation on Wall Street.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -201J8__-
November 5,2008
--=:.- Page 7
Bill Lindqvist, Cazadero Lane, geologist, agreed that Marin would be a small buying entity and
said he was concerned about how MCE would compete and get favorable rates.
Mr. Lindqvist referenced an October 22 letter from the Town Manager concerning the different
levels of green energy. He asked why "deep green" would command a higher rate.
Ms. Curran explained it meant ratepayers could pay extra to purchase 100% renewable power.
Mr. Lindqvist said that he was aware of the critical review of the plan by PG&E, but he
wondered how the independent reviewer was obtained. Ms. Curran said that she made the
arrangement for and on behalf of the Marin Managers' Association.
Finally, Mr. Lindqvist handed out two charts which he said provided evidence that global
warming was in decline.
Jerry Riessen, Ridge Road, asked whether "green" energy under this scenario included biomass.
He said that he had experience in developing gas-fired energy plants, however, he said that the
corn to fuel formula was a disaster and that there were alternatives.
Mr. Riessen said that he had recently attended the NREL conference and that "algae" [algae-
making petroleum products] was the new energy source being talked about.
The Council asked Ms. Weisz to comment on some of the questions and concerns expressed by
the public.
Ms. Weisz said that the draft JP A and business plan were in fact available for review on the
MCE website. She said that these and other materials were available to the public and offered
her card to anyone who cared to receive them. She also noted that there were copies of webcasts
of public meetings available on the website.
Weisz said the implementation plan would not be developed until the contracts were let which
followed the lead of other CCAs.
The question of how the energy service providers were selected was really a bridge, according to
Weisz, because the ultimate goal ofMCE was to own its own assets. She said the result would
be that MCE would not have to hedge and would not be dependent on [other] fuel sources.
Councilmember Gram asked for examples of assets. Ms. Weisz said that a sample scenario
would be a diverse mix of solar and wind installations, along with bio-mass and geothermal
production. She noted that they would not all have to be within the County.
Mr. Gram asked whether the assets would be in our [MCE] name alone or perhaps MCE would
be an investor and have a third party run the plants.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008-_--
November 5, 2008
--=:.- Page 8
Councilmember Collins said that MCE would still be in the "hedge business."
Ms. Weisz agreed that forecasting, the next phase of the plan was critical. She said that the
competition was limited now by the PUC; she said that the King's River Conservation District
had told her that MCE could buy energy for less and sell it for less. Also, she said that MCE
could "move faster" on deals than a larger entity and that there had been a lot of activity and
interest in smaller, independent producers.
Councilmember Gram asked ifMCE might be an "anchor tenant" on a specific project. Ms.
Weisz said that the goal was to own the asset but that MCE could pay others to build it.
Councilmember Berger noted that investor-owned facilities were required to make a profit.
Mayor Slavitz closed the public hearing.
Vice Mayor Fredericks said that all the Council was doing in adopting the ordinance was to
create a JP A to study ways to address AB 32, so she said that questions of climate change were
moot. She said that the JP A would give the town more information and would also gather
information regarding the risks; she said that at this point the risk to the town was minimal up
until the contracts were signed.
Councilmember Berger agreed. He said that the JP A was well crafted and he liked the aspect of
local control; he said that green programs were springing up all over the country and that this was
a way to address the issue of energy consumption.
Councilmember Gram agreed that "you have to start somewhere," and that because the County
was at the forefront there was not a track record. He said that his concern was to protect the town
so that "your assets are protected." To this end, he said he was satisfied with the liability
provisions of the JP A and the fact that there was a "safety net" to allow ratepayers to "get out and
go back to PG&E."
Gram said he still had concerns about asset ownership, and opined that it might be better to
become an investor or an initial tenant; however, he said overall there was a lot to gain from the
program and not a lot to lose.
Councilmember Collins said that the public comments were excellent and that there were still
issues to be addressed. He said that everyone still remembers what happened with Enron.
Collins agreed that the country needed to become independent from fossil fuel and that alternate
energy sources were the way to go. In this case, if the town joined Marin Clean Energy, its
residents would get a vote on energy sources while if the town did not join, they would not.
Mayor Slavitz said that he had been very skeptical of the whole concept at first; however, he said
that he was now comfortable taking the first step. Whether or not the program was viable
- DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008_--
November 5, 2008
--=:.- Page 9
remained to be seen, however, he said that relYing on past ideas and the consumption of coal and
other fossil fuels was not workable; looking ahead to the future was, in the Mayor's opinion.
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To read ordinance by title only.
Berger, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
Mayor Slavitz read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon approving the
Marin Energy Authority Joint Powers Agreement and authorizing the implementation of a
Community Choice Aggregation Program."
MOTION:
To pass first reading of ordinance, with the addition of language in
Section 8.3 - Indemnification of Parties.
Fredericks, seconded by Berger
AYES: Berger, Collins, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz
Moved:
Vote:
2. Construction Noise on Saturdays and Noise from Tree Work on Weekends and
Holidays - (Director of Community Developtnent Anderson)
a) Consider amendment of Title IV, Chapter 13 of Town Code to prohibit or reduce work
hours on Saturdays pursuant to a building permit - Introduction & first reading of
ordinance;
Director of Community Development Anderson said that the issue of construction noise on
Saturdays had become an increasing source of complaints by residents in recent years. While the
operation of heavy equipment is not permitted on Saturdays, Anderson said that numerous
instances of noisy work had been received, including but not limited to the use of tile and power
saws, paint compressors, jack hammers, drills and nail guns. He said that staffhad been
requested to explore options for addressing this growing concern.
Anderson said that in the past, the Council had rejected adopting a "blanket" noise ordinance and
had concentrated on identifying and addressing specific causes of noise through ordinances and
enforcement. He said that staff's approach to Saturday construction noise followed this line of
thinking.
The Director said that a survey had been sent to local builders and contractors asking their
opinion of banning construction on Saturdays. He said that staff had also done a survey of other
jurisdictions to see how they addressed this question.
Anderson said that the results of the town's mail survey had shown that 71 % of
contractorslbuilders said that banning Saturday construction would have some or no impact,
while 29% said that it would have significant impact.
_DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -20IJ8.__-
November 5,2008
--=:.- Page 10
The Director said that banning construction on Saturday outright was one option to address the
issue, doing nothing was another option, setting hours such as 12:00 - 5:00 was an option, or
allowing "quiet work" was another option (which he noted had not worked well in the past).
Finally, Anderson said that the town could target '''noisy equipment" but that this approach would
require objective findings to be enforceable. He said that the Council had not supported the use
of decibel meters in the past.
Anderson suggested that whatever approach the Council chooses be simple but enforceable.
Building Official Bloomquist addressed the question of whether banning Saturday construction
would have the unintended consequence of making large projects take longer to complete. He
said that of the 700 annual permits issued by the town, less than 5% of these were for jobs larger
than $300,000. He said that the town already had a provision to give one no-fee extension to
projects, so for 95% of the permitted projects, not working on Saturday would not have a
significant impact on the community.
Mayor Slavitz asked Chief of Police Cronin for his thoughts on the subject of enforceability. For
instance, Slavitz said that the Mill Valley ordinance differentiated between residents and
contractors and said that the latter were allowed to only do "quiet" work on weekends.
Chief Cronin said that he did not have an opinion as to who did the work or when, just as long as
there was a clear line and objective, not debatable criteria. He said that decibel level readings
were more easily enforceable.
Vice Mayor Fredericks asked staff about differentiating between work by owners and
contractors. Building Official Bloomquist said that the trigger in the proposed ordinance was
whether the project had a permit or not; he noted that activities such as house-painting did not
require a permit. The ordinance would not differentiate between owners and contractors.
Councilmember Berger asked whether the duration of projects was an issue in the community.
Director Anderson said that there was a fair amount of concern about this in various
neighborhoods; however, he said that only a tiny percentage of projects take 18 months or more
to complete.
Councilmember Collins asked if there were a lot of complaints. Chief Cronin said there were not
and that most of these were successfully resolved.
Councilmember Collins asked about the cost of decibel meters. Chief Cronin said that they were
about $250 per unit.
Town Manager Curran said that if meters were used, there should be stated criteria to ensure that
the readings were made in a consistent manner.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -20D8__--
November 5, 2008
--=:.- Page 11
Vice Mayor Fredericks said that in her experience as a psychologist, she understood that sounds
at different ends of the noise spectrum are perceived differently by different people. She said that
this made even using a decibel meter problematic if the noise was perceived as "intrusive."
Mayor Slavitz said that he received about one noise complaint via e-mail per month. He asked
whether the police department was "inundated" with complaints.
Chief Cronin said that while the department was not inundated, noise was a significant issue in
Tiburon. He said that it was not every weekend that a complaint was received. But he also noted
that the Town Manager had called a meeting to discuss various types of noise complaints, in
addition to construction noise.
Mayor Slavitz opened the public hearing.
Holly Hooker, Vistazo West, said that Saturdays were "overflow" days for many construction
projects. She also asked how this would affect home improvement projects and the pursuit of
crafts, such as cabinet refinishing and the like. She said that some noise made the community
seem vibrant and that some people found time to complain about many things.
Vic Canby, Paradise Drive, agreed that sound and noise was always a controversial issue. He
suggested that the Council get more public input on this subject and that protections be built into
the ordinance (such as tree removal for health and safety purposes).
Town Manager Curran said that the current ordinance authorized the Town Manager to permit
work in the event of an emergency.
Mr. Canby said that the San Anselmo ordinance had no measurable criteria and relied upon the
subjective standard of "nuisance."
Mert Lawwhill, Rock Hill Drive, said that he supported adoption of the ordinance; he said that an
inconsiderate neighbor had worked on his home for the last four years on weekends only and that
he needed a break.
Councilmember Gram said that no one was more aggrieved than he and described projects on
either side of him over a number of years. However, Gram said that he was not in favor of
adopting this ordinance because it was too "all encompassing." He said that a lot of work could
be done on Saturdays that would not be intrusive. He agreed that the Council, when it last
amended the Code, had chosen not to utilize decibel meters because their use would not be fair to
some property owners (as a result of geography).
Vice Mayor Fredericks said that when she built her home, she chose not to perform work on
Saturdays in order to placate the neighbors. She said she was in favor of the ordinance based on
staff's recommendation.
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008_--
November 5, 2008
--=:.- Page 12
Fredericks noted that the ordinance would be complaint driven, and therefore enforcement might
not be onerous based on the (sInall) number of complaints. However, she said the ordinance
might be honed more if it were the consensus of Council.
Councilmember Berger said that it would be difficult to ban Saturday work which amounted to
72 days over the life of a permit. He said that while he was sYmpathetic to the complaints about
Saturday noise, he said that Saturdays were often the only day for owners to get things done.
Also, he pointed out that anything less than a complete ban would be very difficult to enforce.
Berger said that perhaps the Design Review Board might raise the issue of voluntary Saturday
work at their hearings. He said that while there was much to recommend the ordinance, now
might not be the appropriate time to 'pass it.
Councilmember Collins said that "noise is noise, permit notwithstanding." He said that staff
might come back to the Council with examples of "big" noise, such as paint compressors, and
possible solutions.
Councilmember Gram suggested that noisy equipment such as bulldozers, air compressors,
grinders, etc. might be banned.
Councilmember Berger said that the Saturday ban might be invoked after the permit has run nine
months, or something along those lines.
Berger also raised the question of construction in residential versus commercial areas. Mayor
Slavitz said that in Tiburon, the areas were right next to each other. However, he agreed with
Berger that a Saturday ban might be instituted after 18 months of permitted work (or some other
length of time).
Mayor Slavitz said that the proposed ban had "lots of wrinkles," and suggested that Council
remand the ordinance to staff in order to find a middle ground.
Town Manager summarized the direction by stating that Council wanted staff to rethink the
options and find a solution that was sufficiently encompassing, perhaps allowing some activity
on Saturdays, but still enforceable. She likened it to "more of a scalpel than a hatchet."
Item remanded to staff.
b) Consider standardized conditions of approval on Tree Permits and Encroachment
Permits to prohibit work on weekends and holidays
Director of Community Development Anderson said that noise from tree work on weekends had
become an increasing source of complaints to the Town. He also said that applications for
encroachment permits had increased many-fold over the past year.
DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -2008__-
November 5, 2008
~- Page 13
Anderson said that encroachment permit work authorized a range of activities from vegetation
removal to street trenching to curb cut/driveway approach work. He said that noisy equipment
and construction vehicles were frequently used in this kind of work which also drove up the
number of complaints.
The Director said that the simplest approach to address such complaints was to prohibit work
purs.uant to a tree permit or an encroachment permit on weekends and holidays. He said that no
amendments would be required to the Town Code, nor was a CEQA review required. Anderson
pointed out that provisions would be made for work performed in the event of an emergency, or
work pre-authorized by the Town outside of normally prescribed hours. He said that such
instances were rare.
Council concurred with staff's recommendation and voted unanimously to adopt it.
TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS
None.
TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT
Town Manager Curran made the following request of Council:
· Request to form ad hoc subcommittees for:
a) Corporation Yard Redevelopment
Councilmember Berger said that a family member worked for the architectural firm that had
been selected for the project; therefore, he was not eligible to serve on this committee.
Councilmember Gram and Councilmember Collins agreed to serve.
b) Lyford Drive Parking Area
Councilmember Collins and Councilmember Berger agreed to serve.
c) Recreation Master Plan
Mayor Slavitz agreed to join Vice Mayor Fredericks to serve on this subcommittee.
Council concurred with the above appointments.
DRAFT Town Council Minutes # 18 -2008__--
November 5,2008
~- Page 14
WEEKLY DIGESTS
. Town Council Weekly Digest - October 17, 2008
. Town Council Weekly Digest - October 24, 2008
. Town Council Weekly Digest - October 31, 2008
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Slavitz
adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m.
JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
-DRAFT Town Council Minutes #18 -201J8__-
November 5. 2008
~- Page 15
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~ovemberI9,2008
Agenda Item: a~ --- 2-
STAFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Administrative Services Department
Subject:
Investment Summary - September 2008
Reviewed By:
~.
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53601, staff is required to provide the Town Council with
a report regarding the Town's investment activities.
ANAL YSIS
The Town of Tiburon currently invests all idle funds for the Town and the Redevelopment
Agency in the California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). Below illustrates the funds on
deposit with LAIF at month end, September 30, 2008:
Agency
Investment
Amount
Interest Rate
Maturity
Town of Tiburon Local Agency $18,500,111.41 2.7740/0 Liquid
Investment
Fund (LAIF)
Redevelopment Agency Local Agency $1,063,024.99 2.7740/0 Liquid
Investment
Fund (LAIF)
FINANCIAL IMPACT
No financial impact occurs by adopting the report. The Town continues to meet the priority
principles of investing - safety, liquidity and yield in this respective order.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Move to accept the September 2008 investment summary
Exhibits:
Prepared By:
None
Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
Town Council Meeting
November 19,2008
Agenda Item: CC - 3
ST AFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Administrative Services Department
Subject:
Recommendation to Accept Annual Financial Audit FY 2007-08
Reviewed By:
~. .--W;::.... / /.
~-
BACKGROUND
As is required by local code and State law, the Town of Tiburon must complete an annual
audit of its financial activities. The auditing firm of Marcello & Company, C.P.A.'s
conducted the audit for fiscal year 2007-08. Their work was completed in accordance with
generally accepted auditing standards; Government Auditing Standards, issued by the
Comptroller General of the United States; and the provisions of the Office of Management
and Budget Circular A-133, Audits of State and Local Government Organizations.
ANAL YSIS
The actual results of the Town's financial activities are presented in the Government-Wide
Financial Statements (pages 11 and 12). Net assets are a good indicator of the Town's
financial position. The Town ended FY 2007-08 with $53.1 million in net assets, an increase
of $102,840 over the previous fiscal year.
Supplementary explanatory information is provided with the Management's Discussion and
Analysis (MD&A) beginning on page 3. The MD&A provides key highlights and a summary
view of performance of financial activities for the year ended June 30, 2008.
The auditors have issued a report that includes required communications concerning their
responsibility under generally accepted accounting standards, significant changes in
accounting policies and unusual transactions, management judgments and accounting
estimates, significant audit adjustments, and other issues related to performance of the audit.
In the area of accounting practices and internal controls, there are no findings as to material
weaknesses.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the Town by having the Council accept this financial audit report.
r~ )\\'n. (.':()l.lf)C.i.1
:\(yveJT11'~cr 19, ~2C1(.l8
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Move to accept the Fiscal Year 2007 -08 annual financial audit as prepared by
Marcello & Company, C.P.A.'s.
Exhibits: Report and General Purpose Financial Statements of the Town of Tiburon for
Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2008
Prepared By:
Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services
~ TOWN OF TIBURON
~ 1505 Tiburon Boulevard
, ! Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~overnberI9,2008
Agenda Item: (C-1
STAFF REPORT
To:.
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Office of the Town Manager
Office of the Town Attorney
Subject:
Recommendation to Adopt on Second Reading an Ordinance of the Town
Council of the Town of Tiburon approving the Marin Energy Authority Joint
Powers Agreement and Authorizing the Implementation of a Community
Choice Aggregation Program
~
Reviewed By:
INTRODUCTION
On November 5, 2008, the Town Council introduced on first reading, as amended, an ordinance
approving the Marin Energy Authority J oint Powers Agreement and authorizing the
implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation program.
At that time, the Council amended into the ordinance a modification to Exhibit A, the Joint
Powers Agreement, to add a new provision related to indemnification. The final JP A, which
reflects this addition, is attached in this report. There were no modifications to the ordinance
language itself. Exhibit B, the Marin Clean Energy Business Plan, was in the November 5, 2008
packet and has not changed, so it is not duplicated in this packet.
RECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends the Town Council pass second reading and adopt the ordinance.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance Approving Marin Energy Authority Joint Powers Agreement
2. Revised Exhibit A: Marin Energy Authority Joint Powers Agreement
Prepared By: Peggy Curran, Town Manager
Ann Danforth, Town Attorney
TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 1
Il!kd~cl
#/
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APPROVING THE
MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A
COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION PROGRAM
The Town Council of the Town ofTiburon ordains as follows:
SECTION 1. The Town of Tiburon has been actively investigating options to provide
electric services to constituents within its service area with the intent of achieving greater local
involvement over the provisions of electric services and promoting competitive and renewable
energy .
SECTION 2. On September 24, 2002, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 117
(Stat. 2002, ch. 838; see California Public Utilities Code section 366.2; hereinafter referred to as
the "Act"), which authorizes any California city or county, whose governing body so elects, to
combine the electricity load of its residents and businesses in a community-wide electricity
aggregation program known as Community Choice Aggregation.
SECTION 3. The Act expressly authorizes participation in a Community Choice
Aggregation (CCA) program through a joint powers agency, and to this end the Town has been
participating since 2003 in the evaluation of a CCA program for the County of Marin and the
cities and towns within it.
SECTION 4. On June 22, 2006, the Town joined a Local Government Task Force
(LGTF), which was comprised of elected officials and representatives of the County of Marin and
each municipality in the County. The purpose of the LGTF was to jointly participate in the
investigation of CCA for Marin communities and customers. The LGTF had five meetings with
the final meeting taking place on March 6,2008. The LGTF meetings looked at issues including:
(a) The costs, benefits and risks of a CCA including legal liability issues.
(b) The governance and business planning of a CCA.
(c) The feasibility of a CCA and deciding whether to pursue formation of a countywide
CCA organization.
(d) Public education.
SECTION 5. Through Docket No. R.03-10-003, the California Public Utilities
Commission has issued various decisions and rulings addressing the implementation of
Community Choice Aggregation programs, including the recent issuance of a procedure by which
the California Public Utilities Commission will review "Implementation Plans," which are
required for submittal under the Act as the means of describing the Community Choice
Aggregation program and assuring compliance with various elements contained in the Act.
SECTION 6. Representatives from the Town along with the other LGTF members have
developed the Marin Energy Authority Joint Powers Agreement ("Joint Powers Agreement")
(attached hereto as Exhibit A) in order to accomplish the following:
(a) To form a Joint Powers Authority (JP A) known as "Marin Energy" and
(b) To specify the terms and conditions by which participants may participate as
a group in energy programs, including but not limited to the preliminary implementation
of a Community Choice Aggregation program.
SECTION 7. Representatives from the Town along with the LGTF members have
developed a Business Plan (attached hereto as Exhibit B) that describes the formation of Marin
Clean Energy and the Community Choice Aggregation program to be implemented by and
through the Marin Energy Authority.
SECTION 8. A final Implementation Plan will be submitted for review and adoption by
the Board of Directors of the Marin Energy Authority as soon after the formation of the Authority
as reasonably practicable.
SECTION 9. As described in the Business Plan, Community Choice Aggregation by and
through the Marin Energy Authority appears to provide a reasonable opportunity to accomplish
all of the following:
(a) To provide greater levels of local involvement in and collaboration on energy
decisions.
(b) To increase significantly the amount of renewable energy available to Marin
customers,
(c) To provide initial price stability, long-term electricity cost savings and other
benefits for the community, and
(d) To reduce green house gases that are emitted by creating electricity for the
community .
SECTION 10. The Act requires Community Choice Aggregation program participants to
individually adopt an ordinance ("CCA Ordinance") electing to implement a Community Choice
Aggregation program within its jurisdiction by and through its participation in the Marin Energy
Authority.
SECTION 11. The Joint Powers Agreement expressly allows the Town to withdraw its
membership in the Marin Energy Authority (and its participation in the Community Choice
Aggregation program) prior to the actual implementation of a Community Choice Aggregation
program through Program Agreement 1.
SECTION 12. A city, town or county may not participate in the Marin Energy Joint
Powers Authority without also participating in the Community Choice Aggregation program
unless the Board of Directors of the Marin Energy Joint Powers Authority decides to not
implement or operate a Community Choice Aggregation program after the Authority is
established.
SECTION 13. Based upon all of the above, the Council approves the Joint Powers
Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A and elects to implement a Community Choice
Aggregation program within the Town's jurisdiction by and through the Town's participation in
th~ Marin Energy Authority, as described in the Business Plan in substantially the form attached
hereto as Exhibit B, and subject to the Town's right to forego the actual implementation of a
Community Choice Aggregation program pursuant to specified withdrawal rights described in the
Joint Powers Agreement. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute the attached Joint Powers
Agreement.
SECTION 14. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days after its adoption,
and, before the expiration of 30 days after its passage, a summary of this ordinance shall be
published once with the names of the members of the Council voting for and against the same in a
newspaper of general circulation published in the Town of Tiburon.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town
of Tiburon held on , and adopted at a meeting held on , by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TffiURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
r~~~h i b",'+- A
Marin Energy Authority
- Joint Powers Agreement -
Effective DATE
Among The Following Parties:
[City of Belvedere)
[Town of Corte Madera)
[Town of Fairfax)
[City of Larkspur)
[City of Mill Valley)
[City of Novato)
[Town of Ross)
[Town of San Anselmo)
[City of San Rafael)
[City of Sausalito)
[Town ofTiburon)
[County of Marin)
MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
This Joint Powers Agreement ("Agreement"), effective as of DATE, is made and
entered into pursuant to the provisions of Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5, Article 1
(Section 6500 et seq.) of the California Government Code relating to the joint exercise of
powers among the parties set forth in Exhibit B ("Parties"). The term "Parties" shall also
include an incorporated municipality or county added to this Agreement in accordance
'with Section 3.1.
RECIT ALS
1. The Parties are either in90rporated municipalities or counties sharing various
powers under California law, including but not limited to the power to purchase,
supply, and aggregate electricity for themselves and their inhabitants.
2. In 2006, the State Legislature adopted AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act,
which mandates a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 to 1990 levels.
The California Air Resources Board is promulgating regulations to implement AB
32 which will require local government to develop programs to reduce
greenhouse emissions.
3. The purposes for the Initial Participants (as such term is defined in Section 2.2
below) entering into this Agreement include addressing climate change by
reducing energy related greenhouse gas emissions and securing energy supply and
price stability, energy efficiencies and local economic benefits. It is the intent of
this Agreement to promote the development and use of a wide range of renewable
energy sources and energy efficiency programs, including but not limited to solar
and wind energy production.
4. The Parties desire to establish a separate public agency, known as the Marin
Energy Authority ("Authority"), under the provisions of the Joint Exercise of
Powers Act of the State of California (Government Code Section 6500 et seq.)
("Act") in order to collectively study, promote, develop, conduct, operate, and
manage energy programs.
5. The Initial Participants have each adopted an ordinance electing to implement
through the Authority Community Choice Aggregation, an electric service
enterprise agency available to cities and counties pursuant to California Public
Utilities Code Section 366.2 ("CCA Program"). The first priority of the Authority
will be the consideration of those actions necessary to implement the CCA
Program. Regardless of whether or not Program Agreement 1 is approved and the
CCA Program becomes operational, the parties intend for the Authority to
continue to study, promote, develop, conduct, operate and manage other energy
programs.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, and
conditions hereinafter set forth, it is agreed by and among the Parties as follows:
ARTICLE 1
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
'l.1 Definitions. Capitalized terms used in the Agreement shall have the meanings
specified in Exhibit A, unless the context requires otherwise.
1.2 Documents Included. This Agreement consists of this document and the
following exhibits, all of which are hereby incorporated into this Agreement.
Exhibit A:
Exhibit B:
Exhibit C:
Exhibit D:
Definitions
List of the Parties
Annual Energy Use
Voting Shares
1.3 Revision of Exhibits. The Parties agree that Exhibits B, C and D to this
Agreement describe certain administrative matters that may be revised upon the
approval of the Board, without such revision constituting an amendment to this
Agreement, as described in Section 8.4. The Authority shall provide written
notice to the Parties of the revision of any such exhibit.
