Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTC Agenda Packet 2017-10-04 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Town Council Tiburon Town Hall October 4, 2017 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Tiburon, CA 94920 Special Meeting(Closed Session) -6:00 p.m. Special Meeting(Interview) —7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting—7:30 p.m. TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING—6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL_ Councilmember Fredericks,Councilmember Kulik,Councilmember Thier,Vice Mayor O'Donnell, Mayor Fraser CLOSED SESSION 1) Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2)of Subdivision(d)of Government Code Section 54956.9 : (1 Potential Case) ADJOURNMENT—to special meeting SPECIAL MEETING— 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Fredericks,Councilmember Kulik,Councilmember Thier,Vice Mayor O'Donnell,Mayor Fraser INTERVIEWS FOR VACANCIES ON TOWN BOARDS est COMMISSIONS (Design Review Board—One Vacancy for Tiburon Appointee) • Karen Ripenburg • Shara Coletta ADJOURNMENT—to regular meeting REGULAR MEETING- 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Councilmember Fredericks,Councihnember Kulik,Councilmember Thier,Vice Mayor O'Donnell,Mayor Fraser ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION IF ANY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Town Council on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however, that the Town Council is not able to undertake extended discussion or action on items not on the agenda. Matters requiring action will be referred to the appropriate Commission,Board, Committee or staff for consideration or placed on a future Town Council meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3)minutes. RECOGNITION OF TOWN SERVICES • Michael McMullen: Parks&Open Space Commission (2002-2008),Parks,Open Space and Trails Commission (2008-2017) INTRODUCTION OF NEW TOWN EMPLOYEES • Jordan Zurheide,Police Service Aide • Deny Cruz,Police Service Aide CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved by one motion of the Town Council unless a request is made by a member of the Town Council, public or staff to remove an item for separate discussion and consideration. If you wish to speak on a Consent Calendar item, please seek recognition by the Mayor and do so at this time. CC-I. Town Council Minutes - Adopt minutes of September 19, 2017 special meeting (Town Clerk Stefani) CC-2. SB 1 RMRA Funding - Consider amendments to Capital Improvement Plan and FY 2017-18 Capital Improvement Plan budget (Department of Public Works) CC-3. Special Vacancy on Town Boards &r Commissions -Announce special vacancy on Heritage &t Arts Commission (Town Clerk Stefani) CC-4. Bayside Stair Easement - Accept grant deed of easement for public pedestrian access (Community Development Department) CC-S. Investment Summary - Adopt report for month ending August 31, 2017 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) CC-6. Marin County Civil Grand Jury Response - Approve Town's response to Marin County Civil Grand Jury Report: Public Engagement in Marin:A PathlvaA,to Inclusive Government(Office of the Town Manager) ACTION ITEMS A1-1. Appointments to Town Boards & Commissions — Consider appointment to Design Review Board(Town Clerk Stefani) AI-2. Energy Efficiency Measures — Consider options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions including Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, LED Streetlights, adding solar panels to Police Station and conversion of municipal accounts to Marin Clean Energy's "Deep Green" program (Department of Public Works) ADJOURNMENT ADJOURN TO CONDUCT THE MEETING OF I-HE TIBURON PUBLIC FINANING AUTHORITY IN TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA TIBURON PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OCTOBER 4, 2017 at 7:45 P.M. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Tiburon Public Financing Authority on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time. Please note however,that the Tiburon Peninsula Financing Authority 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 Tiburon Public Financing Authority meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes. ACTION ITEMS AI-l. Approve minutes of June 15, 2016 meeting of the Tiburon Public Financing Authority ADJOURNMENT RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING TIBURON TOWN COUNCIL - 7:50 P.M. TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS TOWN MANAGER REPORT WEEKLY DIGESTS • Town Council Weekly Digests—September 22 &29,2017 ADJOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Town Clerk at (415) 435- 7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's website, www.townoftiburon.org. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address,phone number and brief description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at,or prior to,the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. JAYNI ALLSEP LATE MAIL #A1 ,2 773 TibU1011 11otIIOM(I w Tilniron.CA '')V)20-Phone-H 3.7060)-1-63 E-Mail:jacni�?<ilLscp-1�launinn.c m October 3, 2017 RE: 10/4/2017 Tiburon Town Council Meeting — Item AI-2. Energy Efficiency Measures Dear Council Members Frederickson, Their, and Kulik, Vice-Mayor O'Donnell, and Mayor Fraser: I was excited to see that the Tiburon Town Council is reviewing a number of sustainability measures at the October 4 meeting. As a long-time Tiburon resident (25 years), I urge the Council to act quickly on opting up to Deep Green followed by installing solar at the Tiburon Police station and switching streetlights to LED. Switching to Deep Green will take municipal electricity emissions to zero immediately. Adding solar panels at the police station and retrofitting LEDs will reduce the electricity load, save money, and support local renewable energy production. All of these actions will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change. We all need to step up and I'm very happy to see the Town Council doing just that! I've spoken at two previous Town Council meetings in favor of Deep Green but, unfortunately, cannot be at the meeting on October 4. As such, please consider my comments above as a part of the public comments portion of agenda item AI-2. Energy Efficiency Measures. Sincerely, Jayni Allsep PERSONAL DATA (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE -A RESUME;MAY BF ATTACHED AS WELL) NAME: 1VIAILINC ADDRESS: � - V�5 1 ;?b E-mail address (optional): Clkll TELEPHONE: Home: cork: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) 'I'IBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: LLIZ REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS°OF INTEREST ne­ r � rel AJP /�-,�: > 44t 4 G ✓ i �r e r APPLICABLE 0 UA LIFICA TIONS AND EXPERILNCE LL ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------_-------_------_--- Date Application Received: . ( Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Terni Expires: Length of Term: 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies. In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (l)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest fiterest) PLANNING a.. PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER S:dcrane%omm.app 1 PERSONAL DATA Only computer-generated or typewritten copy will be accepted; Attach separate pages, including resumes and cover letters, if necessary. NAME: Koy c;rumrine MAILING ADDRESS: 118 stewart Drive TELEPHONE: Home:6/J-bUL4 Work: 279-6024 Fax No. <# Here> PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOC. (if aphlicawe)We leve witnin Tiburon Knolls TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years)24 DATE SUBMITTED: 7/26/17 REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST As a 24 year resident, and an avid reader of the Ark, I would like to contribute to Tiburon's future. My children are now 18, and 16, and I am at a point in my career where I have more free time to devote to serving. APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE My first choice is the Planning Commission. At UC Berkeley, I got an A in Architecture and was strongly encourage by my Professor to pursue that Career. Instead, I went into Business, passing the CPA exam in College; and later becoming a CPA with Price Waterhouse (now PWC) . For fun, I got my real estate license. This later came in handy when I worked for Syufy Enterprises, a major commerial real estate developer. I'm fluent in Spanish, and I'm always striving for win-win situations; which I hope to bring to the Planning Commission. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------- Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Commission,Board or Committee) (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 RECEIVED JUL 2 7 2017 TOWN CIERK TOWN OF TIBURON Instructions and Application to Serve on a Town Board, Commission or Committee The Town Council considers appointments to various Town boards, commissions and committees throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies. In an effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both pages of this form and returning it to Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon CA 94920, or fax it to (415)435-2438. Copies of the application will be forwarded to the Town Council and an informal interview will be scheduled when a vacancy occurs. Your application will remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Diane Crane Iacopi Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Please Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (91 Being the Greatest Interest) #1 PLANNING #5 PARKS & OPEN SPACE #z DESIGN REVIEW # RECREATION # HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS #3 LIBRARY # MARIN COMMISSION ON AGING # BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE 1 Lea Stefani From: Roy Crumrine <racrumrine@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 10:11 PM To: Lea Stefani Subject: Crumrine Application For Tiburon Attachments: Crumrine Application to Serve on a Tiburon Town Board, Commission or Committee 2017.07.26.pdf Lea: Please accept my application. I tried to say more; but, the pdf application seemed to have limited field lengths. In addition to what I was able to write, I'd like to add that I have spent several years involved with our youth in the Leadership of the Tiburon Cub Scout Pack and Boy Scout Troop, as well as donating my time to various sports teams. Now that my Boys are older, I have more time to give back to the Town. I look forward to making a positive contribution and looking for win-win situations whenever possible. Regards, Roy racrumrine(aD_yahoo.com i Tiburon Planning Commission Roy Crumrine Application Additional Information In addition to the information provided in my application and cover email, I'd like to mention the following: I actively follow via the ARK,the local events and issues related to the town. After we purchased our house on Stewart Drive in 1993, 1 spent many hours at the library reading all the issues of the ARK prior to October 1993 to get a better understanding of the community we decided to call home. I either bought or checked out all the Landmark Society books on the history of the Town, Belvedere, and the history of the Tiburon Peninsula. Not only has this historical knowledge made me feel more connected to our town; but,over the years, it has enabled me to share the history with the young Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts,and with newer residents of the community. Over the years, I have occasionally attended Council, Design Review Board,and Planning Commission meetings. Since I submitted my application for the Planning Commission in July, I would have liked to have attended a more recent Planning Commission meeting; but, as of today(September 9t''),they have all been canceled. So,to bring myself more up to speed, I have also read the last 2 years of agendas and minutes. Throughout my career,currently Controller for Thunder(an advertising technology company),or my volunteer activities, I like to be prepared and ready to get to work. Hopefully, I won't have to use the skills; but,several years ago, I participated in one of the first CERT training classes held in town. Now that my Boys are older, I have more free time. Since the Town and Real Estate have always been strong interests of mine, I'd like to serve on the Planning Commission. As both a CPA and having previously earning a real estate license, I am familiar with both real estate and legal terminology,and codes and ordinances. I would like to think that my more than 30 years of business experience would help lead to positive outcomes,and hopefully win-win situations for all parties involved. Personally,from reading all the minutes, I like the fact that the Planning Commission has a hand in making decisions that impact the economic development of the town;on top of being involved with residential matters. Again, I think my business experience,from retail,to start-ups,to multinational corporations could be helpful to the commission. Thank you, Roy Crumrine ON- 01 px '�`zr�s �* /,� s'- -ter '�-r-�,. � ��- °YFa',!� � •, -�"rx.,F�'��` ���' `� ����?� 1 NAME: ter . MAILING ADDRESS: -� ,,�-� E-mail address (optional): 1�f t 32_3. 3 x • 202. TELEPHONE: Home: Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) 6ekl"QVIks� 1®" �©6. . TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: �� O1VS.iTaR fVC-1-1, d D 1 d.i 1 Y3 6 r_. . � .�'`Y �g .: *i..'`t°"z IN -- - C1 a, ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 e-- 20 q mrs -ex pzr ,�CP— TV P r 0 cep CkA� rl o o-F-�rS G�''`e�- ��� Mq CPQ l d��.,P,�- -F� ��.�' .e c/�wj e-✓�e �-�r- l y 4i\ 0� fe IA-t -f-i nt,k.e `Fo wt,��P-1 -Ffn-i s S � �r t � tti� � a�v� �I�...� �� tai,✓�-�-� Dt o : Key,-V-t� TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to. the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING PARKS,OPEN SPACE & TRAILS _ DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER S:dcrane%mm.app 1 PERSONAL DATA (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE—A RESUME MAY BE ATTACHED AS WELL) NAME: Shara Coletta MAILING ADDRESS: 4747 Paradise Drive, Tiburon, CA 94920 E-mail address (optional): Shara.coletta@gmail.com or Shara.l.coletta@jpmorgan.com TELEPHONE: Home: 415-971-1301 Work: 415-315-8490 Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) TIB URON RESIDENT: (Years)4 DATE SUBMITTED: 9/13/2017 REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST I am applying for the position open in Mike T's absence on the Design Review Board.I built a house in Tiburon and have been through the process. I've worked in real estate development for more than 15 years and see the impacts of development and appriciate both the process and outcome. As a community member-I would like to advocate for development and seek to be helpful in working with the planning department as needed. My husband grew up in town and I understand that it has a charm that should be preserved-I recognize new construction should build on the existing charm. APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE See attached resume. ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#I Being the Greatest Interest) 2 PLANNING 6 PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 1 DESIGN REVIEW 7 RECREATION 4 HERITAGE & ARTS 5 DISASTER PREPAREDNESS 9 LIBRARY 8 COMMISSION ON AGING 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 10 OTHER S:dcrene%omm.app 1 Shara L. Coletta 4747 Paradise Drive,Tiburon,CA 94920 Sbara.Cone fa i.com - (415) 971-1301 WORK EXPERIENCE: JP Morgan Chase,San Francisco,CA Executive Director—Community Development Bank(2/16—Present) • Senior community development banker focused on providing debt products to real estate developers in the Northwest.Debt products are mainly structured with taxable and tax-exempt construction and/or permanent financing for affordable housing projects utilizing federal LIHTC,ITC,NMTC and/or HTCs. • Also maintain a focus on development of profitable new business opportunities,preliminary loan underwriting,and maintaining a portfolio of high credit quality.Mainly focused on Identifying and aggressively soliciting appropriate debt opportunities for affordable housing transactions. • Work with a dedicated underwriting team to insure the timely completion of due diligence and preparation of comprehensive credit approval packages. • 2016 Goal of$65MM—Closed$300MM+ • 2017 Goal of$75MM—YTD Closed$200MM+ Charles Schwab,San Francisco,CA Director—Community Development(3/15—2/16) • Act as the sole underwriter of loans and investments in the Community Development Group of Charles Schwab Bank; • Currently focused on structuring community development loans and investments,which are CRA eligible in the Bank's CRA Assessment Areas; • Underwrote and presented to credit committee five affordable multifamily housing fund investments financed with low-income housing tax credits amounting to approximately$50 MM in equity investments; • Underwrote and presented to credit committee four debt transactions for CDFI partners amounting to$60 MM in term loans or LOCs;and • Assist the Community Development Team with business development opportunities and maintaining active relationships with Bay Area and national business partners,including banks,Community Development Financial Institutions,real estate developers,affordable housing lenders,small business lenders,tax credit syndicators,and community,charitable,and non-profit organizations. S4 Development and Investments,Berkeley,CA Consultant—Real Estate Debt and Equity Underwriter(8/11—4/15) • Currently focused on structuring and raising tax credit equity and construction debt for development of mixed-use urban infill and multi-family housing for both investors and developers; • As an independent consultant,prepare financial models,underwrite transactions,and write credit presentations that include detailed financial,management,business,and industry analysis; • Complete detailed market and asset level due diligence(including reviews of all 3rd party reports)to support all investment decisions,write investment memos and present them to senior managers,assist in deal structuring and negotiation of terms with sponsors; • Underwrote affordable multifamily housing transactions financed with housing revenue bonds and low-income housing tax credits—over$550 MM in equity underwritings completed;and • Underwrote Freddie debt transactions for multifamily housing financed with tax exempt bonds and low-income housing tax credits—over$350 MM in debt underwritings completed for TEBS or TAH deals;and • Underwrote Fannie Mare debt transactions for market rate multifamily apartments and student housing amounting to$950MM. Bank of America,555 California San Francisco,CA Commercial Real Estate Banking-Vice President—Debt Underwriter/Portfolio Manager(9/07—8/11) • Lead cross-functional teams to structure loans and submit term sheets to bid on prospective deals,which include commercial construction loans or loans for project financing of LIHTC Developments,or/and mezz lending; • Worked closely with the deal teams to ensure loans were closed as applied for and in a timely manner; • Prepared comprehensive transaction packages,presented transactions to Credit and recommended loan terms; • Provided feedback and recommendations to senior management on project feasibility prior to issuance of term sheets; • Collaborated with originators,senior management,and investors to facilitate client needs while mitigating risk; • Researched and analyzed real estate developers,borrower credit risk,tax-credit investors,management companies, contractors and architects in order to accurately assess transaction risks and mitigants;and • Drafted quarterly performance reports for a portfolio of 30 commercial properties with an aggregate value of$500MM. Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency,Berkeley,CA Member of the Board of Directors(5/11—5/13) • Participate as a key member of the Fundraising,Strategy,and Executive Committees; • Counseled key leaders on various special interest including strategy,fundraising,and hiring of a new Executive Director;& • Hosted the Golf Tournament or two years,which was the most successful fundraiser of 2012 and 2013; • Chaired the Executive Director Hiring Committee. AEGON Realty Advisors,505 Sansome,San Francisco,CA Community Development/Acquisitions-Underwriter/Acquisitions Associate(9/06—9/07) • Underwrote affordable multifamily housing transactions financed with housing revenue bonds and low-income housing tax credits(LIHTC)—over 5150 MM in equity underwritings completed. • Reviewed and analyzed prospective deal opportunities,including project feasibility,strength of general partner,and financial return opportunities.Established pricing,structure deal terms,and prepare proposal letter for general partner's execution; • Oversaw deal due diligence process,including financial analysis,market analysis,and review of all material required to evaluate project; • Served as primary contact for all third party activity,including legal,tax,engineering,consulting,asset management,and other services. • Reviewed financial investment and analysis and market feasibility of deals,evaluate deal strengths and issues,prepare Executive Committee memo and deal packages and present summary to Committee members; • Maintained and enhanced underwriting procedures,including revising and updating investment models,processes and templates to ensure consistency of underwriting practices,and soundness of deal structure; • Identified and evaluated possible solutions to potential deal issues.Worked with deal team to determine optimal strategy to mitigate deal risk and lead client negotiation to achieve successful resolution of issues;and • Reviewed all legal and deal documentation to ensure consistency with deal terms,and coordinate deal closing. MMA Financial,101 Arch Street,Boston,MA Investment Valuation Group-Sr.Market Analyst(9/04—9/06) • Analyzed appraisals,market studies,plans and specs,and tax credit applications as provided for new deals; • Provided a review of market analysis by conducting additional research to confirm the accuracy and completeness of data in the report; • "Traveled to subject market area and canvassed markets by interviewing market participants; • Collected primary and secondary market data using phone surveys and internet; • Negotiated conclusions where reasonable with the acquisitions associates; • Prepared written market study or internal review memorandums and effectively explain data in the financial models; • Presented conclusions at a formal Investment Committee; • Created a procedures template,which was used to acquire all deal due diligence;and • 'Trained analysts in the due diligence and presentation processes. Boston Capital Corp.,One Boston Place,Suite 2100,Boston,MA Asset Management-Asset Manager(09/01—8/04) • Created an online data system for organizing,monitoring,and reporting on company's real estate assets; • Managed a portfolio of over 150 properties consisting of 8,250 units. • Served as primary contact for General Partners and Management Agents; • Monitored construction and occupancy tracking during development; • Prepared analysis to support the release of capital installments to the developer during construction and through stabilization; • Reported quarterly on stabilized properties,including review of financial statements and partnership tax returns; • Researched rental market trends and operational or other property issues and preparing analytical materials for management plans; • Analyzed performance deficiencies and develop projections and workout scenarios for troubled properties;and • Investigated and explained unusual variances in financial analyses and identified,researched,and reported operational, market trends that impacted performance of the portfolio. ADDITIONAL WORK EXPERIENCE: MASSPORT,Communications-Boston,MA Executive Communications Assistant(full-time) (2000-2001) Executive Office of the Governor-Boston,MA Press Assistant(full-time)(1999-2000) George W.Bush Campaign Committees-Boston,MA Intern(part-time)(1999) Massachusetts's Governor's Intern—Boston,MA Full-time(1998-2001) Cellucci/Swift Campaign Committees-Boston,MA Intern(full-time)(1998) EDUCATION: Boston University Bachelors of Arts:International Relations,concentrations in Business&Economics Masters of Administrative Studies&Financial Economics,GPA of 3.5 (Additional courses taken in Real Estate Development and Intercity Planning) Real Estate Finance Certificate:courses taken in RE Development and Finance TECHNICAL TRAINING: Certified in tax credit housing;attended business seminars in negotiation,business writing,financial analysis,and real estate sales; completed courses in real estate practice,real estate principles,real estate finance,real estate appraisal,and real estate law;proficient in Access,Word,Excel,PowerPoint;and have intermediate reading and writing abilities in Spanish. INTERESTS: Community:Board Member for Squaw Valley Alpine Meadows Foundation,Tiburon Little League—Coach and Board Member, Tiburon Soccer Club—Coach and Age Group Coordinator,Foundation for Recd Schools—Directory Fundraiser,Auction Committee Member,Member of the BU Alumni Association and the Belden Club,JP Morgan Chase Ambassador,Chase Volunteer Leadership Group Member&NorCal Leadership Committee member for Enterprise Community Partners Sports:Current USATF National American Record Holder in the 100M Shuttle Hurdles,USATF National Title Holder in the Pentathlon,Hurdles,High Jump,Long Jump,Triple Jump,100M Hurdles,4X400M;and participate regularly in T&F,marathons, triathlons,and century cycling rides. Arts:Photography(had photos displayed at the BU Gallery and at West Point) Other hobbies:Travel(lived in the Czech Republic for 18 months),Flying(Cessnas),Skiing(won The Vertical Challenge at Squaw 2017)and Scuba Diving(certified open water diver) TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES SPECIAIJ-MEETING—6:00 P.M. tALL tember 19, 2017, the Council held a spe ial meeting as follows: TO ORDER --- Councilmember Fredericks,Councilmember Kulik,Councilmember Thier,Vice Mayor O'Donnell, Mayor Fraser CLOSED SESSION 1) Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9: (1 Potential Case) INTERVIEWS FOR VACANCIES ON TOWN BOARDS & COMMISSIONS (Planning Commission—One vacancy for Tiburon appointee) • Roy Crumrine (Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission—Three vacancies for Tiburon appointees) • Jim Wood ADJOURNMENT—to special meeting SPECIAL MEETING—7:30 P.M. Mayor Fraser called the special meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 19, 2017, in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Fraser, Fredericks, Kulik, O'Donnell, Thier PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager Chanis, Town Attorney Stock, Director of Community Development Anderson, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes, Director of Administrative Services Bigall, Chief of Town Council Minutes #19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 1 Police Cronin, Management Analyst Creekmore, Town Clerk Stefani ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. PRESENTATIONS On behalf of the Heritage &Arts Commission,Victoria Fong presented Jim Wood the 21"Annual Heritage Preservation Award to honor his outstanding work and contributions to the Tiburon community. On behalf of the Council,Mayor Fraser expressed gratitude for Mr. Wood's work in the community. CONSENT CALENDAR CC-1. Town Council Minutes —Adopt minutes of August 16, 2017 regular meeting (Town Clerk Stefani) CC-2. Town Council Minutes — Adopt minutes of August 30, 2017 special meeting (Town Clerk Stefani) CC-3. Town Council Minutes—Adopt minutes of September 12,2017 special meeting(Town Clerk Stefani) CC-4. Investment Summary — Adopt report for month ending July 31, 2017 (Director of Administrative Services Bigall) CC-5. Marin County Civil Grand Jury Response — Approve Town's response to Marin County Civil Grand Jury Report: Public Engagement in Marin: A Pathway to Inclusive Government (Office of the Town Manager) CC-6. Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District — Consideration of resolution of intention to disestablish the Tiburon Tourism Business Improvement District(Office of the Town Manager) CC-7. Trestle Trail—Consider award of contract to Oak Grove Construction for Trestle Trail project(Department of Public Works) Town Manager Chanis requested CC-7 (Trestle Trail) be removed for discussion. Councilmember Thier requested CC-5 (Marin County Civil Grand Jury Response)be removed for Town Council Minutes #19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 2 discussion, and made a correction to CC-2 (Town Council Minutes) by noting that she and Vice Mayor O'Donnell were also present at the meeting. MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Items 1-4 and 6, as amended. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Kulik VOTE: AYES: Unanimous CC-7. Trestle Trail—Consider award of contract to Oak Grove Construction for Trestle Trail project(Department of Public Works) The Town Manager thanked Jim Wood for his great work on this project. MOTION: To adopt Consent Calendar Item No. 7, as written. Moved: Thier, seconded by O'Donnell VOTE: AYES: Unanimous CC-5. Marin County Civil Grand Jury Response — Approve Town's response to Marin County Civil Grand Jury Report: Public Engagement in Marin: A Pathway to Inclusive Government (Office of the Town Manager) Councilmember Thier requested a continuance for this item. She said she would like to work with staff on several of the public engagement recommendations that were made. Town Manager Chanis said staff could request an extension from the grand jury to have more time to review the issue. MOTION: To continue the item to a later Town Council meeting following further review with Councilmember Thier. Moved: Thier, seconded by O'Donnell VOTE: AYES:Unanimous ACTION ITEMS AI-1. Adopt Resolution and Recognition of Town Services — Honoring Sergeant Steve Hahn, Tiburon Police Department(Mayor Fraser) Chief of Police Cronin said retiring Tiburon Police Sergeant Steve Hahn had been with the Tiburon Police Department for 22 years, and he and the Mayor presented Sergeant Hahn with a resolution commemorating his time with the Town of Tiburon Police Department. Sergeant Hahn said it has been a pleasure to work, serve and live in the Tiburon community. AI-2. Appointments to Town Boards and Commissions—Consider making appointments to Planning Commission and Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission (Town Clerk Town Council Minutes#19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 3 Stefani) Town Clerk Stefani said there are currently 5 special vacancies on Town boards and commissions: one on the Design Review Board, one on the Planning Commission and three on the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. She said that because only one application was received during the Design Review Board application period, staff has reopened the vacancy for applications and the Town Council will consider that appointment at a later meeting. She said the Town Council interviewed three applicants for the single Planning Commission vacancy: Daniel Amir, Roy Crumrine and Jeff Tsai; and the Town Council interviewed five applicants for the three vacancies on the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission: Bruce King, Angela McInerney, Isaac Nikfar, Leonor Noguez, and Jim Wood. Mayor Fraser inquired about the Town's procedure for appointing individuals to serve the remainder of the existing term of office. Stefani replied that if an individual serves for less than two years after being appointed to a special vacancy, that individual is eligible for automatic reappointment. Vice Mayor O'Donnell moved to nominate Daniel Amir to the Planning Commission. The Town Council deliberated the merits of the candidates.Councilmembers Kulik and Thier agreed Jeff Tsai's extensive legal knowledge and active community life would benefit the Commission. Councilmember Fredericks suggested Daniel Amir's experience with Town history would represent a good connection between policy and community on the Commission, and seconded the Vice Mayor's nomination to appoint Daniel Amir to the Planning Commission. Mayor Fraser believed Daniel Amir had demonstrated his contributions to the community in many ways and he was impressed with the way Mr. Amir had approached neighborhood land use issues and his sense of reason. He supported Daniel Amir's nomination to the Planning Commission. MOTION: To appoint Daniel Amir to the Planning Commission. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous Councilmembers Kulik and Thier both noted that they changed their vote because they felt it was important for this appointment to be made unanimously,and encouraged the other applicants to stay involved. The Mayor then entertained nominations for the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. MOTION: To appoint Angela McInerney to the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous Town Council Minutes#19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 4 MOTION: To appoint Jim Wood to the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. Moved: Thier, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Unanimous MOTION: To appoint Isaac Nikfar to the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. Moved: Thier, seconded by O'Donnell VOTE: AYES: Unanimous AI-3. Consider Financial Contribution and MOU with County — to study westbound Tiburon Boulevard widening project to relieve traffic congestion at the Highway 101 interchange Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Barnes said he was reporting on a project to investigate adding another lane at the Tiburon Boulevard/101 NB interchange. He showed one conceptual proposal of what this project could look like. Barnes said the next step is a"pre-design study", which the County of Marin has offered to do in partnership with the other affected jurisdictions.He said the cost to the Town for this study would be $62,000,and the funds would come from the Planning Area Mitigation Fund.He added that this fund is specifically for traffic problems outside of Tiburon's jurisdictional boundaries. Vice Mayor O'Donnell inquired if the Town would be obligated to be a part of the partnership for the entire reconstruction. Director Barnes said the Town would not. Mayor Fraser said he was in support of contributing money to this project,but expressed concern that the widening of the onramp by CalTrans is conditional on the CalTrans metering project moving forward, which does not have unanimous support. Mayor Fraser opened the floor for public comment. A citizen from the audience said the Town should"go for it" if it improves traffic. Christina Goebel asked how bicycles will be kept safe if there are two turn lanes onto the freeway. Director Barnes said the presentation was simply a conceptual idea, and the staff will need to determine the placement of the green bike lane. MOTION: Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Thier VOTE: AYES: Unanimous AI4. Hawthorne Undergrounding District — Consider adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the Preliminary Engineer's Report (Department of Public Works) Town Council Minutes#19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 5 Councilmembers Thier and Kulik recused themselves. Town Manager Chanis gave a brief history of the project, including district boundaries and an overview of actions taken thus far by the proponents of the district to gather petitions and subscription deposits. Chanis also reminded the Town Council of the Town's policy on undergrounding districts, specifically the notion that residents are encouraged to pursue the formation of undergrounding districts,but 100%of the cost will be borne by the property owners in the district, and there is no assurance of the availability of other funds. The Town Manager said the Council is considering the Preliminary Engineer's Report tonight,which provides a preliminary cost estimate of total project costs,determines general benefit and the special benefits assessed to each parcel.He said staff has provided a detailed analysis of this estimate in the staff report. Chanis said the Council has several options before them tonight: to accept the Preliminary Engineer's Report and pursue the project, provide direction to staff about additional actions or information needed before further consideration, or to reject the report and abandon the project. Mayor Fraser opened the floor for public comment and the following people spoke: • Robert Chandler, district resident, spoke in opposition to the project and cost. • Adrian Gordon, St. Hilary Church and School, spoke in opposition to the project. • Peter Snoek, district resident, spoke in opposition to the project. • Bill Aicorn, district resident, spoke in opposition to the engineer's report and ask that the church be removed from the district. • Tracy Turner, district resident, spoke in support of the project but in opposition of the engineer's report. • Quentin Hills,Belvedere Tennis Club,spoke in support of undergrounding,but said the BTC could not support the project in its present form due to the engineer's report. • Jack Ryan, district resident, spoke in support of the project but in opposition of the engineer's report. • Cristen Goebel spoke in support of the project,but expressed concern over the fairness of the engineer's report, particularly if larger parcels are not included. • Joseph Bell spoke in support of the project,but said the engineer's report was unsatisfactory. • An unnamed district resident spoke in opposition to the project due to the imposed expense and loud construction noise. • Ken Wyle,district resident,spoke in support of the project but in opposition of the engineer's report. • John Lake spoke in opposition to the engineer's report. • Elena Stephens spoke in favor of the project,but requested the Council reject the engineer's report and instead fund construction plans so district residents can vote on the district based on a realistic cost estimate. Town Council Minutes #19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 6 • Leonor Noguez, St. Hilary Church, spoke in opposition to the engineer's report and asked that St. Hilary Church and School be removed from the district. • Father William Brown,St.Hilary Church and School,spoke in opposition to the project and report, and asked St. Hilary be removed from the district. • Barbara George,Community Congregational Church,spoke in opposition to the project and engineer's report. • Frank Mulberg, legal representative of St. Hilary Church and School and Community Congregational Church, spoke in opposition to the project and report. • Terry Hennessey, St. Hilary parishioner, spoke in opposition to the project and report, and commented that district residents who are also parishioners of one of the churches will be paying the assessment twice. • Richard Povak, Community Congregational Church, spoke in opposition to the project and commented that undergrounded utilities are more difficult to repair. • Bahram Seyedin-Noor spoke in support of the project for safety reasons,in opposition to the report due to the great disparity between assessment estimates. Mayor Fraser closed the floor for public comment. Councilmember Fredericks asked if the district proponents were involved in choosing the district engineer. Town Manager Chanis confirmed the proponents were involved. Fredericks asked if it was possible to remove the churches from the district. Town Attorney Stock replied that the churches could not be removed from the existing district if they received a special benefit from the district, but the Town could create a discount for these parcels. Fredericks asked if this project were to be abandoned,if a new district could be drawn that excludes the churches. Bob Whalen, bond counsel, said the district must include all parcels that are determined to have a special benefit by the district engineer.Fredericks then asked for confirmation that the churches have been determined to have a special benefit in this district. Mr. Whalen confirmed this point, and explained that this is why the churches must be included, but the Town could still adjust their assessments. Vice Mayor O'Donnell asked for further explanation about why the churches must be included.Mr. Whalen explained the analysis of several factors required to determine if a parcel would receive a special benefit, and in this case, it is the district engineer's opinion that the churches would receive special benefit, so they must be included in the district. O'Donnell asked if the churches still needed to be included if they received power from another source. Mr. Whalen said that would be a factor for consideration,but there are still safety,aesthetic and view factors to consider. Mayor Fraser asked if the district could be redrawn if the Town hired a new engineer. Mr. Whalen replied that redrawing the district would require the petition process to begin again, but if the Town Council Minutes 919-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 7 proponents of the new district left out specially benefited parcels on the periphery,they would still need to be included in the district. Fredericks asked if the original petitions were signed with the awareness that costs had increased and the general benefit figure had been reduced. Chanis explained that the first petitions circulated included a cost estimate of$6.3 million and no mention of general benefit. When it was deemed necessary to obtain additional petitions, the second round of petitions included a revised cost estimate and an early estimate of the general benefit, which was a higher figure than it is now. Fredericks expressed concern with how contentious this project is. She said both sides are contesting industry standards, many people cannot afford their assessments, and there seems to be a misunderstanding of availability of government funds.Fredericks believed the report's cost estimate is credible, as projects often escalate in costs, particularly for a project so complex. She further reiterated that any contribution or expenditure from the Town would be using Tiburon taxpayer money, and could deprive the rest of the community of a broader spectrum of benefits. She felt the proponents of the district had a responsibility to build consensus in the district,and the lack of consensus in this district created a great risk of litigation and risk to Tiburon taxpayer money. She did not feel bringing this project to a vote would set a good precedent for future districts. She said her conscience to protect taxpayer money, the community discomfort and potential consequences all helped her to decide that she would vote to abandon this project. Vice Mayor O'Donnell expressed support of undergrounding districts. He said he would like to pause this discussion and work with the staff to improve the report.He believed the proponents had unrealistic expectations that the costs of this project will decrease, and said it would be better for them to expect a higher figure and then work to reduce costs as the project goes forward. O'Donnell also questioned the logic of the report in the apportionment of the general and special benefits. He did not believe the general benefit should be so low, and did not agree with the methodology used to determine special benefits for individual parcels or the churches. He agreed there was a great disparity among the assessments, and he hoped the churches could be assessed more fairly. He volunteered to work with the staff and the engineers on these issues, and he hoped the formation of a different formula could be brought back to the community for a vote. Mayor Fraser also expressed support of undergrounding districts. He agreed with the rest of the Council about the proponents' unrealistic expectations that the cost of the project would go down, but said he would like to see the engineer validate those figures to the satisfaction of the community. He was concerned about the dramatic increase in cost between estimates and the apportionment methodology.Fraser said he would consider funding a set of engineered plans so the Council and the community can be confident in the real cost of the project. He agreed with the Vice Mayor that the report's determination of general benefit was quite low,and agreed with Councilmember Fredericks that the decision to contribute to the district cannot be taken lightly as Tiburon taxpayer money is being spent. He said he would support putting the project on Town Council Minutes #19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 8 hold while Vice Mayor O'Donnell works with staff and the engineers to solve some of these issues with the preliminary report. Fredericks said she still felt uneasy about the risks to the Town, but she trusted her fellow councilmembers' vision to make it work. She said if something can be done to lead this project to a positive outcome, she could withhold her objection and support further exploration. Town Attorney Stock said the Council's recommendation is feasible, and this item can be brought back to the Town Council once staff is able to work with Vice Mayor O'Donnell to further refine the estimate with the assessment engineer. Town Manager Chanis confirmed staff is available to work with Vice Mayor O'Donnell at an accelerated pace. MOTION: To direct staff and Vice Mayor O'Donnell to reconsider the report based on discussions and recommendations made by the Town Council. Moved: O'Donnell, seconded by Fredericks VOTE: AYES: Fraser, Fredericks, O'Donnell DISQUALIFIED: Kulik, Thier TOWN COUNCIL REPORTS None. TOWN MANAGER REPORT None. WEEKLY DIGESTS Received. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Fraser adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. JIM FRASER, MAYOR ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Town Council Minutes#19-2017 DRAFT September 19, 2017 Page 9 Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON g 1505 Tiburon Boulevard October 4, 2017 Tiburon, CA 94920 Agenda Item: CC REPORTSTAFF To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Public Works Subject: Allocating Road Repair and Accountability Act Funds to Pave Roadways Reviewed By: t' 9 BACKGROUND Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017. It provides additional funds for roadway maintenance. In the upcoming fiscal year, the predicted increase in revenues to the Town is estimated at $53,693 for FY 2017-18. These funds are anticipated to be allocated by the State in January 2018. The Road Repair and Accountability Act contains a local agency maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement that applies to funds allocated through the RMRA. The Act states that the MOE requirement is to ensure that these new roads funds do not supplant existing levels of city and county general revenue spending on streets and roads. The MOE for the receipt of RMRA funds state that a city or county must maintain general fund spending for street, road, and highway purposes at no less than average of 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12 years. These figures are as reported by each city in the annual streets expenditure reports in Table 5 under"Expenditures by Source"titled"Discretionary." In making this calculation certain one-time funds may be excluded. A city or county that fails to comply in a particular year may make it up with in additional expenditures in the following year. The estimated MOE for the Town of Tiburon is $851,754. Part of the reporting requirement is to tell the California Transportation Commission what project(s) the Town will complete using these funds. ANALYSIS A Major Pothole Repair Project was included in the 2017/2018 Capital Improvement Plan in the Street Improvement Project section in the amount of$330,000. At the July 5th Town Council meeting, Council approved using these funds for the design of the 2018 Various Streets overlay .J oWN of TnwRoim PAGE :t of 2 project. At the August 6, 2017 Council meeting, Council approved a design contract for the project, in the amount of$107,820.00. The construction funding budget for the 2018 Various Streets overlay project, as reflected in the 5-year CIP, is $1.3 million. Currently, the project is funded entirely by the Street Impact Fund. Staff recommends that RMRA revenue in the amount of$53,693 be included as an additional funding source for the 2018 various streets overlay project. The effect of this increase will be to continue to improve the conditions of the Town's roadways. Specifically, funding to be received in January would be spent on the Las Lomas Lane portion of 2018 Various Streets Project construction. The 2018 Various Streets Overlay Project includes the following roadways. The design is in the early stages and costs are not known, but the $1.3 million budget will likely result in deleting one or more streets from this list. Adding the RMRA funds will help to keep all these roads on the list. Street Name From To PCI APOLLO ROAD MERCURY MERCURY 55 BEACH ROAD MARSH MAR WEST 56 BLACKFIELD DRIVE 1075 FT N/O VIA SAN FERNANDO END 64 HACIENDA DRIVE TRESTLE GLEN 300 FT E/O ACACIA 42 HEATHCLIFF DRIVE SUGARLOAF END 19 JUNO ROAD MERCURY VENUS 61 LAS LOMAS LANE MAR WEST END 12 PLACE MOULIN SUGARLOAF END 16 UPPER CECILIA WAY CECILIA CUL DE SAC 29 VIA CAPISTRANO VIA CAPISTRANO EAST VIA CAPISTRANO 36 FRONTAGE WEST VIA EL VERANO VIA SAN FERNANDO END 25 VIA SAN FERNANDO BLACKFIELD PASEO MIRASOL 19 VIA SAN FERNANDO PASEO MIRASOL PASEO MIRASOL 33 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution amending the Capital Improvement Plan budget for fiscal year 2017-18 by adding all RMRA funding, estimated at $53,693 for FY 2017-18, into the Capital Improvement Plan for funding construction of the 2018 Various Streets Project and amending the Capital Improvement Plan to fund the construction of the Las Lomas Lane portion of the 2018 Various Streets Project. Exhibit: Draft Resolution Prepared by: Patrick Barnes,Director of Public Works RESOLUTION NO. XX-2017 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON APROPRIATING ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT FUNDING AND AMMENDING THE 2017-18 BUDGET TO INCORPORATE A LIST OF PROJECTS FUNDED BYSB 1: THE ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 in order to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; and WHEREAS, SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of our Town are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and WHEREAS, the Town must include a list of all projects proposed to receive funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account(RMRA), created by SB 1, in the Town budget, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project's completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and WHEREAS, the Town will receive an estimated $53,693 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2017-18 from SB 1; and WHEREAS,the Town Council considered the 2018 Various Streets Paving Project in Public Meetings on July 5, 2017 and August 6, 2017; and WHEREAS,the Town used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the communities priorities for transportation investment; and WHEREAS,the funding from SB 1 will help the Town overlay the Las Lomas Lane road segment in Tiburon this year and similar projects into the future; and WHEREAS,the 2016 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment found that the Town's streets and roads are in"good" condition and this revenue will help us increase the overall quality of our road system over the next decade; and WHEREAS, without revenue from SB 1, the Town will have a decreased ability to undertake currently planned pavement repair projects; and WHEREAS, the SB 1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic maintenance and safety, investing in complete streets infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices, will have significant positive co-benefits statewide. Page 1 of 2 Town Council Resolution No. xx-2017 DRAFT 101412017 NOW, THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, ORDERED AND FOUND by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, State of California, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. 