ARTICLE 2
FORMATION OF MARIN ENERGY AUTHORITY
2.1 Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall become effective and Marin
Energy Authority shall exist as a separate public agency on the date this
Agreement is executed by at least two Initial Participants after the adoption of the
ordinances required by Public Utilities Code Section 366.2( c)(1 0). The Authority
shall provide notice to the Parties of the Effective Date. The Authority shall
continue to exist, and this Agreement shall be effective, until this Agreement is
terminated in accordance with Section 7.4, subject to the rights of the Parties to
withdraw from the Authority.
2.2 Initial ParticiDants. During the first 180 days after the Effective Date, all other
Initial Participants may become a Party by executing this Agreement and
delivering an executed copy of this Agreement and a copy of the adopted
ordinance required by Public Utilities Code Section 366.2(c)(10) to the Authority.
Additional conditions, described in Section 3.1, may apply (i) to either an
incorporated municipality or county desiring to become a Party and is not an
Initial Participant and (ii) to Initial Participants that have not executed and
delivered this Agreement within the time period described above.
2.3 Formation. There is formed as of the Effective Date a public agency named the
Marin Energy Authority. Pursuant to Sections 6506 and 6507 of the Act, the
Authority is a public agency separate from the Parties. Unless otherwise agreed,
the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Authority shall not be debts, liabilities
or obligations of the Parties.
2.4 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to establish an independent public
agency in order to exercise powers common to each Party to study, promote,
develop, conduct, operate, and manage energy and energy-related climate change
programs, and to exercise all other powers necessary and incidental to
accomplishing this purpose. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the
Parties intend for this Agreement to be used as a contractual mechanism by which
the Parties are authorize" to participate as a group in the CCA Program, as further
described in Section 5.1. The Parties intend that subsequent agreements shall
define the terms and conditions associated with the actual implementation of the
CCA Program and any other energy programs approved by the Authority.
2.5 Powers. The Authority shall have all powers common to the Parties and such
additional powers accorded to it by law. The Authority is authorized, in its own
name, to exercise all powers and do all acts necessary and proper to carry out the
provisions of this Agreement and fulfill its purposes, including, but not limited to,
each of the following:
2.5.1 make and enter into contracts;
2.5.2 employ agents and employees, including but not limited to an Executive
Director;
2.5.3 acquire, contract, manage, maintain, and operate any buildings, works or
improvements;
2.5.4 acquire by eminent domain, or otherwise, except as limited under Section
6508 of the Act, and to hold or dispose of any property;
2.5.5 lease any property;
2.5.6 sue and be sued in its own name;
2.5.7 incur debts, liabilities, and obligations;
2.5.8 issue revenue bonds and other forms of indebtedness;
2.5.9 apply for, accept, and receive all licenses, permits, grants, loans or other
aids from any federal, state or local public agency;
2.5.10 submit documentation and notices, register, and comply with orders,
tariffs and agreements for the establishment and implementation of the
CCA Program and other energy programs;
2.5.11 adopt rules, regulations, policies, bylaws and procedures governing the
operation of the Authority ("Operating Rules and Regulations"); and
2.5.12 make and enter into service agreements relating to the provision of
services necessary to plan, implement, operate and administer the CCA
Program and other energy programs, including the acquisition of electric
power supply and the provision of retail and regulatory support services.
2.6 Limitation on Powers. As required by Government Code Section 6509, the
power of the Authority is subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising
power possessed by the County of Marin.
2.7 ComDliance with Local Zonin!! and Buildin!! Laws. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of this Agreement or state law, any facilities, buildings or structures
located, constructed or caused to be constructed by the Authority within the
territory of the Authority shall comply with the General Plan, zoning and building
laws of the local jurisdiction within which the facilities, buildings or structures are
constructed.
ARTICLE 3
AUTHORITY PARTICIPATION
3.1 Addition of Parties. Subject to Section 2.2, relating to certain rights of Initial
Participants, other incorporated municipalities and counties may become Parties
upon (a) the adoption of a resolution by the governing body of such incorporated
municipality or such county requesting that the incorporated municipality or
county, as the case may be, become a member of the Authority, (b) the adoption,
by an affirmative vote of the Board satisfying the requirements described in
Section 4.9.1, of a resolution authorizing membership of the additional
incorporated municipality or county, specifying the membership payment, if any,
to be made by the additional incorporated municipality or county to reflect its pro
rata share of organizational, planning and other pre-existing expenditures, and
describing additional conditions, if any, associated with membership, (c) the
adoption of an ordinance required by Public Utilities Code Section 366.2( c)( 1 0)
and execution of this Agreement and other necessary program agreements by the
incorporated municipality or county, (d) payment of the membership payment, if
any, and (e) satisfaction of any conditions established by the Board.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event the Authority decides to not
implement a CCA Program, the requirement that an additional party adopt the
ordinance required by Public Utilities Code Section 366.2(c)(10) shall not apply.
Under such circumstance, the Board resolution authorizing membership of an
additional incorporated municipality or county shall be adopted in accordance
with the voting requirements of Section 4.10.
3.2 Continuin!! Particioation. The Parties acknowledge that membership in the
,A..uthority may change by the addition and/or withdrawal or termination of Parties.
The Parties agree to participate with such other Parties as may later be added, as
described in Section 3.1. The Parties also agree that the withdrawal or termination
of a Party shall not affect this Agreement or the remaining Parties' continuing
obligations under this Agreement.
ARTICLE 4
GOVERNANCE AND INTERNAL ORGANIZATION
4.1 Board of Directors. The governing body of the Authority shall be a Board of
Directors ("Board") consisting of one director for each Party appointed in
accordance with Section 4.2.
4.2 ADDointment and Removal of Directors. The Directors shall be appointed and
may be removed as follows:
4.2.1 The governing body of each Party shall appoint and designate in writing
one regular Director who shall be authorized to act for and on behalf of the
Party on matters .within the powers of the Authority. The governing body
of each Party also shall appoint and designate in writing one alternate
Director who may vote on matters when the regular Director is absent
from a Board meeting. The person appointed and designated as the
Director or the alternate Director shall be a member of the governing body
of the Party.
4.2.2 The Operating Rules and Regulations, to be developed and approved by
the Board in accordance with Section 2.5.11, shall specify the reasons for
and process associated with the removal of an individual Director for
cause. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Party shall be deprived of its
right to seat a Director on the Board and any such Party for which its
Director and/or alternate Director has been removed may appoint a
replacement.
4.3 Terms of Office. Each Director shall serve at the pleasure of the governing body
of the Party that the Director represents, and may be removed as Director by such
governing body at any time. If at any time a vacancy occurs on the Board, a
replacement shall be appointed to fill the position of the previous Director in
accordance with the provisions of Section 4.2 within 90 days of the date that such
position becomes vacant.
4.4 Quorum. A majority of the Directors shall constitute a quorum, except that less
than a quorum may adjourn from time to time in accordance with law.
4.5 Powers and Function of the Board. The Board shall conduct or authorize to be
conducted all business and activities of the Authority, consistent with this
Agreement, the Authority Documents, the Operating Rules and Regulations, and
applicable law.
4.6 Executive Committee. The Board may establish an executive committee
consisting of a smaller number of Directors. The Board may delegate to the
executive committee such authority as the Board might otherwise exercise,
subject to limitations placed on the Board's authority to delegate certain essential
functions, as described in the Operating Rules and Regulations. The Board may
not delegate to the Executive Committee or any other committee its authority
under Section 2.5.11 to adopt and amend the Operating Rules and Regulations.
4.7 Commissions~ Boards and Committees. The Board may establish any advisory
commissions, boards and committees as the Board deems appropriate to assist the
Board in carrying out its functions and implementing the CCA Program, other
energy programs and the provisions of this Agreement.
4.8 Director Comoensation. Compensation for work performed by Directors on
behalf of the Authority shall be borne by the Party that appointed the Director.
The Board, however, may adopt by resolution a policy relating to the
reimbursement of expen~es incurred by Directors.
4.9 Board V otine Related to the CCA Proeram.
4.9.1. To be effective, on all matters specifically related to the CCA Program, a
vote of the Board shall consist of the following: (1) a majority of all
Directors shall vote in the affirmative or such higher voting percentage
expressly set forth in Sections 7.2 and 8.4 (the "percentage vote") and (2)
the corresponding voting shares (as described in Section 4.9.2 and Exhibit
D) of all such Directors voting in the affirmative shall exceed 50%, or
such other higher voting shares percentage expressly set forth in Sections
7.2 and 8.4 (the "percentage voting shares"), provided that, in instances in
which such other higher voting share percentage would result in anyone
Director having a voting share that equals or exceeds that which is
necessary to disapprove the matter being voted on by the Board, at least
one other Director shall be required to vote in the negative in order to
disapprove such matter.
4.9.2. Unless otherwise stated herein, voting shares of the Directors shall be
determined by combining the following: (1) an equal voting share for each
Director determined in accordance with the formula detailed in Section
4.9.2.1, below; and (2) an additional voting share determined in
accordance with the formula detailed in Section 4.9.2.2, below.
4.9.2.1 Pro Rata Voting Share. Each Director shall have an equal voting
share as determined by the following formula: (1 /total number of
Directors) multiplied by 50, and
4.9.2.2 Annual Energy Use Voting Share. Each Director shall have an
additional voting share as determined by the following formula:
(Annual Energy Use/Total Annual Energy) multiplied by 50, where
(a) "Annual Energy Use" means, (i) with respect to the first 3 years
following the Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed
in kilowatt hours ("kWhs"), within the Party's respective jurisdiction
and (ii) with respect to the period after the third anniversary of the
Effective Date, the annual electricity usage, expressed in k Whs, of
accounts within a Party's respective jurisdiction that are served by
the Authority and (b) "Total Annual Energy" means the sum of all
Parties' Annual Energy Use. The initial values for Annual Energy
use are designated in Exhibit C, and shall be adjusted annually as
soon as reasonably practicable after January 1, but no later than
March 1 of each year.
4.9.2.3 The voting shares are set forth in Exhibit D.
4.10 Board Voting on General Administrative Matters and Programs Not
Involving CCA. Except as otherwise provided by this Agreement or the
Operating Rules and. Regulations, each member shall have one vote on general
administrative matters, including but not limited to the adoption and
amendment of the Operating Rules and Regulations, and energy programs not
involving CCA. Action on these items shall be determined by a majority vote
of the quorum present and voting on the item or such higher voting percentage
expressly set forth in Sections 7.2 and 8.4.
4.11 Meetine:s and Special Meetine:s of the Board. The Board shall hold at least four
regular meetings per year, but the Board may provide for the holding of regular
meetings at more frequent intervals. The date, hour and place of each regular
meeting shall be fixed by resolution or ordinance of the Board. Regular meetings
may be adjourned to another meeting time. Special meetings of the Board may be
called in accordance with t.he provisions of California Government Code Section
54956. Directors may participate in meetings telephonically, with full voting
rights, only to the extent permitted by law. All meetings of the Board shall be
conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act
(California Government Code Section 54950 et seq.).
4.12 Selection of Board Officers.
4.12.1 Chair and Vice Chair. The Directors shall select, from among
themselves, a Chair, who shall be the presiding officer of all Board
meetings, and a Vice Chair, who shall serve in the absence of the Chair.
The term of office of the Chair and Vice Chair shall continue for one year,
but there shall be no limit on the number of terms held by either the Chair
or Vice Chair. The office of either the Chair or Vice Chair shall be
declared vacant and a new selection shall be made if: (a) the person
serving dies, resigns, or the Party that the person represents removes the
person as its representative on the Board or (b) the Party that he or she
represents withdraws form the Authority pursuant to the provisions of this
Agreement.
4.12.2 Secretary. The Board shall appoint a Secretary, who need not be a
member of the Board, who shall be responsible for keeping the minutes of
all meetings of the Board and all other official records of the Authority.
4.12.3 Treasurer and Auditor. The Board shall appoint a qualified person to
act as the Treasurer and a qualified person to act as the Auditor, neither of
whom needs to be a member of the Board. If the Board so designates, and
in accordance with the provisions of applicable law, a qualified person
may hold both the office of Treasurer and the office of Auditor of the
Authority. Unless otherwise exempted from such requirement, the
Authority shall cause an independent audit to be made by a certified public
accountant, or public accountant, in compliance with Section 6505 of the
Act. The Treasur~r shall act as the depositary of the Authority and have
custody of all the money of the Authority, from whatever source, and as
such, shall have all of the duties and responsibilities specified in Section
6505.5 of the Act. The Board may require the Treasurer and/or Auditor to
file with the Authority an official bond in an amount to be fixed by the
Board, and if so requested the Authority shall pay the cost of premiums
associated with the bond. The Treasurer shall report directly to the Board
and shall comply with the requirements of treasurers of incorporated
municipalities. The Board may transfer the responsibilities of Treasurer to
any person or entity as the law may provide at the time. The duties and
obligations of the Treasurer are further specified in Article 6.
4.13 Administrative Services Provider. The Board may appoint one or more
administrative services providers to serve as the Authority's agent for planning,
implementing, operating and administering the CCA Program, and any other
program approved by the Board, in accordance with the provisions of a written
agreement between the Authority and the appointed administrative services
provider or providers that will be known as an Administrative Services
Agreement. The Administrative Services Agreement shall set forth the terms and
conditions by which the appointed administrative services provider shall perform
or cause to be performed all tasks necessary for planning, implementing,
operating and administering the CCA Program and other approved programs. The
Administrative Services Agreement shall set forth the term of the Agreement and
the circumstances under which the Administrative Services Agreement may be
terminated by the Authority. This section shall not in any way be construed to
limit the discretion of the Authority to hire its own employees to administer the
CCA Program or any other program.
ARTICLE 5
IMPLEMENTATION ACTION AND AUTHORITY DOCUMENTS
5.1 Preliminarv ImDlementation of the CCA Prof!ram.
5.1.1 Enabling Ordinance. Except as otherwise provided by Section 3.1, prior
to the execution of this Agreement, each Party shall adopt an ordinance in
accordance with Public Utilities Code Section 366.2( c)(1 0) for the purpose
of specifying that the Party intends to implement a CCA Program by and
through its participation in the Authority.
5.1.2 Implementation Plan. The Authority shall cause to be prepared an
Implementation :plan meeting the requirements of Public Utilities Code
Section 366.2 and any applicable Public Utilities Commission regulations
as soon after the Effective Date as reasonably practicable. The
Implementation Plan shall not be filed with the Public Utilities
Commission until it is approved by the Board in the manner provided by
Section 4.9.
5.1.3 Effect of Vote On Required Implementation Action. In the event that
two or more Parties vote to approve Program Agreement 1 or any earlier
action required for the implementation of the CCA Program ("Required
Implementation Action"), but such vote is insufficient to approve the
Required Implementation Action under Section 4.9, the following will
occur:
5.1.3.1 The Parties voting against the Required Implementation
Action shall no longer be a Party to this Agreement and
this Agreement shall be terminated, without further notice,
with respect to each of the Parties voting against the
Required Implementation Action at the time this vote is
final. The Board may take a provisional vote on a
Required Implementation Action in order to initially
determine the position of the Parties on the Required
Implementation Action. A vote, specifically stated in the
record of the Board meeting to be a provisional vote, shall
not be considered a final vote with the consequences
stated above. A Party who is terminated from this
Agreement pursuant to this section shall be considered the
same as a Party that voluntarily withdrew from the
Agreement under Section 7.1.1.1.
5.1.3.2 After the termination of any Parties pursuant to Section
5.1.3.1, the remaining Parties to this Agreement shall be
only the Parties who voted in favor of the Required
Implementation Action.
5.1.4 Termination of CCA Program. Nothing contained in this Article or this
Agreement shall be construed to limit the discretion of the Authority to
terminate the implementation or operation of the CCA Program at any
time in accordance with any applicable requirements of state law.
5.2 Authority Documents. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the affairs of the
Authority will be implemented through various documents duly adopted by the
Board through Board resolution, including but not necessarily limited to the
Operating Rules and Regulations, the annual budget, and specified plans and
policies defined as the Authority Documents by this Agreement. The Parties agree
to abide by and comply with the terms and conditions of all such Authority
Documents that may be ~dopted by the Board, subject to the Parties' right to
withdraw from the Authority as described in Article 7.
ARTICLE 6
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
6.1 Fiscal Year. The Authority's fiscal year shall be 12 months commencing July 1
and ending June 30. The fiscal year may be changed by Board resolution.
6.2 Denositorv.
6.2.1 All funds of the Authority shall be held in separate accounts in the name
of the Authority and not commingled with funds of any Party or any other
person or entity.
6.2.2 All funds of the Authority shall be strictly and separately accounted for,
and regular reports shall be rendered of all receipts and disbursements, at
least quarterly during the fiscal year. The books and records of the
Authority shall be open to inspection by the Parties at all reasonable times.
The Board shall contract with a certified public accountant or public
accountant to make an annual audit of the accounts and records of the
Authority, which shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements
of Section 6505 of the Act.
6.2.3 All expenditures shall be made in accordance with the approved budget
and upon the approval of any officer so authorized by the Board in
accordance with its Operating Rules and Regulations. The Treasurer shall
draw checks or warrants or make payments by other means for claims or
disbursements not within an applicable budget only upon the prior
approval of the Board.
6.3 Bude:et and Recoverv Costs.
6.3.1 Budget. The initial budget shall be approved by the Board. The Board
may revise the budget from time to time through an Authority Document
as may be reasonably necessary to address contingencies and unexpected
expenses. All subsequent budgets of the Authority shall be prepared and
approved by the Board in accordance with the Operating Rules and
Regulations.
6.3.2 County Funding of Initial Costs. The County of Marin shall fund the
Initial Costs of the Authority in implementing the CCA Program in an
amount not to exceed $500,000 unless a larger amount of funding is
approved by the .Board of Supervisors of the County. This funding shall
be paid by the County at the times and in the amounts required by the
Authority. In the event that the CCA Program becomes operational, these
Initial Costs paid by the County of Marin shall be included in the customer
charges for electric services as provided by Section 6.3.3 to the extent
permitted by law, and the County of Marin shall be reimbursed from the
payment of such charges by customers of the Authority. The Authority
may establish a reasonable time period over which such costs are
recovered. In the event that the CCA Program does not become
operational, the County of Marin shall not be entitled to any
reimbursement of the Initial Costs it has paid from the Authority or any
Party.
6.3.2 CCA Program Costs. The Parties desire that, to the extent reasonably
practicable, all costs incurred by the Authority that are directly or
indirectly attributable to the provision of electric services under the CCA
Program, including the establishment and maintenance of various reserve
and performance funds, shall be recovered through charges to CCA
customers receiving such electric services.
6.3.3 General Costs. Costs that are not directly or indirectly attributable to the
provision of electric services under the CCA Program, as determined by
the Board, shall be defined as general costs. General costs shall be shared
among the Parties on such basis as the Board shall determine pursuant to
an Authority Document.
6.3.4 Other Energy Program Costs. Costs that are directly or indirectly
attributable to energy programs approved by the Authority other than the
CCA Program shall be shared among the Parties on such basis as the
Board shall determine pursuant to an Authority Document.
ARTICLE 7
WITHDRA W AL AND TERMINATION
7.1 Withdrawal.
7.1.1 General.
7.1.1.1 Prior to the Authority's execution of Program Agreement 1, any
Party may withdraw its membership in the Authority by giving no
less than 30 days advance written notice of its election to do so,
which notice shall be given to the Authority and each Party. To
permit consideration by the governing body of each Party, the
Authority s.hall provide a copy of the proposed Program Agreement
1 to each Party at least 90 days prior to the consideration of such
agreement by the Board.
7.1.1.2 Subsequent to the Authority's execution of Program Agreement 1, a
Party may withdraw its membership in the Authority, effective as of
the beginning of the Authority's fiscal year, by giving no less than 6
months advance written notice of its election to do so, which notice
shall be given to the Authority and each Party, and upon such other
conditions as may be prescribed in Program Agreement 1.
7.1.2 Amendment. Notwithstanding Section 7.1.1, a Party may withdraw its
membership in the Authority following an amendment to this Agreement
in the manner provided by Section 8.4.
7.1.3 Continuing Liability; Further Assurances. A Party that withdraws its
membership in the Authority may be subject to certain continuing
liabilities, as described in Section 7.3. The withdrawing Party and the
Authority shall execute and deliver all further instruments and documents,
and take any further action that may be reasonably necessary, as
determined by the Board, to effectuate the orderly withdrawal of such
Party from membership in the Authority. The Operating Rules and
Regulations shall prescribe the rights if any of a withdrawn Party to
continue to participate in those Board discussions and decisions affecting
customers of the CCA Program that reside or do business within the
jurisdiction of the Party.
7.2 Involuntary Termination of a Partv. This Agreement may be terminated with
respect to a Party for material non-compliance with provisions of this Agreement
or the Authority Documents upon an affirmative vote of the Board in which the
minimum percentage vote and percentage voting shares, as described in Section
4.9.1, shall be no less than 67%, excluding the vote and voting shares of the Party
subject to possible termination. Prior to any vote to terminate this Agreement with
respect to a Party, written notice of the proposed termination and the reason(s) for
such termination shall be delivered to the Party whose termination is proposed at
least 30 days prior to the regular Board meeting at which such matter shall first be
discussed as an agenda item. The written notice of proposed termination shall
specify the particular provisions of this Agreement or the Authority Documents
that the Party has allegedly violated. The Party subject to possible termination
shall have the opportunity at the next regular Board meeting to respond to any
reasons and allegations that may be cited as a basis for termination prior to a vote
regarding termination. A Party that has had its membership in the Authority
terminated may be subject to certain continuing liabilities, as described in Section
7.3. In the event that the Authority decides to not implement the CCA Program,
the minimum percentage vote of 67% shall be conducted in accordance with
Section 4.10 rather than Section 4.9.1.
7.3 Continuinl!: Liabilitv: Refund. Upon a withdrawal or involuntary termination of
a Party, the Party shall remain responsible for any claims, demands, damages, or
liabilities arising from the Party's membership in the Authority through the date
of its withdrawal or involuntary termination, it being agreed that the Party shall
not be responsible for any claims, demands, damages, or liabilities arising after
the date of the Party's withdrawal or involuntary termination. In addition, such
Party also shall be responsible for any costs or obligations associated with the
Party's participation in any program in accordance with the provisions of any
agreements relating to such program provided such costs or obligations were
incurred prior to the withdrawal of the Party. The Authority may withhold funds
otherwise owing to the Party or may require the Party to deposit sufficient funds
with the Authority, as reasonably determined by the Authority, to cover the
Party's liability for the costs described above. Any amount of the Party's funds
held on deposit with the Authority above that which is required to pay any
liabilities or obligations shall be returned to the Party.
7.4 Mutual Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement
of all the Parties; provided, however, the foregoing shall not be construed as
limiting the rights of a Party to withdraw its membership in the Authority, and
thus terminate this Agreement with respect to such withdrawing Party, as
described in Section 7.1.
7.5 Disposition of Propertv upon Termination of Authoritv. Upon termination of
this Agreement as to all Parties, any surplus money or assets in possession of the
Authority for use under this Agreement, after payment of all liabilities, costs,
expenses, and charges incurred under this Agreement and under any program
documents, shall be returned to the then-existing Parties in proportion to the
contributions made by each.
ARTICLE 8
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
8.1 DisDute Resolution. The Parties and the Authority shall make reasonable efforts
to settle all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement. Should
such efforts to settle a dispute, after reasonable efforts, fail, the dispute shall be
settled by binding arbitration in accordance with policies and procedures
established by the Board.
8.2 Liabilitv of Directors" Officers" and EmDlovees. The Directors, officers, and
employees of the Authority shall use ordinary care and reasonable diligence in the
exercise of their powers and in the performance of their duties pursuant to this
Agreement. No current (~)f former Director, officer, or employee will be
responsible for any act or omission by another Director, officer, or employee. The
Authority shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the individual current and
former Directors, officers, and employees for any acts or omissions in the scope
of their employment or duties in the manner provided by Government Code
Section 995 et seq. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the defenses
available under the law, to the Parties, the Authority, or its Directors, officers, or
employees.
8.3 Indemnification of Parties. The Authority shall acquire such insurance coverage
as is necessary to protect the interests of the Authority, the Parties and the public.
The Authority shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Parties and each of
their respective Board or Council members, officers, agents and employees, from
any and all claims, losses, damages, costs, injuries and liabilities of every kind
arising directly or indirectly from the conduct, activities, operations, acts, and
omissions of the Authority under this Agreement.
8.4 Amendment of this A2:reement. This Agreement may be amended by an
affirmative vote of the Board in which the minimum percentage vote and
percentage voting shares, as described in Section 4.9.1, shall be no less than 67%.
The Authority shall provide written notice to all Parties of amendments to this
Agreement, including the effective date of such amendments. A Party shall be
deemed to have withdrawn its membership in the Authority effective immediately
upon the vote of the Board approving an amendment to this Agreement if the
Director representing such Party has provided notice to the other Directors
immediately preceding the Board's vote of the Party's intention to withdraw its
membership in the Authority should the amendment be approved by the Board.
As described in Section 7.3, a Party that withdraws its membership in the
Authority in accordance with the above-described procedure may be subject to
continuing liabilities incurred prior to the Party's withdrawal. In the event that
the Authority decides to not implement the CCA Program, the minimum
percentage vote of 67% shall be conducted in accordance with Section 4.10 rather
than Section 4.9.1.
8.5 Assi!!nment. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the
rights and duties of the Parties may not be assigned or delegated without the
advance written consent of all of the other Parties, and any attempt to assign or
delegate such rights or duties in contravention of this Section 8.5 shall be null and
void. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the
successors and assigns of the Parties. This Section 8.5 does not prohibit a Party
from entering into an independent agreement with another agency, person, or
entity regarding the financing of that Party's contributions to the Authority, or the
disposition of proceeds which that Party receives under this Agreement, so long
as such independent agreement does not affect, or purport to affect, the rights and
duties of the Authority or the Parties under this Agreement.