2. The Capital Improvement Plan budget for fiscal year 2017-18 is amended to incorporate the Las Lomas portion of the 2018 Various Streets Overlay project planned to be funded with Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues: The 2018 Various Streets Overlay Las Lomas project is to be constructed in 2018 with a useful life of 20 years including the following roadway segments: Street Name From To PCI LAS LOMAS LANE MAR WEST END 12 3. The Capital Improvement Plan budget for fiscal year 2017-18 is amended as follows: Amend the Capital Improvement Plan to include an additional $53,693 in State Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues for funding a portion of the 2018 Various Streets Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, State of California this 4th day of October, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: JIM FRASER,MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Page 2 of 2 Town Council Resolution No. xx-2017 DRAFT 10/4/2017 TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting October 4, 2017 t .. 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Agenda Item: CC ,� STAFF PO. To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Clerk Subject: A;` uncement of Vacancy on the Heritage & Arts Commission Reviewed By: BACKGROUND Town Council Resolution No. 16-2007 (Appointments Procedure) requires that the Mayor announce special vacancies that have occurred on Town boards, commissions and committees at the earliest possible Town Council meeting following the vacancy, and direct staff to publish a special vacancy notice in The Ark and The Marin Independent Journal to inform the public of these vacancies and to seek applicants to fill the positions. On September 19, 2017, the Town Council appointed Heritage & Arts Commissioner Daniel Amir to an unscheduled vacancy on the Planning Commission. Daniel Amir's resignation became effective on September 27, after his final Heritage & Arts Commission meeting. The Notice of Special Vacancy has been posted, and staff will seek applicants to serve out the remainder of Mr. Amir's term, until February 2020. The application period will close on October 19. The Council will be required to interview all new applicants for the position before an appointment is made. Already one application has been received from Leonor Noguez. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Announce the special vacancy on the Heritage & Arts Commission by adoption of this report on the Consent Calendar Exhibits: 1. Letter of Resignation from Daniel Amir 2. Notice of Special Vacancy Posted 9/21 Prepared By: Lea Stefani, Town Clerk RE VE Sept 27th, 2017 SEP 2 7 2017 To: TOWN CLERK Lea Stefani TOWN OF TIBURON Town Clerk Town of Tiburon CC: Patti Pickett Town of Tiburon Dear Lea, I hereby announce as of September 27th, 2017 my resignation from the Heritage and Arts Commission of the town of Tiburon. PAmir 22 Juno Road Tiburon, CA 94920 EXN®. ` TOWN OF TIBURON SPECIAL VACANCY NOTICE On Town Boards, Commissions & Committees September 2017 HERITAGE & ARTS COMMISSION (Statutory Authority: Section 1313-2 of Tiburon Municipal Code) Purpose: The Heritage & Arts Commission works to preserve and protect those buildings, sites, works of art and other objects which have special historical, cultural or aesthetic character or interest to the Tiburon Peninsula. Appointees serve staggered, four-year terms.The Commission establishes educational programs and awards focusing on the unique history of the area. The Commission works on special community projects and events and is interested in planning events that would provide a forum for local artists to showcase their work. Qualifications: Town Council Resolution No. 29-2016 states that the commission shall be comprised of seven (7) members whose qualifications shall be as follows: Four(4) members must be residents of the Town of Tiburon at the time of appointment; Two (2) members may be residents of the City of Belvedere at the time of appointment; One (1) member may be a resident of the greater Tiburon peninsula(unincorporated territory) at the time of appointment. Applicants shall have the interest, desire, and time available to help promote projects related to the history and art of the Tiburon Peninsula. A formal art/history background is preferred but not required. A vacancy on the Heritage and Arts Commission has occurred as follows: Appointee Date Appointed Date Resianetl Term Expires Daniel Amir February 2012 September 2017 February 2020 Interested applicants can contact Tiburon Town Clerk Lea Stefani at (415)435-7377 for more information, or submit an application at Tiburon Town Hall, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Applications are also available online at www.townoftiburon.or;?. Deadline for Applications: October 19, 2017 Notice Posted ai Town Hull&Library �+ Notice Published in The Ark on September 27, October 4& 11, 2017 �-�,XHIBI 1 NO-� CC: Marin IJ Town Council Meeting TOWN OF TIBURON g 1505 Tiburon Boulevard October 4,2017 Agenda Item: Tiburon, CA 94920 STAFF PO . To: Mayor and Members of Town Council From: Community Development Department Subject: Consider Acceptance of a Grant Deed of Easement for Public Pedestrian Access from the Point Tiburon Bayside Condominium Association Over a Portion of its Common Area; Vicinity of Mar West Street Opposite Las Lomu Lane Reviewed By: ' BACKGROUND In January 2016, the Town entered into a written agreement with the Point Tiburon Bayside Condominium Association for the purchase of a public pedestrian easement across a portion of the Association's common area. The easement would formalize a well-travelled route through the Bayside Association's common area connecting to the Point Tiburon Plaza and Downtown destinations beyond, including the ferry terminal and bus stops. This acquisition would complete the public pedestrian connection from Centro West Street to Downtown Tiburon in this area. The purchase price was agreed upon as $15,000 and this amount was included in the budget. ANALYSIS The Agreement required the Point Tiburon Bayside Association to reconstruct the stairway before the easement was accepted by the Town. That work has now been completed and the wooden staircase has been replaced by a concrete stairway meeting current building codes. The stairway is now open to public use and has been eagerly embraced by its users. Staff would like to commend the Bayside Association, the Lyford Cove/Old Tiburon Neighborhood Association, and all others who contributed financially or otherwise to the replacement of the stairway. The proposed easement has been surveyed, title cleared, and the grant deed prepared for execution. Pursuant to provisions of the Agreement, the matter now comes to the Town Council for acceptance of the grant deed of easement and authorization for payment of the purchase price set forth in the Agreement. Consistency of the proposed acquisition with the Tiburon General Plan was established prior to the time the Town entered into the Agreement to purchase the easement in January 2016, and had been reviewed by the Planning Commission in 2015 and found consistent with the General Plan. TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 1 OF 2 Town Council Meeting October 4,2017 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Town Council: 1. Adopt the Resolution accepting the grant deed of easement and authorizing the Town Manager to ensure its recordation. 2. Authorize the purchase of the easement in the budgeted amount of$15,000. EXHIBIT Draft Resolution of Acceptance with Form of Grant Deed attached. Prepared by: Scott Anderson,Director of Community Development TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 2 RESOLUTION NO. XX-2017 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF TIBURON ACCEPTING AN OFFER OF DEDICATION FROM THE POINT TIBURON BAYSIDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION FOR A PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT CONNECTING MAR WEST STREET TO DOWNTOWN (COMMON AREA FOR ASSESSOR PARCEL NOS. 059-380-01 THROUGH 67) WHEREAS, the Point Tiburon Bayside Condominium Association has offered to the Town of Tiburon a grant deed of easement for public pedestrian purposes across a portion of its common area; and WHEREAS, the securing of the easement will perfect public access rights over a well-used stairway and paved driveway area connecting from Mar West Street to the Point Tiburon Plaza access roadway and points beyond in downtown Tiburon and will constitute a fine addition to the Town's pedestrian circulation system; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and Town Council have found and determined.that the acquisition would be consistent with the Tiburon General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon Town of Tiburon hereby accepts the offer of grant deed of easement with covenants, attached hereto as Exhibit 1, authorizes the Town Manager to take all necessary and appropriate steps to ensure its final execution, and directs the Town Clerk to ensure its timely recordation in the Official Records of Marin County. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon on , 2017 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NAYS: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: JIM FRASER, MAYOR TOWN OF TIBURON ATTEST: LEA STEFANI, TOWN CLERK Attachment: Exhibit 1, Form of Grant Deed of Easement with Covenants Tiburon Town Council Resolution No.xx-2017 4--/2017 1 Recording Requested by: Town Clerk of the Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, CA 94920 Record without fee per GC 27383 GRANT DEED GRANT OF PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT WITH COVENANTS (Portion of Common Area of APN 059-380-01 through APN 059-380-67) (This document may be signed in counterpart) For valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, THE POINT TIBURON BAYSIDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, a California nonprofit mutual benefit Corporation ("HOA" or "Grantor"), hereby grants to the TOWN OF TIBURON, County of Marin, State of California, a Municipal Corporation ("Town" or "Grantee") an Easement for Public Pedestrian Access, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, on this day of , 2017 ("Effective Date"). RECITALS A. The HOA is the owner of certain real property commonly known as the Point Tiburon Bayside "common area", as defined and depicted on the Condominium Plan for Point Tiburon Bayside, filed for record with the Marin County Recorder as Document Number 1985-0023362 on June 5, 1985 ("HOA Property"). A portion of the HOA Property, described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, contains a stairway("Stairway") leading down from Mar West Street toward downtown Tiburon, and a pathway ("Pathway") leading from the base of the Stairway across the HOA Property to its western edge. Said Stairway and Pathway together constitute the public pedestrian access easement area(`Basement Area"),which is graphically depicted on Exhibit`B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. B. The Town holds title to and maintains the public right of way for the adjoining portion of Mar West Street, a public street, said portion being described in Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. C. For many years, members of the public have used the Easement Area as a means of walking to the downtown. To ensure that the Easement Area will remain available to the pedestrian public, the parties have agreed to provide for future maintenance and responsibility for said Easement Area as set forth herein and in the Use and Maintenance Agreement between the Town and the HOA regarding the Use and Maintenance of the Mar West Stairway and a Connecting Pathway dated January 20, 2016, a fully-executed copy of which is on file with the Town Clerk of the Town of Tiburon, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California. Page d ✓� , No. D. The Town of Tiburon Town Council adopted Resolution No. -2017 on , 2017, agreeing to accept the Easement being conveyed herein and authorizing the Town Manager to execute all documents necessary and appropriate to complete the contemplated transaction. Grant of Easement 1. For good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants to Grantee, its successors and assigns, a ten foot (10') wide non-exclusive easement ("Easement") for public access with the right of immediate entry and possession for a public pedestrian trail in, on, over, across, under, through and along that portion of the HOA's Property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("Easement Area"). The Easement Area is graphically depicted in Exhibit"B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Description and Purposes of Easement 2. The Easement is for public pedestrian access purposes for use by the general public. The portion of the Easement Area described in Exhibit "A" containing the Stairway shall be known as the "Stairway Easement." The remainder of the Easement Area described in Exhibit"A" shall be known as the "Pathway Easement." Term of Easement 3. The Easement and rights and obligations herein shall commence when the Grantee accepts the Easement and shall continue thereafter in perpetuity. Maintenance of Improvements 4. Grantee shall maintain the Stairway Easement in good repair, at Grantee's sole cost and expense, including, without limitation, performing all maintenance, repair and other work reasonably necessary to preserve and maintain the Stairway in a good and safe state of repair. 5. Grantor shall retain responsibility for maintenance, repair and all other work for the HOA Property outside the Stairway Easement including, without limitation, the Pathway Easement. Hold Harmless and Insurance 6. Grantee shall hold harmless, indemnify and defend Grantor from any claim, lawsuit or liability involving the use by the public of the Easement Area. This Section shall not apply to claims, lawsuits or liabilities arising from the negligent or willful act or omission of Grantor. Page 12 Notices 7. All notices, demands, consents,requests or other communications required to or permitted to be given pursuant hereto shall be in writing, shall be given only in accordance with the provisions of this section, shall be addressed to the parties in the manner set forth below, and shall be delivered by certified mail return receipt requested, or by overnight courier or delivery service with signature required,to the addresses set forth below, or to such other place as any party may similarly in writing designate to the others. Notices shall be effective three business days after mailing by certified mail or upon delivery by overnight courier or delivery service(or, if delivery is not during regular business hours on a business day,then on the next business day). The addresses of the parties to receive notices are as follows: Grantor: POINT TIBURON BAYSIDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 210 Paradise Drive Tiburon, CA 94920 Grantee: Town Manager Town of Tiburon 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon, California 94920 Exhibits and Recitals 8. All exhibits and recitals referenced herein are incorporated into this Deed as though set forth in full. This Deed includes the following Exhibits, which are attached and identified as follows: Exhibit"A": Legal Description of Easement Area Exhibit`B": Graphic Depiction of Easement Area Exhibit"C": Legal Description of Portion of Mar West Street Adjoining the Easement Area [signatures follow on next page] Page 13 Executed on . i_) }1 t c,u n u.. , 2017, at Tiburon, Marin.County, California. GRANTOR:. POINT TIBURON BAYSIDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 1 _. 