8.6 Severabilitv. If one or l!lore clauses, sentences, paragraphs or provisions of this
Agreement shall be held to be unlawful, invalid or unenforceable, it is hereby
agreed by the Parties, that the remainder of the Agreement shall not be affected
thereby. Such clauses, sentences, paragraphs or provision shall be deemed
reformed so as to be lawful, valid and enforced to the maximum extent possible.
8.7 Further Assurances. Each Party agrees to execute and deliver all further
instruments and documents, and take any further action that may be reasonably
necessary, to effectuate the purposes and intent of this Agreement.
8.8 Execution bv CounterDarts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of
counterparts, and upon execution by all Parties, each executed counterpart shall
have the same force and effect as an original instrument and as if all Parties had
signed the same instrument. Any signature page of this Agreement may be
detached from any counterpart of this Agreement without impairing the legal
effect of any signatures thereon, and may be attached to another counterpart of
this Agreement identical in form hereto but having attached to it one or more
signature pages.
8.9 Parties to be Served Notice. Any notice authorized or required to be given
pursuant to this Agreement shall be validly given if served in writing either
personally, by deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid with
return receipt requested, or by a recognized courier service. Notices given (a)
personally or by courier service shall be conclusively deemed received at the time
of delivery and receipt and (b) by mail shall be conclusively deemed given 48
hours after the deposit thereof (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) if the
sender receives the return receipt. All notices shall be addressed to the office of
the clerk or secretary of the Authority or Party, as the case may be, or such other
person designated in writing by the Authority or Party. Notices given to one Party
shall be copied to all other Parties. Notices given to the Authority shall be copied
to all Parties.
ARTICLE 9
SIGNATURE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Joint Powers Agreement
establishing the Marin Energy Authority.
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
Party:
Exhibit A
To the
Joint Powers Agreement
Marin Energy Authority
-Definitions-
"AB 117" means Assembly Bill 117 (Stat. 2002, ch. 838, codified at Public
Utilities Code Section 366.2), which created CCA.
"Act" means the Joint Exercise of Powers Act of the State of California
(Government Code Section 6500 et seq.)
"Administrative Services Agreement" means an agreement or agreements entered
into after the Effective Date by the Authority with an entity that will perform tasks
necessary for planning, implementing, operating and administering the CCA Program or
any other energy programs adopted by the Authority.
"Agreement" means this Joint Powers Agreement.
"Annual Energy Use" has the meaning given in Section 4.9.2.2.
"Authority" means the Marin Energy Authority.
"Authority Document(s)" means document(s) duly adopted by the Board by
resolution or motion implementing the powers, functions and activities of the Authority,
including but not limited to the Operating Rules and Regulations, the annual budget, and
plans and policies.
"Board" means the Board of Directors of the Authority.
"CCA" or "Community Choice Aggregation" means an electric service option
available to cities and counties pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 366.2.
"CCA Program" means the Authority's program relating to CCA that is
principally described in Sections 2.4 and 5.1.
"Director" means a member of the Board of Directors representing a Party.
"Effective Date" means the date on which this Agreement shall become effective
and the Marin Energy Authority shall exist as a separate public agency, as further
described in Section 2.1.
"Implementation Plan" means the plan generally described in Section 5.1.2 of this
Agreement that is required under Public Utilities Code Section 366.2 to be filed with the
California Public Utilities Commission for the purpose of describing a proposed CCA
Program.
"Initial Costs" means all costs incurred by the Authority relating to the
establishment and initial operation of the Authority, such as the hiring of an Executive
Director and any administrative staff, any required accounting, administrative, technical
and legal services in support of the Authority's initial activities or in support of the
negotiation, preparation and approval of one or more Administrative Services Provider
Agreements and Program Agreement 1. Administrative and operational costs incurred
after the approval of Program Agreement 1 shall not be considered Initial Costs.
"Initial Participants" means, for the purpose of this Agreement,
"Operating Rules and Regulations" means the rules, regulations, policies, bylaws
and procedures governing the operation of the Authority.
"Parties" means, collectively, the signatories to this Agreement that have satisfied
the conditions in Sections 2.2 or 3.2 such that it is considered a member of the Authority.
"Party" means, singularly, a signatory to this Agreement that has satisfied the
conditions in Sections 2.2 or 3.2 such that it is considered a member of the Authority.
"Program Agreement 1" means the agreement that the Authority will enter into
with an energy service provider that will provide the electricity to be distributed to
customers participating in the CCA Program.
"Total Annual Energy" has the meaning given in Section 4.9.2.2.
Exhibit B
To the
Joint Powers Agreement
Marin Energy Authority
-List of the Parties-
Exhibit C
To the
Joint Powers Agreement
Marin Energy Authority
-Annual Energy Use-
This Exhibit C is effective as of October 8, 2008.
Party
City of Belvedere
T own of Corte Madera
Town of Fairfax
City of Larkspur
City of Mill Valley
City of Nova to
Town of Ross
Town of San Anselmo
City of San Rafael
City of Sausalito
Town of Tiburon
County of Marin
Authority Total Energy Use
*Data provided by PG&E
kWh (2005*)
10,498,935
75,726,510
23,594,966
63,659,700
64,761,440
268,301,203
13,329,878
47,874,957
332,588,277
52,373,525
42,831,004
332,726,224
1,328,266,620
Exhibit D
To the
Joint Powers Agreement
Marin Energy Authority
- Voting Shares -
This Exhibit D is effective as of October 8, 2008.
Section Section Voting
Party kWh (2005*) 4.9.2.1 4.9.2.2 Share
City of Belvedere 10,498,935 4.17% 0.40% 4.56%
Town of Corte Madera 75,726,510 4.17% 2.85% 7.02%
Town of Fairfax 23,594,966 4.17% 0.89% 5.05%
City of Larkspur 63,659,700 4.17% 2.40% 6.56%
City of Mill Valley 64,761,440 4.17% 2.44% 6.60%
City of Novato 268,301,203 4.17% 10.10% 14.27%
Town of Ross 13,329,878 4.17% 0.50% 4.67%
Town of San Anselmo 47,874,957 4.17% 1.80% 5.97%
City of San Rafael 332,588,277 4.17% 12.52% 16.69%
City of Sausalito 52,373,525 4.17% 1.97% 6.14%
Town of Tiburon 42,831,004 4.17% 1.61 % 5.78%
County of Marin 332,726,224 4.17% 12.52% 16.69%
1,328,266,620 50.000/0 50.000';" 100.00%
*Data provided by PG&E
TOWN OF TIBURON
;:::: 1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
November 19, 2008
Agenda Item: C.c ~ ~
STAFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Office of the Town Clerk
Subject:
Resolution Commending the Men and Women who fought the Angel Island
Fire and all those who supported the effort
Reviewed By:
~-
BACKGROUND
The October fire on Angel Island was successfully fought without the loss of life and very little
damage to the historic structures and resources of the island. This is due in large part to the
rapid response of the Tiburon Fire Protection District and all the other agencies and volunteers
that assisted in this effort.
At the behest of Mayor Slavitz, Town staff has drafted a resolution commending the firefighters
and others who successfully dealt with this challenging and life-threatening incident.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached resolution and join with Mayor Slavitz in
commending these brave men and women.
Exhibits:
. Resolution
Prepared By: Diane Crane Iacopi, Town Clerk
DRAFT
Resolution No. 46-2008
A Resolution of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
Commending the Men and Women who fought the
Angel Island Fire and
All those who supported them and contributed to this effort
Whereas, on October 12, 2008, a fire started on Angel Island which ultimately
consumed over 300 acres, or 400/0, of the island; and
Whereas, the response to the fire was immediate and intense, led by members of
the Tiburon Fire Protection District, the Southern Marin Fire Protection District, Mill
Valley, Sausalito, and Marin County Fire Departments; and
Whereas, Tiburon's new Fireboat Tiburon, in conjunction with Sausalito's
Fireboat Liberty, rapidly delivered personnel to the island and participated in the firefight,
along with the United States Coast Guard and State Parks vessels; and
Whereas, volunteers such as local residents Lisa Wear and Maggie McDonough
of Angel Island ferry joined the first responders in their efforts to evacuate the island and
to bring needed equipInent and supplies to the island; and
Whereas, as the blaze continued into the following days, these brave men and
women were joined by Cal Fire (California Department of Forestry), the Novato and
Marinwood Fire Departments, the Larkspur and San Rafael Fire Departments, as well as
the California Department of Corrections; and
Whereas, the California Highway Patrol sent a helicopter, Dave's Dive Service
and Redwood Shore Diving provided their equipment and personnel, as did West Bay
Builders in Novato; and
Whereas, the fire fighting efforts were assisted by the work of local officials in
the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere, including the Tiburon and Belvedere Police
Departments, the Tiburon and Belvedere Departments of Public Works, and Emergency
Services Coordinator Laurie Nielsen; and
Whereas, these efforts were aided by the Marin County Department of Public
Works, the Tiburon Volunteer Firefighters, Angel Island State Park personnel and their
families, and countless others; and
Whereas, food and sustenance were provided to the firefighters by GuaYmas
Restaurant and Ristorante Servino of Tiburon, as well as Lombardi's restaurant in San
Rafael;
Page 1 of 2
Whereas, food and sustenance were provided to the firefighters by GuaYmas
Restaurant and Ristorante Servino of Tiburon, as well as Lombardi's restaurant in San
Rafael;
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon
hereby commends the brave men and women who were successful in fighting the Angel
Island fire and saving the important building and historical sites for this and future
generations; and
Be it further resolved that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon commends
and thanks its public safety and public works personnel, along with its staff and all the
volunteers who provided their expertise, time and resources to see this effort through to a
successful conclusion.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council on
November 19, 2008, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
JEFF SLA VITZ, MAYOR
TOWN OF TIBURON
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK
Page 2 of 2
TOWN OF TIBURON
~ 1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~ovember 19, 2008
Agenda Item: c(- &:
STAFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Community Development Department
Subject:
Future Annexation Agreement for the Property Located at
3630 Paradise Drive; Assessor Parcel 058-031-14; James and Shannon
Israel Trustees, owners and applicants
Reviewed By:
~
BACKGROUND
In approximately 2002, a private sewer line (the Shaw line) was constructed to the Sanitary
District No.5 (SD5) Playa Verde Treatment Plant from a new home on Paradise Drive in the
vicinity of Teaberry Lane. Shortly thereafter, the sewer line was accepted as a public line by SD5
and several properties on Teaberry Lane and on Paradise Drive along the route of the new sewer
line annexed into SD5 after securing an annexation agreement from the Town of Tiburon. Other
property owners along the route remain on individual treatment systems, and are only gradually
seeking connection to the public sewer line as circumstances allow or dictate.
The property owners of 3630 Paradise Drive are now seeking approval from the Town for the
standardized annexation agreement that would enable them to connect into the public sewer
system. The subject property is currently developed with a single family home and is not eligible
for future subdivision under current zoning. Approval of the annexation agreement would be
consistent with adopted Town policy and practice for this portion of the unincorporated Tiburon
Peninsula.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council:
Authorize the Town Manager to execute the Annexation Agreement for 3630
Paradise Drive.
Exhibits:
1.
2.
Vicinity Map
Owner-executed Agreement with 3630 Paradise Drive
prepared By:
Laurie Tyler, Associate Planner
~
~
I
~
(\J
o
I
CO
L()
o
::f.t
-
CD
t)
S-
ro
a..
Q)
>
.C
o
Q) (/)
(/) Q)
"C .- c
C -g :.::i
G) Co >.
C) 0- t
~ 0 Q)
(V') a.
CD e
(V') 0-
DD
w
z~A-~
~
!I:
/
/
ID
IDO
LLO
0_
..-
-
CD
>
--
S-
O
Q)
en
--
-0
ro
S-
ro
a..
o
(\J
CD
(\J
o
o
LO
o
LO
N
o
c
--
t)
--
>
\
-"I
,-----J
/
'>
~X
'" /
"X /
X ~/
EXHIBIT NO..-1.-
APN NO. 58-031-14
Recording Requested By:
TOWN OF TIBURON
Return to:
Director of Community Development
Town of Tiburon
1505 Tiburon Blvd.
Tiburon, CA 94920
This document is for the benefit of the Town of Tiburon.
DOCUMENT TITLE
AGREEMENT REGARDING
ANNEXATION OF REAL PROPERTY
COMMONL Y KNOWN AS
3630 PARADISE DRIVE
TO THE TOWN OF TIBURON
EXHIBIT NO. Z
AGREEMENT REGARDING ANNEXATION OF REAL PROPERTY
TO THE TOWN OF TIBURON
This Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of , 2008 by and
between the Town of Tiburon, a municipal corporation, ("Town" hereafter) and James A.
. Israel and Shannon Israel, trustees of The Israel Family Trust dated June 16, 2003
("Owner" hereafter) and is based upon the following facts:
(a) Owner holds title to that certain real property ("the Property" hereafter) described
in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and shown for illustrative purposes only on the
attached Exhibit "B"; aild
(b) Owner desires to connect to the public sewer system provided by Sanitary District
No.5. As a result of the Marin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
dual annexation policy, Owner would be required to annex to the Town of
Tiburon concurrently with annexation to the Sanitary District unless the policy is
waived. Town recognizes that at this time, annexation of this non-contiguous
property would result in inefficient provision of Town services to the property,
but that at some point in the future, the Town may desire annexation.
( c) The Town has agreed to defer annexation of the Property and recommend such to
the Local Agency Formation Commission on the conditions set forth in this
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE PARTIES
HERETO AS FOLLOWS:
1. Owner agrees on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns that, in the
event any future proceedings for the annexation of the property to the Town shall
be initiated by the Town, Owner shall neither directly nor indirectly oppose or
protest such annexation.
2. Owner agrees that his obligations hereunder shall run with the Property and that
the Property shall be held, conveyed, hypothecated, encumbered, leased, rented,
used and occupied subject to the provisions of this Agreement and that the
obligations undertaken by Owner hereunder shall be binding on all parties having
or acquiring any right, title, or interest in the Property.
2
OWNER:
~" o1JJ:.J.J -/}//
afttnaw/~~ lW ~ f t
TOWN OF TIBURON:
By:
Margaret A. Curran, Town Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Ann R. Danforth, Town Attorney
Attachments: Exhibits "A" and "B".
3
~b1Lb/2008 11:43
0131301301313130
E:
PAGE 01
CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMffiNT
State of California
County of
On~~
M sr;n
before me,
Kenny Eckhardt, Notary Public
personally appeared ja..N\Q sA. \ S~Gte \
(HL't-e irJ$Cf't namo M<l tltlc of the officer)
ar0 ~ctf)flo{', (Lj[Qe \
,.
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactl;)lY evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subsc.ribed. to
the within instnnn.ent and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in bj,slher/their authorized
capacity(ies), and that by mather/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s)) or the entity upon behalf of
which the per~on(s) act~d, executed the instnunent.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of Cali fomi a that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
~~, ~
Signat of Notary Public:
(Notaty S~l)
~ ~ :. ~ ~ K~NNY EC~H;RDT /'- r
O-Q'$ COMM, #1/70393 "0
a. NOTARY PUBL.Ic-<CALIFORNIA 0
~ . _ MARIN COUNTY ..I.
J-.y-":" '..". ~ctJ~m. :XPI~ S!I.~r ~ 2~1 ~
WITNESS ll?-Y han~ and official seal.
.
.
(Title or dC!icription of attached dOCUlncnt co.otinued)
ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATION
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING TInS FORM
Ani." QC!know/~dgment completed in C.alifomia must aantal'" verb~t tx.{lCtly 0.,
apPf.ar,~ abewt ill dtP. notm-y Jection or Q ~tparare o.ck1'lawledpnent form must be
prope.rJ)l comp/t/~d (md. attached to that doCII~"t. 71le 0,,1, ~)tCepti01'l iJ if Q
docume1ft is fo bi? .-ecoJ'(Jtd or.tnide ofCalifon1ia. Tn su~h inst(1.nca, any al~rnatiVt
acknowledgment lItrbf(l.ge as may be printed 011 Ikch a doCllPtltnt Sf) long os r.lt.t1
v(!,.hia~ does nQt 7'erpiir~ the FIOtary to do something tha' Is tUegrJ/ for (l notary ;rt
Callfor"ia (i.e. cftrttiving tilt! aufhorU.(!d' capadt)J of th~ aig7tt~), Pilume check the
document. car~ful(11 fo,. proper notarial word.ing and attach this 10m! lfrequi,.~d.
. DESCRIPTION OF THE A IT ACHED DOCUMENT
A(,~~~~N\ fL~~~\~ b A~N~>L~\ \.cJr-J
Ol~ ~ ~ I, Pfl-OJ"l"fC.'(z::'( -J C r-)Ju N. ~)..\ ( ':'-1
\~ (Title or <Iescrlption or attached doctrment) .
~-'JCuJ"> AS. % ~ PACJ-l\tl\S.~" D~ \
Number of Pages ___ Document Date
To lk~ \tM)r.J ~ 1\BV~
~". '(Add,tionaJ inf'onmtion)
(Title)
o PartJler( s)
o Attomey-in~Fact
o Tro~tee(s)
o Otb{~
· State and County infurma.tkm mutlt be the State aud Co\IfJiy where tlu~ doC'utnent.
Signcr(ll) personally appeared bef.(lTC the nomry public for acknowledgment.
· Date ofnotar.iz.-,tion must be tbc date: that the signcr(lI) pefSOJ1slly AfJPe.,red which
mum 1ll8o be the same date the acknowl~dgment is completed,
· The notary public Jl1~ print his or her name as it appears within his Of her
commission fQl10wed by a cortuna and th~ your title (notJty public),
· Print the name(5) of document Rigner(s) WIll) pcttionally IIIppcar ~t the time of
notm'iution.
· Indicate the correct singular or pl\ll'lll tbrms by crossing off incorrect fonns (Le.
heI~c1~ is 18tH ) or circli:ng the correct f01.J11li. l=ailure to cmTCCtly indicate this
:Information may ]e~d to ~ectiOtl of docwrtent recorc:tint,
· The notary seal impre&sion. must be elear aod pbotograpbically reproducible.
hnJlt'ession must not cover tat or 1,ne..cL If seal imprcaaiOtl lltr.rDdgc&. re.s~lll if a
sufficient area pcnnits, othcrwifie complet;J; B. different acknowledgment form,
· Slenaturc of tlm -notary P\lbH~ "mm maten t,he ~lgnatul'c au iile with tbe offiCE: of
the county clerk
~ Additional information is not requited o\Jt could help to enSl.~ this
ocknowl~ if! not misused, or attached to a different docum~t,
~ Indicate title or type Qfatbtched document. tlumbcJ:' of pages ~Tld date,
~ lndicatc the cBpaclty claimed by t'be !tigner, 1f thc c.l.iml;!d capac1t}' I~ a
corpOl'ate officef', indicate the titl~ (I.e. C~O. ero, SccreUtl)'),
· Sp~ur"'\' AI1;1('h fhi< M""~",",,\""" jr, 11-,.. ";...........) .".-r....,-_._,
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER
o Individu.al (8)
o Corporate Officer
"Exhibit A"
All that certain real property situate in a portion of the Rancho Corte Madera Del Presidio in
the County of Marin County, State of California, described as follows:
Beginning at the southeasterly corner of the property described in the Deed to James Israel
and Shannon Israel recorded July 21,2006 as Document 2006-0045874, Marin County
Records and the existing Sanitary Distdct No.5 boundary:
1. Thence leaving said boundary North 73013'00" West 92.06 feet;
2. Thence South 67047'00' West 162.49 feet;
3. Thence North 26023'40" West 42.59 feet to the Sanitary District No.5 boundary;
4. Thence along said boundary North 41029' 42" East 18.07 feet;
5. Thence North 56027'51" East 37.40 feet;
6. Thence North 85000'21" East 22.72 feet;
7. Thence North 59011 '20" East 33.35 feet:
8. Thence North 37003'08" East 34.05 feet
9. Thence North 70055'24" East 34.27 feet;
1 O. Thence North 82021 ' 41" East 12.09 feet;
11. Thence North 40049' 58" East 22.67 feet;
12. Thence North 37016'26" East 13.81 feet;
13. Thence North 43042'07" East 12.87 feet;
14. Thence North 34057'31" East 11.27 feet
15. Thence North 15020'02" East 16.58 feet;
16. Thence North 30040' 17" East 24.93 feet;
17. Thence North 03026'57" West 16.16 feet;
18. Thence leaving said boundary South 48031 '00" East 74.00 feet;
19. Thence South 70035'33" East 59.09 feet to the Sanitary District No.5 boundary;
20. Thence along said boundary South 27049'38" West 144.87 feet to the Point of
Beginning and containing 0.66 acres of land more or less.
~3Ci"~2
~~9.Q[
5= ::J"'O 0 9.
(l)0...,~3
p-'-~(I)~
~~ ~ ..
.-~
t: '-< cD
Ul 0.. ::l
(1)(1)-
D.Ul
oQ~
Ul"'O ...,
.-"'0
go'~
Ul ::l (I)
(jj'o W
_wo
Q o..,z.
(I).
o::!l
::l:J-1
(I)=:r
2. 0.. (jj'
--.
CD::lo..
..., CD
.....s:Ul
Q CD 3.
(J)"'O
00t:~
9..0-0
CD o..::l
2. ~' 2.
_0'-
O::JO
::J :J
0..3:0..
o _.
"000
)>:J
o 0
--
o 0
:J
a.
3:tDen>
>!:!:!>Z
ozzZ
~C):::j~
>>>>
:::O-f
0-0-<(5
1'T100Z
r:::o_
-o::::lenO
:::OO~.."
I'T1ZC:;-f
~o-1::C
0.." fT1
(5 Zr
:i9>
fTlU16
::us::(J)
>)>0
~-o.."
::Cz-
o9~
()--~
~ar
-11-1
fTlSo
o
o
I
:I:::> s:
~z
J;;o
ZV) ~
(l)c~
1:U_
,..., > < L-J
~z....,z
~ ~d Ci
UI :::ll t.::l
CXli:,
cr ~Q ~
CD ;s;.
~ ~I
()1 I", t::l
'-'~zo
-<~ ~
0'"
>",
:::ll
CD
"..
ID
~
""U,."
:;ox
0-
-u(J)
o::::l
(f)Z
r'TlG'>
o
(J)
(f))>
>z
z-
_-1
-1)>
>::::0
:::0-<
-<0
0-
_(J)
(f)-f
-1::::0
:;0-
-(")
0-1
-Iz
zo
O.
'01
(}1
tD
lDO
oc
cz
zo
0)>
)>::::0
:;0-<
-<
:>
(J)
lJ)
>rn
'lJ)
:-o~
aen
(J1-o
~:>
l:::ll
0"
VI'"
--'
IZ
.....c::
~~
tD
",
:::ll
(J)
~
.."
"
o
:::ll
",
(J)
o
I
C
:::l
o
Z
Z
9
)0-
n
0::0
.fT!
01:>
0ICi)
fT!
-'. (J)
II. "
Ol~
0.'"
r
rr1
'"
rr1
Z
o
~~~~~~~~~~~IIIIIIIII~
oW~~~~~VlN~OIDOO~~~~~~~fT1
I
~~~zzzzzzzzzzzzzz~~z z
N~~O~--~~~~~~u~~~~'~~'~rn-
~O~~O~~VI~O~O~ID~OI~~~~fT1fT1
~~~N~N~~~~N~dJdNNN~J)>-;
W~--0I00~NOlID--~U~O~ID~~~~)>
~uO~~OUON~~~o~~~~~oozrn
~~q~~~~~~~~~~q~~~qqqQ~
~""fT1~JT1""fT1fT1JT1JT1JT1JT1~fT1~~~~~~
~~~~N--~----N--UU~~U--~~W~
~~~?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N~Z
. OO--ID~N~~~ONO~~~O~~OQ
~~qq~~~~~~~~~~~q~~~q~
01
o
,
C')
:5" :::0
0 0)>
=r -0 r-
;! N
0
0) en
0 UIO
0)>
- r
~ fTI
0'>
0
....
1'1,)
o
r
o
zO
0>
-l::j
UlO
~Z
f;;3:
>
-0
(/)"'0
-::0
;:;to
ffl
('"J
-l
~
::0
o
1"'1
?>
\J
o
U1
())
I
a
~
I
o
U1
....
tij
X
::r
l-"'I ·
cr
l-"'I .
~
CD
fTI
9
z
Z
Z
C')
~
~
o
lJ1
00
I
o
~
I
~
.p.
?>
:-0
o
U1
~
I
a
~
I
.....
(J1
to
~
~
?>
-u
o
(J1
~
I
o
~
I
VI
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~ovember 19, 2008
Agenda Item: CC"-- '7-
To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From: Office of the Town Manager
Subject: Recommendation to Approve the Fourth Amendment to the EmploYment
Contract of the Town Attorney
Reviewed By: ~- .
BACKGROUND
On November 5,2008, the Town Council met in closed session to conduct an evaluation of Town
Attorney Ann Danforth. To follow up on that evaluation, I have prepared the attached
amendment to her EmploYment Agreement. The amendment would recognize Ms. Danforth's
excellent performance with a salary increase, of modest scope to reflect the current tight
economic times.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The Town Attorney works a part-time schedule of 750/0 of a full-time work week. Her contract
provides that while she works on this schedule, she shall receive 75% of her position's base
salary. The base salary is presently $159,660, thus Ms. Danforth's actual salary is $119,748. We
proposed a 2.50/0 increase which would increase her base salary to $163,651 and her actual, 75%
salary to $122,739. This increase can be absorbed within the Administrative Services
Department budget, accordingly, the amendment will have no fiscal impact on the adopted Town
budget.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that the Town Council:
Move to adopt, and authorize the Mayor to execute, the fourth amendment to the Town
Attorney's EmplOYment Agreement as presented.