1 By: enry G. McWhinney nney .Its: President; Board of.Direc.tors ATTEST: h 1 By: George Hill Its: Secretary of the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: Scott Phillips, Association Counsel Acknowledgment(attach notarizations as required) Paged 4 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE § 1189 A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached,and not the truthfulness,accuracy,or validity of that document. State of California ) County of ) On�� before me, d i � 3 ^, ° l! dtl Date _ Here Insert Name and Tit of the Officer personally appeared Name(s) of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies),and that by his/her/their signature(s)on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. EMILY LEA STEFANI WITNESS my hand and official seal._A_n_ _ Z Notery Public_--California- Morin County Commisaon*2169225 M Comm.ExpiresOct 23,2020+ Signature p ignature 4 Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above OPTIONAL Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: Signer's Name: ❑Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑General ❑ Individual ❑Attorney in Fact ❑ Individual ❑Attorney in Fact ❑Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑Trustee ❑ Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is Representing: 02014 National Notary Association • www.NationaiNotary.org • 1-800-US NOTARY(1-800-876-6827) Item#5907 Executed on , 2017, at Tiburon, Marin County, California. GRANTOR: POINT TIBURON BAYSIDE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION By: Henry G. McWhinney Its: President, Board of Directors ATTEST: By: George Hill Its: Secretary of the Board APPROVED AS TO FORM: C Scott Philli s, A.sso iation Counsel Acknowledgment(attach notarizations as required) wit Page 14 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIVIL CODE§ 1189 A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached,and not the truthfulness, accuracy,or validity of that document. State of California ) Countyof ) On I before me, AYL,, rc_ Date ` A Here Insert Name and Title of the Offic r personally appeared �"1 • ��\ 1 r Name(s) of Signer(s) who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the persons(whose name('is/aX subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged. to me that he/s /tth executed the same in h' /h �tl it authorized capacity(igsy, and that by his/ t r signature on t e instrument the person, or tfie entity upon behalf of which the personKacted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. r,o NATASHA L.OSBORNE WITNESS my hand and official seal. NotaryPublic—California Z Marin County Z Commission is 2199204 My Comm.Expires May 27,2021 Signature �JAQ%9_ , LAW Signature of Notary Public Place Notary Seal Above OPTIONAL Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: Document Date: �iQ-4 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: �gner's Name: El Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): El Partner — El Limited ElGeneral- "~ ' ❑ Partner — ❑ Limited ❑ G.en4a' l ❑ Individual ❑Attorney--ire Fact El Individual El Attorney in Fact El Trustee El Guardian or Conservator ❑Trustee ❑Guardian or Conservator ❑ Other: ❑ Other: Signer Is Representing: Signer Is-Representing: 02016 National Notary Association •www.NationalNotary.org • 1-800-US NOTARY(1-800-876-6827) Item #5907 Exhibit "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF STAIRWAY ACCESS EASEMENT & PATHWAY ACCESS EASEMENT Lying within the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California and being a portion of Lot 3, as shown on the subdivision map titled "Point Tiburon" filed in Volume 19 of Maps, at Page 4, on February 16, 1984, in the office of the Marin County Recorder, more particularly described as follows: STAIRWAY ACCESS EASEMENT PARCEL A A strip of land 10.00 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly boundary line of said Lot 3, said northerly boundary also being the southerly right of way of Mar West Street, from which the most northerly corner of said Lot 3 bears North 72°29'24" West 190.03 feet; thence leaving said northerly boundary, South 29'04'11" West 16.14 feet; thence South 14'23'15" West 4.97 feet to a point hereinafter referred to as Point A and terminus of said strip. The sidelines of said strip shall be prolonged or shortened as to terminate at the boundaries of said Lot 3 and on a line perpendicular to the centerline described herein at Point A. Together with the following described land: PARCEL B Commencing at a point on the northerly boundary line of said Lot 3, said northerly boundary also being the southerly right of way of Mar West Street, from which the most northerly corner of said Lot 3 bears North 72°29'24" West 190.03 feet; thence continuing along said northerly boundary, South 72°29'24" East 5.10 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the herein described parcel, thence continuing along said northerly boundary South 72°29'24" East 13.11 feet; thence leaving said northerly boundary South 84'09'13" West 6.72 feet; thence North 82°31'41" West 7.88 feet to the easterly line of said PARCEL A; thence along said easterly line, North 29'04'11"East 4.12 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PATHWAY ACCESS EASEMENT A strip of land 10.00 feet in width, the centerline of which is described as follows: BEGINNING at aforementioned Point A; thence South 14'23'15" West 8.98 feet; thence South 75°11'29" West 32.51 feet; thence North 74°50'51" West 33.00 feet; thence along a curve to the left, having a radius of 17.00 feet, through a central angle of 90°00'00", for a length of 26.70 feet; thence South 15°09'09" West 28.00 feet; thence North 74°50'51" West 79.00 feet; thence along a curve to the left, having a radius of 180.00 feet, through a central angle of 30°50'05", for a length of 96.87feet; thence South 74°19'09" West 225.19 feet to the westerly boundary of said Lot 3. 1360 North Dutton Avenue,Suite 150,Santa Rosa,CA 95401 Tel: (707)542-6268 Fax: (707) 542-2106 www.cinquinipassarino.com CPI No.: 7644-17 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF STAIRWAY ACCESS EASEMENT & PATHWAY ACCESS EASEMENT The sidelines of said strip shall be prolonged or shortened as to terminate on a line perpendicular to the centerline described here in at Point A and at the boundaries of said Lot 3. BASIS OF BEARING: Being North 55°38'30" West from a found 2-inch brass disk in a standard monument well marking the point of reverse curvature in the centerline of Paradise Drive, being at the westerly end of the curve shown at " R=518' A=15°01'48" L=141.39' ", to a found 2-inch brass disk in a standard monument well marking the easterly end of a curve in the centerline of Paradise Drive shown as " R=375' A=26°18'51" L=176.60' " as shown on Sheet 9 of 10 said subdivision map of Point Tiburon. END OF DESCRIPTION See attached Exhibit `B' for a graphical depiction. Prepared by Cinquini & Passarino, Inc. p1.LAN®�Gy Phthony Cin ni, P.L.S. 8614Cc)hG. Date � Cr EX 1360 North Dutton Avenue, Suite 150,Santa Rosa,CA 95401 Tel: (707)542-6268 Fax: (707)542-2106 www.cinquinipassarino.com CPI No.: 7644-17 Page 2 of 2 E M qp EXHIBIT 'B' THIS DIAGRAM IS FOR GRAPHIC PURPOSES ONLY. ANY G� RD 6�Vp :' FST o ERRORS OR OMISSIONS SHALL NOT EFFECT THE LEGAL IT DESCRIPTION. 6' ST POB PARCEL B " 00 y10 N5812'17 w POB PARCEL A 74,29' POC PARCEL B SITE MAP BEGIN SAE l0\ NO SCALE SEE DETAIL S84'09'13"W 6.72' N29'04'11"E N82'31'41"W 7.88' POB PARCEL A POB 4.1?�/ POC PARCEL B_ PARCEL B �`� � ,90�ovi ` S29'04'll"W 4.97' BEGIN SAE V S14'23'15"W 4.97' ..Zh' . . ENPOINT E S14'23'15"W 8.98' BEGIN PAE / I �1 r�P PROEL \� �A ` 'N7�9 S75'11'29"W 32.51' R=17.00' / / POINT A I 6=90'00'00"--------� N74'50'51"W 33.00' 1 r END SAES Lffi26.70 BEGIN PAE `o�� S15'09'09"W 28.00' O , y O DETAIL NOT ��`y'`" ,� NOT TO SCALE Q-�/.0 6b; ° �'� i LEGEND i / POB POINT OF BEGINNING R=180.00' POC POINT OF COMMENCEMENT / 0=30'50'05" SAE STAIRWAY ACCESS EASEMENT N13'01'24"W 17.87' / / PAE PATHWAY ACCESS EASEMENT L=96.87' BOUNDARY LINE 0—f r 4 / / CENTERLINE 10' j, 1NIr r l B J R J u / WIDE EASEMENT— EDGE 10' WIDE/�5.00 •1 J NIA P S 4 �� EASEMENT /,-10.00, I J-r J ry ^� / 5.00' P J11�1T r1BUR JN 19 MAPS GRAPHIC SCALE 60 0 30 1 inch = 60 it. 0 END PAE CINQUINI 8c PASSARINO, INC. N / / LAND SURVEYING w 4 'Q�) / FA BOUNDARY 1360 No. Dutton Ave. o E ?) & TOPOGRAPHIC Santa Rosa, Co. 95401 ��� CONSTRUCTION Phone: (707) 542-6268 N11'49'21"E 107.91 ® SUBDIVISIONS Fax: (707) 542-2106 ko i WWW.CINGUINIPASSARINO.COM JOB NAME: TOWN OF TIBURON DRAWN BY:JRW CHECKED BY:AGC SCALE:1"=60' DATE:7/14/2017 j DESCRIPTION:PATH EASEMENT JOB :7644-17 PAGE:2 OF 2 Exhibit C Legal Description Portion of Mar West Street, Tiburon, California All that certain real property comprising a portion of Mar West Street, situate in the Town of Tiburon, County of Marin, State of California, described in the deed from Hugh Boyle and Ida Boyle to the County of Marin, recorded at Book 191 of Deeds at Page 498, Official Records of Marin County, to wit: FIRST: A strip of land fifty (50.0) feet wide and lying on the right or southerly side of the following described line, to wit: Beginning at a point distant South 73 degrees, 43 minutes, East 125.5 feet; and thence South 52 degrees, 17 minutes, East 378.4 feet from"T.L.S. 447" of the official Survey of the Swamp and Overflowed Tide and Salt Marsh Lands in Section 6, Township No. 1, South Range No. 5 West M.D.X., running thence South 73 degrees, 8 minutes, East 475.7 feet. SECOND: A strip of land sixty(60.0) feet wide and lying on the left or southwesterly side of the following described line, to wit: Beginning at the initial point of the first above described strip of land; running thence North 52 degrees, 17 minutes, West 378.4 feet; thence North 7 degrees, 42 minutes, West 310.5 feet; thence North 16 degrees, 47 minutes, West 105.7 feet; thence North 46 degrees, 54 minutes, West 95.3 feet; thence North 69 degrees, 47 minutes, West 61 feet; thence North 83 degrees, 7 minutes, West 90 feet; thence North 87 degrees, 58 minutes, West 173.9 feet; thence South 54 degrees, 5 minutes, West 91.2 feet; thence North 50 degrees, 49 minutes, West 200 feet; thence North 57 degrees, 50 minutes, West 87 feet; thence curving to the right on the arc of a circle having a radius of 55.64 feet, 54.56 feet; thence North 10 degrees, 20 minutes, West 93.5 feet; thence curving to the right on the arc of a circle having a radius of 39.8 feet, 36.7 feet; thence North 43 degrees, 00 minutes, East 185.9 feet; thence North 33 degrees, 13 minutes, East 49.9 feet; thence curving to the left on the are of a circle having a radius of 91.25 feet, 57.6 feet; and thence North 3 degrees, 11 minutes, West 78 feet to a point in the southerly line of Esperanza Street, said point being distant South 3 degrees, 11 minutes, East 4 feet from a iron bolt. END OF DESCRIPTION TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting 1505 Tiburon Boulevard October 4, 2017 { $ AQcnda Itcm: CC- 0, Tiburon, CA 94920 b SFA PO . To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Administrative Services Department Subject: InvAstment Summary—August 2017 Reviewed By: Y BACKGROUND Pursuant to Government Code Section 53601, staff is required to provide the Town Council with a report regarding the Town's investment activities for the period ended August 31, 2017. ANALYSIS August 2017 Agency Interest Investment Amount Rate Maturity Town of Tiburon Local Agency Investment $23,554,084.22 1.084% Liquid Fund (LAIF) Money Market(Bank of $ 100,000.00 0.15% Liquid Marin) Total $23,654,084.22 The total invested at the end of the prior month was $23,854,084.22, therefore; the Town's investments declined by $200,000 from July 2017. FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact occurs by accepting this 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 Investment Summary for August 2017 Prepared By: Heidi Bigall, Director of Administrative Services TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting October 4,2017 1505 Tiburon Boulevard ' Tiburon, CA 94920 Agenda Item: CC STAFF PO . To: Mayor and Members of Town Council From: Office of the Town Manager Subject: Approve Town's Response to Marin County Civil Grand Jury Report Entitled: Public Engagement in Marin-A Pathway to Inclusive GovWnaftce Reviewed By: BACKGROUND On June 26, 2017,the Marin County Civil Grand Jury issued a report entitled: Public Engagement in Marin-A Pathway to Inclusive Governance. The report, attached as Exhibit 1, identifies several findings and makes several recommendations. The report requests the Town respond to all twelve of the report's recommendations. Town staff has drafted a written response (Exhibit 2), which is attached for the Council's review. The response must conform to the format required by Penal Code section 933.05. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council review and approve the response letter and authorize the Town Manager to sign and forward the letter to the Civil Grand Jury. EXHIBITS 1. Civil Grand Jury Report entitled: Public Engagement in Marin-A Pathway to Inclusive Governance 2. Draft Response Letter to Civil grand jury report entitled: Public Engagement in Marin-A Pathway to Inclusive Governance Prepared By: Lea Stefani,Town Clerk Pao( 1011 EXHIBIT NO. 2016-2017 MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY Public Engagement in Marin A Pathway to Inclusive Governance Report Date: June 15, 2017 Public Release Date: June 26, 2017 1 14 1 a 1 r • COUNTY OF MARIN : Marin County Civil al Grand Jury Public Engagement in Marin A Pathway to Inclusive Governance SUMMARY Last year's Grand Jury released a report entitled "2015-2016 Web Transparency Report Card" which rated the information quality of local agencies' websites. This year's jury decided to go a step further and look at how well our cities, towns and the County engage with the public.;Wefirst surveyed each of the agencies to learn about their public engagement strategies and their;perceived effectiveness. We then surveyed residents of our municipalities and unincorporated areasto get a "snapshot" view of their experience with their local government's engagement. Finally, we looked at the reporting of local issues by local media. We found that public engagement in Marin takes different forms dependingon where you live. In addition, while every agency is making efforts to engage, some have more political will, more resources, and/or a more active public to make that happen. Public engagement may take many forms, but all have the goal of enabling more inclusive governance. The following report provides an overview of current public engagement throughout Marin and suggests methods of improvement for our 11 municipalities and the County. With this report, the Grand Jury hopes to illuminate a pathway to inclusive governance, inspiring both our local government and the public they serve. BACKGROUND "Government should be participatory. Public engagement enhances the government's effectiveness and improves the quality of its decisions."1 —Barack Obama Many terms describe public involvement in government decision making: community or civic engagement, community participation, and public participation. In this Report, we define public engagement (PE) as:A broad range of methods through which government agencies provide the public with More and better-information about, and meaningful opportunities to influence, government decisions. Public engagement is not new.2 However, effective public engagement calls upon agencies to go beyond minimum statutory requirements, such as the Ralph M. Brown Acta 1 Obama,Barack."'Iransparency and Opcn Government."Federal Register.21 Jan.2009 Nalbauian,.lohn."N'aulititin,Commniuiv FnablmDcmoc acN Vcw Roles for Local GovernmentVlanagers."Public A(kninistration Revieiv.November/December, 1999.. 3"Gov-54950.5 Ra1L)h M. Bros-\n Act." California Legis/a�ivelr�fnnacrtion. Public Engagement In Marin for public meetings and the California Public Records Act`' for keeping and providing public records. PE is important for local government agencies as well as the public they serve. Today, agencies throughout California are applying a variety of PE strategies and practices to address issues ranging from land use and budgeting to housing and public safety. They are discovering that successful engagement of residents in decision making can bring several benefits:5 ■ Improved agency decision-making and actions, with better impacts and outcomes ■ More community buy-in and support for agency decisions, with less contentiousness ■ Faster project implementation with less time and expense in revisiting or reversing decisions ■ Better identification of the public's values, ideas and recommendations ■ More informed residents about issues and local agencies ■ More civil discussions and decision making ■ More trust in each other and local government ■ Higher rates of community participation and leadership development' Effective PE may now be more important than ever. "Disparities in education,health, economic opportunity, and access to affordable housing and justice continue to increase, and the resources available to confront those challenges have not kept pace with expanding needs."6 Marin's municipalities and the County of Marin face increasingly significant issues needing public support for resolution, such as the lack of affordable housing,and unfunded post-retirement liabilities. Building partner-like relationships between these agencies and their communities through PE may provide the support our agencies need. Marmites want to be engaged, as noted in the County's 5 Year Business Plan for 2015-2020.7 However, a December 2016 Marin Independent Journal Editorial, favorably commenting on the County's goals for 2017, concluded by stating: The list of goals or New Year's resolutions deserved more public attention and involvement before they were approved as political marching orders, but maybe fixing that flaw will make the list for 2018.8 Local government efforts at public engagement often occur as one-time activities focused on one immediate and controversial issue. However, local governments that"embed" a capacity to regularly consider, design, use and improve their PE practices may be better able to successfully assess the need for PE in particular instances and shape the best responses, since no one set of PE strategies works for everyone. 