Exhibits:
Fourth Amendment to EmplOYment Contract
Prepared By:
Peggy Curran, Town Manager
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO TOWN ATTORNEY'S
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
This FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT ("Amendment") is effective as of November 20, 2008, by and between The Town
of Tiburon ("Town") and Ann R. Danforth ("Employee").
RECITALS
A. On December 15, 1995, the Town and Employee entered into a letter .agreement
("Original Agreement") that retained Employee as Town Attorney for the Town,
beginning on January 22, 1996. Employee has ably served as the Town Attorney since
that date. On March 18, 1998, the Town and Employee amended the Original Agreement
by a memorandum providing for Employee's continuing as Town Attorney on a seventy-
five percent work schedule on an indefinite basis.
B. Effectively July 1, 2001, the parties entered into a new agreement that superceded and
replaced the Original Agreement and amendment ("Attorney's Agreement"). The parties
subsequently amended the Attorney's Agreement on November 16, 2005, February 7,2007,
January 12, 2008 and November 19,2008.
C. The Town Council has conducted its 2008 performance evaluation of Employee as set forth
and is well satisfied with Employee's Performance. The Council finds that the Employee
has demonstrated legal and management skills that compare favorably to persons holding
similar positions in similar agencies.
D. The Town's policy is to offer compensation packages that are competitive with similar
employers for similar positions so as to maintain the highest quality staff to serve the public.
To continue to maintain a competitive compensation package for Employee so as to retain
Employee as Town Attorney, the Council has decided to further modify the Employee's
Agreement and compensation as set forth in this Amendment and Employee has agreed to
such modification.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE RECITALS AND
OF THE MUTUAL PROMISES AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, IT IS
AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Base Salary
_ H:\ISSUES BY DEPTS, ALL STAFF\Atty 2008\Town Atty Employment Ag 11-19-08 Amend 4.doc
1
(a) Section 4.1 of the Attorney's Agreement shall be amended to read as follows:
4.1 Base Salarv. Employee shall receive a base salary of One
Hundred, Sixty-Three Thousand, Six Hundred and Fifty-One Dollars
($163,651) per year. Consistent with the Town's practice, this salary
shall be retroactive to July 1,2008, the beginning of the fiscal year.
2. Attornev's Aereement Otherwise Unchaneed. Except as expressly modified by this
Amendment, and the previous amendments described herein, the Attorney's Agreement
between the Town and Employee shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to the Attorney's Agreement shall be
effective as of the day and year written above.
Dated:
THE TOWN OF TIBURON:
By:
Margaret A. Curran
Manager, Town of Tiburon
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Thomas Curry, McDonough, Holland &
Allen
Acting Town Attorney
EMPLOYEE
Ann R. Danforth
_ H:\ISSUES BY DEPTS, ALL STAFF\t\.tty 2008\Town Atty Employment Ag 11-19-08 Amend 4.doc
2
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~ovember 19, 2008
Agenda Item:/J I- !
STAFF REPORT
To:
Mayor and Members of the Town Council
From:
Community Development Department
Subject:
Variance Study Session
~.
Reviewed By:
BACKGROUND
At the Town Council/Planning Commission/Design Review Board workshop held on April 29,
2008, it was suggested that each of the three groups hold a variance/findings study session at
future meetings, based on an internal training session held by staff earlier in the year. The
Planning Commission and the Design Review Board have already held their study sessions.
Staff has prepared this study session to provide useful information and insights into the thought
processes used to evaluate variance applications and formulate findings for their granting (or
denial). Because of the manner in which the Zoning Ordinance apportions review authority, the
Town Council seldom considers variance applications, except on appeal. The Design Review
Board initially hears almost all variance applications filed with the Town.
The study session will focus on variance findings, but will also touch upon the basics of findings
associated with other development applications. The Town's decision-making bodies are
routinely required to make findings in taking actions on non-legislative development applications,
such as design review permits, variances, and conditional use permits. While findings for
conditional use permits and design review applications tend to be of a general nature (usually
focusing on compatibility of use and/or consistency with plans, policies, and guiding principles of
review), state planning laws require more specific findings for variance applications. These
applications depend on site-specific characteristics, thus the findings are not general in nature.
The Town Attorney and Director of Community Development will present the study session
materials and be prepared to discuss it and respond to questions and comments.
EXHIBITS
1. Study Session Outline and Supporting Materials
Prepared by:
Scott Anderson, Director of Community Development
TOWN COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ON VARIANCES AND FINDINGS
11/19/2008
OUTLINE
I. Basics of Findings for Land Development Applications
A. Circumstances Requiring Findings
B. Form & Adequacy of Findings
C. Timing & Preparation of Findings
D. Some Caveats
1. Scarcity of time and resources
2. Level of Controversy/Likelihood of Challenge
II. Variance Findings
A. Basis in California Government Code: Sections 65906 & 65906.5
B. Findings Required by Tiburon Zoning Ordinance: Sections 16-4.3.5 and 16-4.3.6
C. Materials from February 7,2008 Town staff internal workshop on findings
D. Examples
1. Poor example of findings
2. Better example of findings
III. Discussion and Questions
I. Basics of Findings
A. CIRCUMSTANCES REQUIRING FINDINGS
1. Findings must be made if there is a specific legislative requirement for findings
2. Court must first determine whether agency's decision is adjudicative or
legislative:
(a) Findings are required when the city acts in an adjudicative capacity
(b) Findings are not required when the Agency acts in a legislative capacity
B. FORM AND ADEQUACY OF FINDINGS
1. Each finding should be followed by a paragraph stating the evidence behind the
finding and linking the raw evidence to the finding, unless the finding does so
itself
(a) Each finding is a statement that must be proven or well-supported by specific and
objectively verifiable evidence
(b) Staff and decision-makers may pull evidence from all sources
(c) Findings must explain reasons for actions and conclusions
(d) The reasons for the action or conclusion must include facts
2. Conclusory, general, ambiguous or boilerplate findings without evidence are not
adequate
(a) Conclusory findings are insufficient evidence
(b) Findings should provide supported analysis
(c) Findings should clearly reveal the analytical process
C. TIMING AND PREPARATION OF FINDINGS
1. Adoption by reference to staff reports; for example, within a motion or resolution
2. It can also be appropriate to prepare findings following deliberation and a
tentative decision, and present them at a later meeting for adoption (by resolution)
D. CAVEATS
1. Scarcity of time and resources
2. Level of controversy/likelihood of challenge
o
II. Variance Findings
A.. EXCERPTS FROM CALIFORNIA
GOVERNMENT CODE
65905. (a) Except as otherwise provided by this article, a public
hearing shall be held on an application for a variance from the
requirements of a zoning ordinance, an application for a conditional
use permit or equivalent development permit, a proposed revocation or
modification of a variance or use permit or equivalent development
permit, or an appeal from the action taken on any of those
applic~tions.
(b) Notice of a hearing held pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be
given pursuant to Section 65091.
65906. Variances from the terms of the zoning ordinances shall be
granted only when, because of special circumstances applicable to the
property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, the strict application of the zoning ordinance deprives
such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the
vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
Any variance granted shall be subject to such conditions as will
assure that the adjustment thereby authorized shall not constitute a
grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon
other properties in the vicinity and zone in which such"property is
situated.
A variance shall not be granted for a parcel of property whicH
authorizes a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly
authorized by the zone regulation governing the parcel of property.
The provisions of this section shall not apply to conditional use
permits.
65906.5. Notwithstanding Section 65906, a variance may be granted
from the parking requirements of a zoning ordinance in order that
some or all of the required parking spaces be located offsite,
including locations in other local jurisdictions, or that in-lieu
fees or facilities be provided instead of the required parking
spaces, if both the following conditions are met:
(a) The variance will be an incentive to, and a benefit for, the
nonresidential development.
(b) The variance will facilitate access to the nonresidential
development by patrons of public transit facilities, particularly
guideway facilities.
1.
l3, EXCERPTS FROM TIBURON ZONING ORDINANCE
16-4.3.4 Public hearing and notice required.
A public hearing as prescribed in section 16-3.3 shall be held to consider every application for a variance. No-
tice shall be given pursuant to Government Code Section 65091 and as otherwise required in section 16-3.3.2.
(Ord. No. 360 N.S., (part))
16-4.3.5 Findings by acting body.
In order to approve or conditionally approve an application for a variance, the acting body shall, on the basis
of the application and the evidence submitted, make all of the following findings:
(a) Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location,
or surroundings, the strict application ofth6 zoning ordinance will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones;
(b) The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges, inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones;
(c) The strict application of the zoning ordinance would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship. Self-created hardships may not be considered among the factors which might constitute special cir-
cumstances. A self-created hardship results from actions taken by present or recent owners of the property which
consciously create the very difficulties or hardships claimed as the basis for an application for a variance;
(d) The granting of the variance or adjustment will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other property in the vicinity.
The applicant shall have the burden of denlonstrating the existence of any special circumstances. The acting
body must find that facts exist which satisfy the general criteria set forth in this section. (Ord. No. 360 N.S.,
(part); Ord. No. 462 N.S., S 3 (part))
16-4.3.6 Findings for variances from off-street parking or off-street loading regulations.
In addition to making the findings required by section 16-4.3.5, where the application is for a variance from
regulations for off-street parking or off-street loading, the acting body shall also make the following findings:
(a) Neither present nor anticipated future traffic volumes generated by the use of the site or the uses of the
sites in the vicinity reasonably require strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation;
(b) Granting of the variance will not result in the parking or loading of vehicles on public streets in such a
manner as to interfere with the free flow of traffic on the streets, or other private property, or on open space;
(c) Granting of the variance will not create a safety hazard or any other condition inconsistent with the ob-
jectives of this chapter. (Ord. No. 360 N.S., (part)) ,
1
C # STUDY SESSION ON VARIANCE FINDINGS
FEBRUARY 7, 2008
Introduction
A variance is essentially a constitutional safety valve. Variances allow
cities to make administrative adjustments where strict application of
general regulations would "be confiscatory (i.e., a taking) or produce unique
hardship. We cannot grant a variance to authorize a use that is not
otherwise allowed by our Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 16 of the Town's
Municipal Code). We can use them to adjust regulations on physical
standards, such as lot size, set backs and so forth, provided that (a) the
deciding body makes the necessary findings and (b) those findings are
supported by the administrative record. This paper explains in greater
detail the Town's requirements for variances, established by state law and
our Zoning Ordinance. Unless otherwise indicated, citations are to the
Town's Municipal Code.
VARIANCES
16-4.3.5 Findings by acting body.
In order to approve or conditionally approve an application for a variance, the
acting body shall, on the basis of the application and the evidence submitted,
make all of the following findings:
(a) Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the zoning
ordinance will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other properties in
the vicinity and in the same or similar zones.
Discussion: This finding requires some vhvsical aspect of the vrovertv (not the
project design) to constitute a special circumstance that would warrant the
granting of a variance. These physical characteristics are typically size (small
lot), shape (oddly-shaped or narrow or shallow lot), topography (steep or
otherwise physically unusual, which can include rock outcroppings, stands of
mature trees, or other unusual physical features). Note that the unusual physical
aspect of the property must deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity in the same or similar zone. If all properties in the
vicinity are steep, then steepness would not be unusual; at that point look to see if
properties in the vicinity have been granted the same type of variance being
sought.
3
(b) The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges, inconsistent with
the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar
zones.
Discussion: Refer to the latter part of the discussion above. If the physical aspect
is not typical of surrounding properties, this is an easy finding to make. If the
physical aspect is typical of surrounding properties, this is where you need to look
at other properties in the vicinity to see if they have been granted similar
variances. If not, it would be difficult to justify the variance.
(c) The strict application of the zoning ordinance would result in practical
difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship. Self-created hardships may not be
considered among the factors which might constitute special circumstances. A
self-created hardship results from actions taken by present or recent owners of the
property which consciously create the very difficulties or hardships claimed as the
basis for an application for a variance;
Discussion: The analysis contained in findings (a) and (b) will largely dictate the
write-up of this finding. Finding (c) should contain some analysis of the self-
created hardship issue. Note that design issues not related to an unusual or
special physical aspect of the property are not justification for a variance. We
should not grant a variance merely because the design requires one.
Use common sense in drafting this finding. We should not merely accept (and
assert in our staff reports) that the applicant will suffer hardship if they are not
granted the variance needed for their extra deck space, media room, etc. We
cannot make this finding merely because most of the applicant's neighbors have
bigger decks and media rooms (that issue is covered by the prior finding). In
considering this issue, ask yourself, would it be really unfair for the applicant to
do without the requested improvement? If so, why?
(d) The granting of the variance or adjustment will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity.
Discussion: The public welfare finding is usually a fairly simple finding to make
unless the variance request is egregious. The injurious to other property finding
is one where neighbor sentiment with respect to the variance can be helpful. If no
neighbors are opposed, there would be no evidence in the record to support an
injury to other property. In both cases, stick with facts and figures (acceptable
distances between neighbor-owned buildings, safe distance from a public street,
no fire, building, or other safety codes violated, etc.).