9 Those local gft overnments often have written PE plans guiding their public engagement efforts. In Marin, Mill Valley, Novato, San Rafael, and the County have formal PE plans.(See Appendix A for definition of"PE Plan.") d"Goy°-6%'51 C tlitomia Public,Rcc.otds Act." Calilbrnia Legislative Information. '"What &WhY Should I do it?"InstitrNe forLocal Government.2016. 6 Barnes,Melody&Schmitz,Paul."Couluumity I nLagement Matters-(\�o��-1\9orc Th 3n;✓�.r)."Star?ford Social banovation Review.Spring 2016. 7"County of Marin 5 Year Business Plan.2_015-2020."CormtY of A1107-h?.October 2015. 8"County lists leeisla_tivc goals for 2017."Marin Independent Journal.31 Dec.2016. 9"Thio Orientations of Local Government to Public I:nPa*anent: Passk e-Active-Sunt ami;_a."Institute forLocal Government. 2016.;"Embedding Public Fugas,emcut m Local Go%ernment."Institute for Local Govermnent.Accessed 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 of 61 Public Engagement Its Marin Since public engagement is important especially now, we undertook this study to see how Marin's municipalities and the County view their own public engagement, what the public's view is, how the news media perceives PE in Marin, and to make suggestions for improving PE in our municipalities and the County. METHODOLOGY The Grand Jury followed the methodology outlined below. Literature Review_. We analyzed literature from respected sources in California, nationwide and - internationally to identify best practices in public engagement. These sources include the following: ■ Institute for Local Government, an affiliate of the League of California Cities, the California State Association of Counties and the California Special Districts Association ■ The Davenport Institute for Public Engagement and Civic Leadership at Pepperdine University, a co-author of reports with the Institute for Local Goverment ■ Public Agenda, a New York based nonpartisan nonprofit organization and co-author of reports with the h7stitute for Local Government and The Davenport Institute ■ National Coalition for Dialogue & Deliberation, a Pennsylvania based organization ■ International Association for Public Participation, a Colorado based international association that seeks to improve public engagement .. Public Engagement Plan Review. We reviewed public engagement plans, ordinances and resolutions in Marin and other California cities and counties. Grand Jury Report Review. We reviewed The Win Cup/Tam Ridge Residences: How Did It Colne To Pass?10 and the response. Public Engagement Information Request to Marin Agencies. We prepared a Public Engagement Information Request and distributed it to Marin's I I municipalities and the County of Marin to gather their views on public engagement opportunities. (See Appendix A: Public Engagement Information Request.) The Information Request included questions regarding the best practice strategies for implementing public engagement principles formulated by the sources listed above.1 1 SF Bay Area cities that have used such strategies and principles in public engagement plans include Oakland and Menlo Park.12 Public Eng age ment'Survey to Marin Residents. We also prepared a survey for Marin residents to gather the public's views on engagement in their municipalities and the County. (See Appendix B: Survey of Residents of Unincorporated Marin County and Appendix C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities'& hncorporated Towns.) The public survey adapts concepts from a California joint report issued by the Institute for Local Government, The Davenport Institute for Public 10"Win Cup;T am Ridge Residences: I Ionv laid It(onic To Pass?"Marin County Civil Grand Jury.24 June 2015. "Pt❑te j�lcs of Local Gox ermnerit_Public Lugg>c.ncnt."Institute.for Local Government.2015.;"Core Principles for Public Eng t�aemetit."National Coalition lin-Dialogue& Deliberation. 1 May 2009 Core,Values tot the Practice of Public Participation."International Association,for Public Participation.2008. 12"Oakland Cin-CouneiI Resolul ion Ao.84385 Resolution Establishing The City of Oakland,s E3udeet Process Tran Spa rencv and PublicP trticipation Policy."Citi-of 0akland.21 May 2013- City of Menlo Park.Community En agement Plan."City ql Menlo Park.2011-12. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 3 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin Engagement and Civic Leadership, and Public Agenda.l' The Grand Jury circulated this survey through the cooperation of news and social media and some agencies. News Media Review. We reviewed Marin Independent Journal articles on public engagement in Marin. The Independent Journal has served Marin readers for more than 150 years, often shining the light on local government and public engagement.14 Attendance at Public Meetii-u4s. Finally, the Grand Jury attended public meetings of Marin municipalities and the County. 13 Beyond Business as Usual: Leaders of Californias Civic OrvanizationS Seek New Ways to Engage the Public in Local Governance."Public Agenda.2013. "Sunshine week'celebrates the Lblic s right to know."Marin Independent Journal. 15 March 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin DISCUSSION Using the concepts of public engagement (PE), the Grand Jury took a snapshot of 12 government agencies and the public to get an idea of not only how these agencies view their own PE efforts, but also how the public perceives these efforts. We started by surveying Marin's 11 municipalities and the County ("the agencies") in the form of an online Information Request containing questions pertaining to PE attitudes, practices and approaches. Each agency was given 21 days to respond during which time we were available to answer questions from respondents. To assess how the people of Marin feel about public engagement, we developed and disseminated two online Public Engagement Surveys designed to capture information from residents of both cities and towns and the unincorporated areas of Marin. These surveys were announced through the Marin Independent Journal, The Ark Newspaper, Marin Post,Point Reyes Light,and the private social networking service for neighborhoods,Nextdoor. As was the ease with the agencies, the surveys were open for 21 days and we were available to answer questions from respondents during that time. The questions in both surveys were identical and provided opportunities for both multiple-choice and narrative responses. It is important to remember that the people who responded to the public survey were self-selected. However, they were willing to share their thoughts to give us a window into what some of our public is thinking. Four hundred fifty-one (45 1)public responses were received and reviewed, after culling duplicates. Overview: Agency Public Engagement Information Request Responses Viewed in aggregate, Marin agencies' responses to our request (see Appendix D: Summary Agency Views of Public Engagement) showed: ■ Benefits. Agencies mostly agreed on these PE benefits: improved decision making; more community buy-in; better identification of the public's values, ideas and recommendations; more informed residents; more civil discussions; more trust; faster project implementation; and higher rates of participation. ■ A Formal PE Plan. Four of the 12 agencies reported having a plan. ■ Inclusive Planning Use. Agencies all agreed on the use of PE for these areas: parks & recreation, land use &planning, transportation & infrastructure, housing, and budgeting. ■ Transparency Strategies. Agencies all used: newsletters by email, newsletters on website, community news on website, and draft budgets online. ■ I"mproving Authentic Intent. Agencies mostly: summarized complexity, used clear and simple language, and meaningful and timely information. ■ The PE Culture. All agencies rated their culture as excellent or good in these areas: PE improves decision-making, views the public as partners, gives public full consideration, and proactively contacts and engages with community. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin ■ Breadth of Participation. All agencies "regularly" or "sometimes": build and nurture relationships, distribute information regularly, provide timely information, and welcome community participation. ■ Informed Participation. All agencies "regularly" or"sometimes": proactively post issues on their website and use other communication platforms. ■ Accessible ,Participation. All agencies "regularly" or"sometimes": have meetings that are broadly accessible in terms of location/time/language and deliver presentations in alternative living locations for the elderly. Not surprisingly, all of the agencies are aware of the importance of public engagement, agree on its many benefits, and view themselves as having a good PE culture. Opinions varied as to what constitutes effective PE. A recurring theme in response to the Information Request was "one size does not fit all."As a result, some agencies—especially the smaller ones do not feel the need for a formal PE Plan. Instead, they are comfortable taking their cues from the communities they serve, reacting to issues as they come up and engaging mostly through their websites, newsletters, and public meetings. Others may have budgeting and other resource concerns to contend with before they can consider developing a plan. With the exception of the City of Sausalito, those with populations under 10,000 do not intend to develop any formal PE Plan at this time. However, the Grand Jury suggests that agencies do not need to start their public engagement efforts by crafting a formal PE Plan. Instead, an agency can gather their existing engagement strategies in a simple document(which we refer to as PE Guidelines), which can evolve over time with community input. The process of creating the Guidelines does not need to be expensive nor take a lot of resources. These Guidelines can also avoid the need to reinvent the wheel each time a public engagement issue arises, and provide flexibility in the event of employee retirement or turnover.1 s Elements of such Guidelines can be found in checklists and tables contained in San Luis Obispo's PublicEngagementand Noticing Manual 16 and Seattle Office for Civil Rights' Inclusive Outreach And Public Engagement Guide.17 Larger municipalities such as Novato and San Rafael, who have completed formal PE plans, encompass much larger geographic areas with greater, more diverse populations. With a larger public to serve and contend with, it makes sense for these municipalities to develop and make use of a formal PE Plan to achieve effective, meaningful, and consistent communication. Appendix E ("Platforms Used to Engage The Public")reflects some of the tools and platforms Marin's cities/towns and the County are using to disseminate information to the public. While each agency makes use of standard, expected methods of communication, such as public meetings and notices, website and email, most have also embraced what have become popular and relatively 15 Medford,Marlena."Silos Arc Good for Grain Not Public EnaaQement."Peak Democracy. lel Dec.2016. 16"Public Envy*anent And NotlunLManual."City ofSan LHiS Obispo,Nov.2015. 17 ,inclusive Outreach And Public Enna rement_Ciuide."Seattle Office f n-Civil Rights.April 2009(Rev.01/11/12). June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 of 61 Public Engagement In Maria essential social media platforms like Twitter and texting. This represents an expansion from the minimum requirements of The Brown Act, which guarantees the public's right to attend and participate in meetings of local legislative bodies. Moving beyond these requirements is an essential strategy of effective, modern day PE. Overview: Comparing Public Engagement in Marin with the San Francisco Bay Area In 2013, Public Agenda published Testing the Waters'8 and Beyond Business As Usual.19 These reports contained the results from surveys of 900 local officials and 500 leaders of civic and community-based organizations throughout California, exploring "the attitudes of California's ` local officials toward public participation in local governance." The reports concluded that, "These officials believe that the current models for including the public in local decision making fall to meet the needs of both residents and local officials."20 Although our sample size was significantly smaller(12 Marin vs. 206 Bay Area officials) than the Testing the Waters survey, we found similarities: Testing the Waters Testing the Waters Grand Jury Survey Question 206 Bay Area Respondents 12 Marin Agencies Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied 72% at least"somewhat satisfied" 75'%a at least"somewhat satisfied" are you with the level of public participation in local government decision making in your community? Thinking about significant public 4% input frorn experts 8°/0 input from experts decisions that you've been involved 600/q,input also from stakeholders& 42%, input also from stakeholders& with,which best describes how this interest groups interest groups process typically works? 30,,%input from broad cross section 50% input from broad cross section In the past year, how often have you 100% at least once 75% at least once seen a public decision made with, considerable input fi-om a broad crosssection of the community? 18 1-lagelskamp,Carolin and Immerwahr,John and Hess,Jeremy."Testing the_Waters:California's Local Officials Experiment with Ne\\ � ays to En �tgc the Public."Public Agenda.2013. lagelskam Carolin and Immerwahr,John and Hess,Jeremy."Beyond Business As Usual Leaders of Calitoi ni is Civic p• Y —y-- Organizations Sect. New Ways to Engaae the Public in Local Government."Public Agenda 2013. 20 1lagelskamp,Carolin and Immerwahr,John and Hess,Jeremy."Iestim-,the Waters.Califoinia"s Local Officials t xperunent with New Ways to Fngale the Public."Public Agenda 2013. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 of 61 Public Engagement In Mal-in Likewise, our sample of 451 Marin residents vs. 125 Bay Area civic leaders (from Beyond Business As Usilol) also showed similarities: Beyond Business as Usual Beyond Business as Usual Grand Jury Survey Question 125 Bay Area Respondents 451 Marin Residents Overall,how satisfied or dissatisfied 7`% Very satisfied 20% Satisfied are you with the efforts made by 490X, Somewhat satisfied 31% Somewhat satisfied most local public officials to include 22%, Somewhat dissatisfied 18°/6 Somewhat dissatisfied the public in government decision 15%, Very dissatisfied 24%Dissatisfied making? One way for local officials to engage 21%Never 33%Never with the public is through public 320/0 1-2 36% 1-2 hearings and comments at council, 46% 3 or more 31% 3 or more board or commission meetings. In the past 12 months,how many times have you personally attended such a meeting? As far as you are aware, do your 72%) Email 59% Ernail local public officials REGULARLY 32%) Social Media 43% Social Media use the following for communication 73% Website 79%Website and outreach to the public? Overview: Resident Responses to Public Engagement Survey The total number of responses by residents of ourcities, towns, and unincorporated areas of Marin was 451, as shown below: Number of Public Engagement Survey Responses Belvedere(0) t Corte Madera(10) Fairfax(16) Larkspur(9) Mill Valley(22) Novato(201) Ross(4) San Anselmo(19) San Rafael(78) Sausalito(5) Tiburon(3) , Unincorporated Marin(84) 0 60 120 180 240 Number of Survey Responses June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin Details: Individual City,Town, and County Snapshots Since each agency has its own philosophy of what effective PE is, and how to achieve it, the following discussion highlights each town or city and the County on its own merits. Each municipality's snapshot contains the following information: ■ Background. Demographic overview of the municipality using Bay Area Census2l data. ■ View from the City (or Town or County). Excerpts from the agency informational requests (see Appendix A). ■ Views from the Residents. Highlights from the public surveys (see Appendices B and C), representative comments from residents, and a "by-the-numbers" synopsis: o On average how many public hearings,meetings and/or workshops do you attend each year?("Meeting Attendance") o Are you interested in becoming more engaged in the decision making process? ("Engagement Interest") o How satisfied are you with the efforts to include the public in government decision making?("PE Satisfaction") o Please rate how the agency is doing in the following areas of public engagement ("Detailed PE Issues") ■ Agency is making more of an effort to engage a wide variety of people in government decision making("Making an effort") ■ Agency engages the public in ways that are broadly accessible in terms of location, facilities,time,and language(`Broadly Accessible") ■ Residents have ample opportunity to participate in agency's government decisions ("Ample Opportunity") ■ Agency provides the public with the information it needs,and with enough lead time,to effectively engage in the decision making process("Effectiveness") ■ Agency gives full consideration to public input before making government decisions("Full Consideration") ■ Agency regularly informs residents of follow-up,progress,outcomes,and impacts concerning decisions made based on public involvement("Regularly Informs") ■ Agency builds relationships with community-based groups and interested residents that are broadly reflective of the public it serves("Relationship Building") ■ Ageney regularly uses clear and simple language in communications("Clear& Simple") o Which tools are used to engage and communicate with the public? ("PE Tool Awareness") ■ View from the Media. Illustrative PE issues covered by the press in recent years. Studies show a positive relationship between newspaper readership and civic engagement.22 Most of the featured stories are from The Marin Independent Journal(IJ), Marin's major news source. Some of the stories recapped in this section are success stories. Some are not. The Grand Jury suggests that all are instructive for the benefits of effective public engagement. ■ Summary. A brief comparison of views expressed by the agency, residents, and media. 21 "Bay Area Census."Uctropolitan Transportation Commission and Association q/ Bay Area Governments. 22 Shaker,Lee "Dead Newspapers adCiizes' Civic En r 7ement."Political Comnm7ication.loin-nal.Vol ume 31,2014-Issue 1,p .... 30.1an.2014. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin i Belvedere has the smallest population of all Marin cities and towns at just 2,068 residents with a median family income of$181,800. It has the highest percentage of residents over 65 years at 31.6%, and the smallest percentage of children under 5 years at just 4.6%. However, Belvedere is in the average range of families with children under 18 at 24.2%. View from the City Belvedere does not have, and does not plan on adopting, a formal PE Plan. Nor is PE a part of any one job description within the agency. When asked why they had no plans to adopt a PE Plan, Belvedere responded, "As a small city, PE processes can often be accomplished more easily and informally compared to larger cities. At this time, we feel our current PE processes garner a sufficient amount of public engagement such that formalizing a plan is not necessary at this time." As we heard from other small-scale communities in Marin, size matters when it comes to spending agency resources on developing a full-scale PE Plan and hiring PE-specific personnel. In addition, because of the very nature of their close-knit communities, municipalities like Belvedere feel that active public engagement tends to happen organically. Indeed a visit to Belvedere's website confirms that the deer issue and its follow-on study, is featured prominently on a new webpage where all reports, information, public correspondence, and a video-recorded community forum are catalogued regarding this issue.23 Views From the Residents There were no respondents to our survey to provide information or insight regarding resident views of PE efforts in Belvedere. View from the Media A long-running issue in Belvedere concerns what some residents say is an out of control deer population. With the community divided over what, if anything, to do about it, they continue grappling with solutions as the City Council works to hear public input. In August 2016 the IJ reported that, "...the council agreed the deer issue needs to be addressed, and it voted unanimously to confront community concerns by calling for a forum in which they will invite wildlife experts to participate in a panel." That this is an issue that merits debate "was evident by the turnout," said the IJ.24 Summary Since Belvedere is a very small community, the city reports no need for a formal PE Plan. Based on media reports, Belvedere residents are engaged—primarily in an on-going, issue- by-issue basis. 23" __ Cuucnt IsSUCS betoic tl.:Cite Council."Cit),oJ'Behvedere. 24 Rodriguez.Adrian."Bcl\cdcie deur issue to be subject of lorum."A11a1-iI7 Indepe»denl Joan-nal.9 Aug.2016. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin Corte Madera's population is 9,253 with a median family income of$141,140. Although only 16% of the residents are over 65, certainly not the highest percentage in Marin, Corte Madera has been recognized by the World Health Organization as a member of the Global Network of Age- Friendly Cities self-identifying as "Age-Friendly Corte Madera."25 Corte Madera and its neighboring city, Larkspur, often called "the Twin Cities," share a police department with San Anselmo (the Central Marin Police Authority) and is currently in discussion with Larkspur regarding merging fire departments. View from the Town Corte Madera does not have and has no plans to adopt a formal PE Plan. According to the town, "Public engagement is an expectation as a Town. We follow best practices for engaging the public and disseminating information. We also hire employees that understand the importance of this expectation." Extending outreach through webcasting, Facebook,Nextdoor, texting and mobile apps, Corte Madera has also created an effective transparency portal on their website.26 The town also regularly assesses their PE efforts for effectiveness, asking participants for feedback and advice pertaining to their PE experience. Views From the Residents Ten Corte Madera residents responded to our survey. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 70% have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 70% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 60% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues - Increased effort, advance information, and informs are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness Website and social media are most familiar 25"Our.Miss ion,Statement."Age-Friendly Corte Madera.Accessed 28 Apr.2017. .._........... 26"T rvtsparency Portal."The Town of Corte AYladera. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 of 61 Public Engagement In Mari The quotes below are some of the responses to our invitation for general comment. However, it must be noted that given the small number of responses, these views are not necessarily representative of the greater public's views: Torn)n has an outstanding website, a weekly online neivsletter, email notices of hearings and uses Nextdoor to distribute information. We r-yonder where the tax$$goes, as many updates and repairs are shoddily done; especially with the heavy weather and damage to many roadside areas. Corte Madera is generally open with its communication. Some people are just not interested in participating. View from the Media % The road to completing Corte Madera's Tam Ridge apartment complex has been a rocky one. A March 2017 IJ editoria127 citing progress on the project stated, "There have been some important lessons learned along the way, including that it is better to make sure that the public is informed about and encouraged to engage in the decision making process than having to deal with the public fall-out.' Because of its controversial development history, this same article reported that, "The building has also reinvigorated public interest in local planning decisions, as residents have gotten a look at what can happen when they aren't paying attention."- In another development debate, plans to rebuild a major Corte Madera hotel has run up against public opposition over the paving of a pond that currently sits on the intended expansion site. After vetting the plan in what the IJ in April 2017 called "marathon meetings,"most recently one with a "heated, four-hour standoff," the issue continues to be debated.— Summary v The town reports good PE efforts and has no plans to create a formal PE Plan. y Residents who responded to our survey are generally positive, although "advance information" and "informs"were rated negatively. This view is perhaps part of the difficulties reported in the media. The Marin IJ reported on two on-going controversies in Corte Madera highlighting the recognition that early and on-going involvement in community issues is crucial. 27 (\Marin 1+: Pro,less on Corte M rdera apartment complex w Leonie."Marin IndependentJourna126 Feb.2017 .. . Rodriguez,Adrian."Corte Madera hotel plan plods throm-,h pond debate."Maa-in Independent Join-nal.4 Apr.2017 June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin The town of Fairfax has a population of 7,441. Nearly 27% of the residents are families with kids under 18, and 4.5% have kids under five. The Town of Fairfax website describes Fairfax as "...an environmentally conscious community situated in the heart of central Marin County and is considered the most progressive of Marin's 11 incorporated cities."The site further states, "The Town has ordinances preventing chain stores; take-out styrofoam food packaging and plastic bags and is in the process of updating its General Plan with a goal of retaining its small town character. View from the Town Fairfax does not have a formal PE Plan, nor does it intend to create one. While Fairfax "actively engages the community for input on major land use,projects, and/or policy issues," the town finds that"different approaches are needed for different issues/projects. "As an example of rigorous, ongoing public discourse requiring time and resources, Fairfax cited, "One land use issue [that] has been in discussion for four years." After gathering community input via a community workshop and online forums, the town recently changed direction regarding plans for their Town Center. In addition,public online forum discussions surrounding the issue of medical marijuana cultivation led to a more informed decision. Views from the Residents Sixteen residents responded to our survey.,By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 68.8% have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 68.8% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 43.8% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts' Detailed PE Isstes Advance information,full consideration,and informs are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness Website and surveys are most familiar 29"About Fairfax.California."Town of Fairfax. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin Below are some responses to our invitation to make general comments: I wish that the Town ivould post 019 Facebook or have a blog as part of their website to post updates about ongoing issues. The more controversial items on the meeting agenda are scheduled at the end of the town meetings, so you may have to stay 4 hours to be heard. I've seen instances of the town council making decisions before the public is heard... The Town of Fairfax govermnent operates in secrecy and uvith complete disregard for the interests of its citizens. There is an imperial and dismissive air to Toivn officials. They do not care at all what residents think and completely disregard viet-ns contrarp to their orvn. View from the Media The Fairfax Town Council has reacted to the undoing of a 2014 rezoning decision by proposing a new district exclusively for senior housing in hopes of building community support for the affordable senior housing project known as Victory Village. A March 2016 IJ article reported that, "Opponents to the rezoning gathered more than 1,000 signatures on a petition forcing the council to backtrack and undo the zoning change." Opposition for this latest zoning proposal has been vocal, but support for Victory Village is also being voiced. According to the IJ, "The project has the fill] support of the Marin Organizing Committee, a group of 16 civic organizations, including churches and synagogues, which has championed the cause of addressing Marin's affordable housing shortage."'0 In a related issue, a former Fairfax council member posted a letter on behalf of a concerned citizen's group to The Marin Post. The letter, addressed to the Town's mayor and council, appeared under the headline "Fairfax residents ask Town to preserve public engagement and transparency in planning decisions."s I Summary > Fairfax reports having no PE Plan with no intent to develop one. The town believes different approaches to engage the public are needed for different kinds of issues. The resident response to our survey indicates a wish for increased efforts in PE by the town. Less than half the respondents to our survey were somewhat satisfied with the town's efforts and the majority expressed the desire to become more involved. > This view was also expressed by residents in a letter addressed to the Town and subsequently posted to The Marin Post. 30 1lalstead,Richard."Fairfax tries new zoning tact:on senior housing complcx."Marin Independent Journal.6 Mar.2017. si "F uif ix i.esidcnts ask Town to reserve public engagenu nt and ti uis�uuic� ui l imin-decisions."The A4arin Post. 1 Feb. t 1 _..__.._ ....._ E _:.' l_. 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin .. _ . ......... Larkspur's population is 11,926, making it the fifth largest municipality in Marin. The median family income is $115,360. Along with Belvedere and Sausalito, more than 21% of its residents are over 65, which gives these three cities the highest percentage of older adults in all Marin. Larkspur and Corte Madera are often referred to as the "Twin Cities," in part because of their close proximity to one another. The Twin Cities share a local community newspaper(Twin Cities Times), are currently in negotiation regarding a merger of fire departments, and have consolidated police departments with San Anselmo forming the tri-city "Central Marin Police Authority." View from the City Larkspur does not have a formal PE Plan. Engagement opportunities are made available in multiple ways beyond the public meeting, including use of tools such as Facebook, Twitter and texting. Larkspur states that they view their public as partners, and give full consideration to public input before making decisions. 'PE is an assigned duty of one or more staff members and the City of Larkspur "makes every effort to engage the public in its processes. " Views from the Residents There were nine responses from Larkspur residents to our survey. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 88.9%have attended at least one meeting;annually Engagement Interest 66.7% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 33.3% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Broad accessibility, advance information,and full consideration are ranked worst PE Too] Awareness Website and email are most familiar The quotes below are some of the responses to our invitation for general comments. It must be noted,however, that given the small number of responses, these views are not necessarily representative of the public's views: I haven't used the Larkspur Web Site. I don't think I get information that I need to know[aboutj what is going on in the City Hall Meetings or general information about[what] is going on about town. Only i/1 go to the City,and ask a particular questions is when I find out what is going on about that one thing. Staff(city manager) wants to control information presented at meetings. Often will not release contribution to board meetings before the date. A recently started email neivsletter from the City Manager is excellent. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin View from the Media In February of 2017, an IJ editorial noted that public protests prompted Larkspur to reverse its decision (which was already being implemented) to reduce traffic lanes on a heavily-traveled, short stretch of Magnolia Avenue at a cost of thousands of dollars to taxpayers. While the City approved the lane change, it did not "get much public attention until locals noticed the [rerouting] lines painted on the road." The Editorial noted this "deserved more effective front-end attention" and "That attention might have saved taxpayers $50,000, a cost that should serve as a reminder for future projects.