4-
The Tiburon Zoning Ordinance also adds that:
The applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating the existence of any
special circumstances. The acting body must find that facts exist which
satisfy the general criteria set forth in this section.
Discussion: While this may be true, most applicants are not capable of
articulating variance findings and connecting facts in the record to create
sufficient justification for granting a variance. Staffwill usually (but not always)
need to augment any written application materials attempting to justify a
variance. Do so only if you independently judge that the findings can be made.
* * * * * *
Writing findings
Findings should link raw evidence (facts) in the record to the finding, and do so in
a manner that reveals the analytical process and provides rational support for the
finding. Evidence should be objectively verifiable, but may be pulled from all
sources that were available to the decision maker. In addition to staff reports and
public testimony at the hearing, the findings may rely on the personal
observations of the individual decision makers (during a site visit, for example),
provided that those observations are disclosed during the public meeting.
Conclusory statements and circular findings are not sufficient evidence in support
of a variance.
Hint: Use terms such as "in that" and "because" liberally, tied to facts and
evidence in the record that support the finding.
5
D. Examples
{ SAMPLE-- -- POOR
"..
PROPOSAL:
The applicant has submitted drawings for the expansion and addition to the existing
single-family dwelling, with variances for reduced front yard setback and excess lot
coverage, for the property located at 2 Gingerbread Lane.
The existing dwelling is single-story and contains three bedrooms, a living room, dining
room, kitchen, and two-car garage. The proposed project would include expanding the
living areas of the home at the rear of the dwelling, and conversion of the existing
garage into an additional bedroom, bathroom and laundry room. A new two-car garage
is proposed in front of the existing garage.
In addition to the expansion of the home and conversion of the garage, a partial second
story is proposed at the center of the home, which would include a master bedroom and
bathroom, terrace and an extra bedroom. The interior of the home would be slightly
reconfigured with the proposed improvements. Expanded decking at the rear of the
home and an additional terrace off the family room are also proposed.
The proposed structure would create a gross floor area of 3,428 square feet which is
below the maximum permitted floor area for a parcel of this size (3,471 sq. ft.). The
proposed structure would create a lot coverage of 3,332 square feet (22.60/0) which
exceeds the maximum permitted lot coverage in the RO-2 zoning district (150/0). The
applicant is requesting a variance for excess lot coverage.
The proposed expansion of the home would result in an approximately 21 foot front yard
setback. The maximum front yard setback in the RO-2 zoning district is 30 feet. The
applicant is requesting a variance for reduced front yard setback.
Zoning
With the exception of the requested variances for reduced front yard setback and excess
lot coverage, the project appears to be in conformance with the remaining development
regulations of the RO-2 zoning district.
Variances
In order to grant the requested variances, the Board must make all of the following
findings required by Section 16-4.3 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance.
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including
size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of
this Ordinance will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones.
Front Yard Setback:
The proposed expansion of the home would push the entry area into the 30 foot
front yard setback, resulting in a 21 foot front yard setback at this location. The
home is situated towards the end of a cul-de-sac and has a circular front yard,
which results in a curvilinear front yard setback line. This is a special
circumstance applicable to the property.
~
Lot Coverage:
The home is situated on a lot that is below the minimum lot size for the RO-2
zoning district. Combined with the topography of the lot, this creates a difficult
site in which to work with. It is not unusual to see lot coverage requests on
substandard parcels.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent
with the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same or
similar zones.
Front Yard Setback:
Other homes located within cul-de-sacs commonly run into front yard setback
issues because the setback line is curvilinear.
Lot Coverage:
Properties in the vicinity of the subject property, specifically on Gingerbread Lane
and along Cupcake Street, have previously been granted variances for excess lot
coverage. Therefore, it is not uncommon for this type of variance request.
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical difficulty
or unnecessary hardship.
Front Yard Setback:
The existing home is already located within the front yard setback, so it would be
an unnecessary hardship to allow a small section of the entry porch to encroach
additionally into the setback.
Lot Coverage:
Due to the existing topography and orientation of the home and surrounding
homes, adding floor area as a full second story to the house to gain additional
living space would impede on possible viewsheds from 7 Gingerbread Lane, and
would also increase the mass and bulk of the structure. The applicant has opted
to convert the existing garage into usable space at the lower level at the front of
the property where it is concealed.
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
Front Yard Setback:
Granting the front yard setback would not be detrimental or injurious to other
properties because most of the homes along Gingerbread Lane appear to be
located within the front yard setback.
Lot Coverage:
The proposal indicates a partial second story. If the home was proposed with a
full second story and the existing garage was left unconverted, this may result in
additional view blockages for the neighboring residence.
From the evidence provided, Staff believes that there is sufficient evidence to support
the findings for the requested variance for excess lot coverage.
-::r
c1. , SAMPLE---' BETTER
PROPOSAL
The applicant is submitting a request for construction of a new single-family dwelling
and appurtenant outdoor improvements, with variances requested for reduced front yard
.setback and excess wall height. The property is currently improved with a single-family
dwelling that would be demolished as part of the project. The footprint of the existing
single-story residence is shown on the site plan. The new residence is in the same
general location on the lot, but is taller, larger, and extends closer to Locust Drive.
The project proposes a two-story structure with an additional basement level. The
basement would include an office, a media/exercise room and storage/mechanical rooms.
The main level of the home would include a three car garage, living and dining rooms,
kitchen, nook, family room, laundry room, an office and a guest suite. A patio would
extend the length of the home at the rear, with access from both the family room and
living room. A terrace would extend off the living room to connect with the proposed
pool house. Substantial grading will be required to construct the project.
The pool house would include a bathroom, laundry room and covered loggia. The upper
level of the home would include the master bedroom suite, three bedrooms and
corresponding bathrooms, a laundry room and a tech area. An interior elevator and
stairway would service all three floors of the home.
The proposed dwelling would result in a gross floor area of 6, 194 square feet, which is
slightly below the maximum floor area ratio permitted for a property of this size (6,334
sq. ft.). The proposed dwelling would result in a lot coverage of 4,884 square feet (11 %),
which is below the maximum permitted lot coverage for the RO-1 zone (15%).
The required front yard setback in the RO-1 zone is thirty feet (30'). The subject
property has frontage on Rocky Road, which is a privately-maintained roadway open to
public use. It consists of two twenty (20) foot wide roadway easements over the parcels
on either side, with the property lines for those parcels forming the center line of the 40
foot wide easement. In this instance, the paved surface of Rocky Road is located entirely
outside the subject parcel and on the opposing parcel. This unusual physical situation
creates a de facto 50-foot front yard setback for the subject property, since the Town
measures its front yard setbacks from the roadway easement line and not the property
line. The proposed project shows a small portion of the home encroaching within this
larger-than normal front setback area, although the house would be approximately 37 feet
from the paved Rocky Road travelway. The proposed project also shows a thirteen foot,
six inch (13' 6") high auto court wall located in the front yard setback, coming to wi thin
fifteen (15) feet of the Rocky Road travelway. This auto court wall would require a front
yard setback variance and a height variance, as any wall over six (6) feet is not permitted
in a yard setback area without a variance.
s
Variances
In order to grant the requested variance for reduced front yard setback for the residence
and auto court wall, the Board must make all of the following findings required by
Section 16-4.3 of the Tiburon Zoning Ordinance.
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size,
shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of this
Ordinance will deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar zones.
As described above, the unusual physical situation (a de facto 50' front yard
setback from the front property line located at the improved Rocky Road street
frontage) constitutes a special circumstance not generally applicable to other
properties in the vicinity or zone and which serves to create a hardship for this
property. The standard setback is only 30 feet. Since the proposed residence
would be placed approximately 37 feet from the Rocky Road travelway, and the
travelway is unlikely to be significantly widened in the future as only one vacant
single-family lot remains that could be accessed by it, Staff believes there is
ample justification for the approximately thirteen (13) foot encroachment by the
residence into the front yard setback. However, the proposed auto court wall
would encroach to within approximately fifteen (15) feet of the front property
line, and staff concludes that the variance finding cannot be granted for this wall
as proposed. Staff notes that a six (6) foot high wall would not require either a
front yard variance or a height variance.
2. The variance will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with
the limitation upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same or similar
zones.
Few, if any, other properties in the vicinity or zone have this unusual physical
situation where a de-facto fifty (50) foot front setback is required. The grant of
variance for the residence, which would still preserve a thirty-seven (37) foot
setback from the street frontage, would therefore not constitute a grant of special
privilege. Approval of the proposed auto court wall to extend within fifteen (15)
feet of the street would constitute a special privilege in the opinion of Staff.
3. The strict application of this Ordinance would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship.
A strict application of the Ordinance would result in a practical hardship for this
property in that a de facto fifty (50) foot front year setback would be required
instead of the typical thirty (30) foot setback that is standard in this zone.
Allowing the residence to encroach to within thirty-seven (37) feet of the front
property line appears to be a reasonable accommodation of this hardship.
C.1
4. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other properties in the vicinity.
The proposed location of the residence would result in a thirty-seven (37) foot
setback from the Rocky Road travelway. By the standards of the zone and the
typical development pattern in the RO-1 zone, this distance is more than adequate
and would not therefore be detrimental to the public or to other properties in the
vicinity.
In conclusion, staff believes there is sufficient evidence to support the findings for the
requested variance for reduced front yard setback for the residence, but not for the auto
court wall.
In order to grant the requested variance for excess wall height for the auto court wall, the
Board must make all four of the findings required by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff
concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support any of the findings necessary to
grant the height variance for the thirteen foot, six inch (13'6") auto court wall. Staff
believes that the excess wall height would serve to buffer a future potential residence on
the vacant lot across Rocky Road from visual and noise impacts of the auto court, and
establish increased privacy for the proposed residence. While these are laudable goals,
they are not sufficient grounds for the granting of a variance. A six (6) foot high auto
court wall would not require any variances. The auto court wall appears to Staff as an
architectural extension of the residence that does not serve to retain a steep hillside and
does not appear to be justified by a physical hardship or special circumstance applicable
to the property.
\0
TIBURON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Slavitz called the meeting of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency to order at 7:30
p.m. on Wednesday, February 6,2008, in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon
Boulevard, Tiburon, California.
ROLLCALL
PRESENT: BOARDMEMBERS:
Berger, Collins, Gram, Fredericks and
Slavitz
ABSENT: BOARDMEMBERS:
None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ANNUAL MEETING
1. Adopt Minutes of January 3, 2007 meeting - (Board Clerk Crane Iacopi)
2. Adopt Minutes of May 2, 2007 meeting - (Board Clerk Crane Iacopi)
MOTION:
Moved:
Vote:
To adopt Minutes of January 3 and May 2, 2007 meetings.
Berger, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Collins
3. Annual Audit Report - Accept Annual Audit Report for Fiscal Year ending June
30, 2007 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall)
Director Bigall provided the staff report and staff recommendation.
MOTION:
To accept the Audited Annual Finan~ial Report for the Tiburon
Redevelopment Agency for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007.
Gram, seconded by Fredericks
AYES: Unanimous
ABSENT: None
Moved:
Vote:
Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2008 February 6,2008
7?DA -/
Page 1
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency, Chair Slavitz
adjourned the Redevelopment Agency meeting at 7:35 p.m., to the regular meeting of the
Tiburon Town Council.
JEFF SLA VITZ, CHAIR
ATTEST:
DIANE CRANE IACOPI, BOARD CLERK
Redevelopment Agency Minutes #01-2008 February 6,2008
Page 2
TOWN OF TIBURON
1505 Tiburon Boulevard
Tiburon, CA 94920
T own Council Meeting
~ovember 19, 2008
Agenda Item:
fJJ)A -:2
STAFF REPORT
To:
Board of Directors, Tiburon Redevelopment Agency
From:
Administrative Services Department
Subject:
Recommendation to Accept FY 2008 Annual Financial Audit
Reviewed By:
Background
Attached are the Audited Financial Statements for the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2008. The audit was performed by the public accounting firm of
Marcello & Company in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United
States. The Redevelopment Agency is considered a component unit of the Town of Tiburon and
is therefore required to be audited as a separate entity of the Town.
As background, The Tiburon Redevelopment Agency was created in 1983 under provisions of the
Community Redevelopment Law primarily to assist in the clearance and rehabilitation of areas
determined to be in declining condition in the Town of Tiburon. The Agency will expire when
the Town's low/moderate income housing requirements have been met. The Town currently
needs to develop four additional units of low-income housing within the RDA boundaries to meet
the housing requirements. The Town's recently adopted Housing Element designates several
privately owned sites within the RDA project area as affordable housing sites and commits the
RDA funds to assist with the development of affordable housing on these sites. Development of
anyone of these sites would meet the RDA's requirement for affordable housing.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board of Directors:
Move to accept the Audited Annual Financial Report for the Tiburon Redevelopment
Agency for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008.
Exhibit
1. Audited Financial Statements of the Tiburon Redevelopment Agency for the period
ended June 30, 2008
Prepared by: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services