„ 32 In January 2017, after almost a year without progress, Larkspur announced in the IJ that they were again moving on plans for a new library and community center. With a strategy involving a committee to explore funding for and cost of operating the library, city officials expected to'� receive a presentation in the spring about work done to date. Planning for the project had slowed due to changeover in key staff. Residents "have expressed that maintaining the city's small-town character is important to them” and one councilman stated, "We will arrive at the right solution when we've eliminated all the wrong ones. That's how the design process works."" However, by March 2017, it was reported "Unfortunately, city staff then and now lacked a vision of what the community needed or had any idea how to finance it. With leadership missing, altruistic community volunteers unaccustomed to compromising due to conflicting agendas will inevitably stumble about unfocused and struggle to formulate financially viable plans."3' Summary Larkspur has no formal PE Plan and no intent to develop one, although the agency does report utilizing multiple tools to engage the public. 31 With only nine responses from the public, the Grand Jury makes no inferences. A Marin IJ editorial noted one particularly difficult issue in which the town reversed a decision (already partially implemented) because of public protest. The editorial noted that in the fixture "...more effective front-end attention" could be fruitful. 32"Larkspur rescinds Magnolia lane chane."Marin Independent Join'nal. 1 Feb.2017. 33 Rodriguez,Adrian."Larkspur shu ukr renn renews focus oplan fora ,.libi iy. mununitV hub."Marin Independent Journal22 Jan.2017. 34 Spotswood,Dick."Larkspur limps alone with librar �lan."Marin Independent Journal. 25 Mar.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 16 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin According to 2010 census data, Mill Valley has a population of 13,903. This makes Mill Valley the third largest city in Marin. The median family income is $167,000. Of the 6,084 households, 30% have children under 18. Similar to San Rafael, Mill Valley shares its zip code with a number of unincorporated areas including Strawberry, Tam Valley, Almonte, Homestead Valley and Alto. View from the City Mill Valley has a formal PE Plan. Adopted in June of 2014, their Strategic Communications Plan is "...designed to identify goals and strategies to effectively communicate with community members, drive the development of internal communications policies, and improve the overall effectiveness of the City in meeting the needs of the community."35 As identified in the Communications Plan, a"Communications Group"—comprised of a Community Engagement Supervisor(newly established position as a result of the Plan), Communications Specialist (part-time contract service provider), and the Assistant to the City Manager—was established to implement communication goals. Mill Valley now has an active Community Engagement Supervisor who reports to the Assistant to the City Manager. In addition, Mill Valley has a convenient transparency portal on its recently revised website.36 With two-way communication defined as a priority, Mill Valley has been busy with many significant PE processes over the past 24 months, including: community workshops, regular email newsletter updates, liaisons with the business community, outdoor tabling and tent events, and door-to-door interactions. As a result of increased involvement of the public, more decisions are based on community support and, in one instance, such efforts "galvanized a neighborhood." Views from the Residents We received responses from 22 residents of Mill Valley. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 86.4% have,attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 59.1% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 72.7% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Full consideration and builds relationships are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness Website, email,and direct mail are most familiar Of the 22 respondents who completed our survey, not all responded to our invitation for general continents. However, some of those responses are below: MV City manager does a yeoman's job of sending out MV Connect and his Newsletler on a regular basis,putting a Positive spin on most subjects, even the less savory subjects. I think that the decision making process about who should serve on committees should be more transparent. More advanced notice is needed about meaty agenda items. Agendas come out Thursday for Monday meetings. Not enough time to inform and engage citizens and businesses. Would like an 3'"Sti ate ic._C.... i�ahons 1 lun."Ciry of Mill Valley.June 2014. 35,,S.. I�ansharenc�."City ofNli11 Valley. Accessed 28 Apr.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 17 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin annual and six month published calendar ivith topics. Mill Valley communication and decision making too centralized in City Manager. Council member hosts table at Litton[sic]Square monthly---Rotates--for citizen input etc. Great effort by them. I see council members in town and then are very approachable and take time to stop and answer questions or make suggestions or provide contact information. 90%of what they do is for show and to avoid legal challenges, not because they actually want to hear any dissenting opinions. View from the Media Settlement of a lawsuit alleging failure to preserve and protect the city's recreational and emergency evacuation routes was contingent upon approval at a March 20, 2017 Mill Valley City Council meeting. The lawsuit was filed against Mill Valley's city manager in October 2016 by a former city planning commissioner and longtime trail advocate. The IJ reported that, "News of the lawsuit ignited citizens, who formed a committee to put pressure on city officials to correct what they say has been years of neglect." As a result, "The City Council in January approved a nine- point action plan to address concerns about the protection and preservation of the paths. The city has since resolved more than 10 complaints of encroachments through a crackdown in enforcement."Mill Valley's mayor was quoted as saying, "This action is an example of the Mill Valley City Council listening to the community and taking deliberate and thoughtful action to directly resolve concerns."37 * Mill Valley has taken action in responding to acts of hate and anti-Semitism in their community by adopting a resolution, "reaffirming its commitment to respect, tolerance and compassion—with a plan to appoint a `task force' committee to reinforce the effort," stated the Marin IJ in an April 18, 2017 article. The "resolution package" includes "an action plan to audit existing community programs in an effort to ensure that the city is offering services, policies and programs with the same intent and commitment to tolerance and respect."Further, "Community members were excited that the council was discussing these issues of intolerance." The task force will likely include those who live and work in Mill Valley..,34 Summary Mill Valley has a robust PE Plan and website and has made two-way communication a priority. The City has a highly-engaged public that mostly views council members favorably, but thinks issues could be communicated earlier and better. The IJ reports quick responses to high-profile citizen concerns. 37 Rodriguez,Adrian."Mill \7aIIcy settle,,steps,I u3eS and paths IaWS111t."Marin 117depe77de71 J0717-77al. 18 Mar.2017. 38 Rodriguez,Adrian.`MiII Valley council pionurtes respect and toleranceto quell hate episodes."Mcn•i77lndepe7dent Journal. 18 Apr.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 18 of 61 Public Engagement 1n Morin i Novato is Mai-in's second largest city with a population of 51,904. The median age of its residents is 43 years with 15.7% over 65. Novato has the second largest concentration of Hispanic or Latino residents at 21.3%, behind San Rafael with 30%. The median family income is $97,000/year.39 Nearly half of the city's employees live within Novato, an important issue for many Marin cities and towns where affordability is often a challenge. View from the City As the second most populous municipality in Marin, Novato has a PE Plan (dated 2015-2016) which has not been formally adopted. They also employ a Public Communications Coordinator who is specifically tasked with public participation and engagement. For Novato, "effective communication means improving public access to timely, accurate, and helpful information about the City and its services; providing a variety of easy, accessible, and meaningful ways to engage with the City; and promoting transparency in the City's decision-making process and outcomes of key citywide issues affecting the daily lives of our Novato community. ,40 The City has a history of being engaged and active in civic discussion. However, they have recently broadened their reach by recognizing and utilizing the changing technology landscape to inform and engage the public. Facebook, Twitter, texting, webcasting, e-newsletters, and Nextdoor are among the newer platforms Novato is using to expand their outreach. Views from the Residents Of the total number of responses to our survey by city and town,just over 50% (20 1) were from Novato, by far the largest response to our survey..By,the numbers: Meeting Attendance 65.2% have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 68.7% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 50.7% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Full consideration, advance information, and ample opportunity are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness Website and email are most familiar Some of the views expressed by Novato residents were: A few Council members in Novato are excellent in answering questions, etc. City staff in some areas however, have already made their decision before public engagement. The public engagement is a mandatory formality only. One has to be very civic minded to follow all that is going on in the City and where the information is. I get lost trying to find which place has the information I need- and often would prefer a 7oi erson's summary rather than legalize[sic]. It's a full time job (exhausting!) trying to keep up with what is happening and I have only focused on the things 1 am involved with and rely on others to spread the word on something that requires additional attention. 3e"List of CaIifoi nia loc itions by income." Mkipedia.Accessed 28 Apr.2017. 10"C ommtmis itions& Commgnrty Em-,agement Plan."Cit,gfNovato.2015-2016. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 19 of 61 Public Engagement hn Marie Public communication engagement efforts are improving online(Nextdoor.com for example). That said, 1 would hope that the intention of the public engagement efforts are genuine and that City truly wants to hear,firorn its taxpayers and residents. More often than not it seems that the community is being "engaged"so that the City can check that box off without really caring about Citizen opinion. Would like to see more conummication and outreach in Spanish to engage Our Spanish-speaking population I would like to be able 10 provide feedback online instead of having to attend in person a meeting (at a time I usually can't attend) in order to provide feedback. The city is misleading in its very few and limited attempts at notifying the public. It's usually c?fier the fact news and only very few members of the community seem to know what's going orz. Plenty of opportunity is given, not much taken due to citizen inertia. Sometimes people who have not taken the opportunity to voice their opinions at the onset of a proposal will later become very vocal about quashing it. You can firing a horse to water. View from the Media IJ Editorials in January and November 2016 discussed the dissatisfaction of Novato residents concerning the City's decision-making process preceding installation of solar panels over the parking lot at the Hamilton pool. This led to a resident's lawsuit and increasing costs. The City apologized for not doing a better job of involving neighbors in the decision-making process—a dialogue that the IJ commented, "should have taken place long before the city installed [the panels]."41 Novato subsequently submitted an article for`publication in the IJ stating its commitment to public engagement and transparency.42 Six weeks later, the IJ commented that the City had used unclear language ("bureaucratese") in titling a City Council agenda item.43 In April 2017, the IJ complimented the City of Novato for agreeing to engage residents concerning proposals to develop three city-owned sites at Hamilton.44 Summary Many of the responses from the public echoed the issues reported in Views From the Media. n While the City of Novato has been increasingly using more communication tools, it appears that the City could better engage the public earlier on topics that are likely to be controversial. 41 "Solar panels a test for Novatos leaders."Marin Independent Journal. l4 Jan.2016.;"Is Novato legal clash worth the cost?" — — Marin Independent Journal.20 Nov.2016. 42"Novato is IeadinL,on community cnga,cntcnt and transparency."Marin Independent Journal. 14 Dec.2016. 43"Novato should h rvc del tycd FALAI tax vote."Marin Independent Journal.30 Jan.2017;"Novato,'FAM display mastery of bureauu ttese Ylarin Independent Jour)ial.31 Jan.2017. 44,,A little time\a ould be well invested in Hamilton."Marin Independent Journal.3 April 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 20 of 61 Public Engagement In Nlarin ........ ........ .. The town of Ross has a population of 2,415 with a median family income of$200,800. Ross is the second smallest municipality in Marin. It has by far the smallest percentage of renter-occupied housing units at 14%, indicating the vast majority of residents own their own homes. Ross has the largest percentage of families with kids under 18 at 43% and, along with Belvedere, has the highest percentage of residents with bachelor's degrees in Marin at 82%. With the national average at 22%, Ross is clearly a highly-educated community. View from the Town Ross also does not have and does not plan to adopt a formal PE Plan. The rationale for not adopting a plan mostly revolves around engagement as it currently happens in this very small town: Towns and cities that are small-scaled in size and resources generally conduct business in a somewhat more organic fashion that naturally relies 071 active citizen engagement to accomplish the public's business. Even if there is no adopted Plan, towns become acutely aware of issues that matter to their community, the stakeholders and others who tare impacted, and the formal and informal methodologies to inform, consult, and/or engage. As such,public engagement principles and practices become naturally embedded into operations. Much of the PE that goes on in Ross is centered on land use decisions. As such, Ross fostered a process conducive to dialogue and collaborative problem solving that offered early opportunity for feedback regarding creation of their Advisory Design Review group and procedure. Other recent PE processes conducted in Ross include extensive community engagement regarding improvement to Winship Bridge (one public meeting was held at the bridge itself), and a survey about short- term rentals that generated significantly more public participation and comment than previous Town Council meetings or public workshops. View froin the Residents There were four respondents to our survey and no comments regarding resident views of PE efforts in Ross. View from the Media At a meeting of the town council in July of last year, Ross, like other Marin municipalities, addressed the issue of whether short-term rentals should be operating unregulated in their town. At the time, with no regulations or definitions on residential use, the town's municipal code was unclear regarding permitted use. But unlike other cities or towns, Ross—which operates on a much smaller scale—has no hotels so has not collected transient occupancy taxes. The discussion started in January 2015, but according to the IJ, "The council put off making any formal decision due to a lack of rental activity."Nevertheless, the Ross planning manager stated, "There is merit in fine-tuning some of our definitions." And not surprisingly, "lZesidents are on both sides of the issue." Plans for a future meeting on the issue was announced.`' a'Rodriguez,Adrian."Ross considers short-tum rental regulations."Marin Independent Journal. 12 July 2016. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 21 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin 7� During a "two-hour, impassioned debate" at a packed Town Hall in Ross in December of 2016, officials decided to go forward to restore a town-owned house instead of tearing it down to make way for a park designed for preschoolers. Residents on both sides of the issue attended and even though there was "overwhelming support for the park", the IJ reported that the Town Council voted 4-1 to restore the house, which could bring the town $10,000 to 520,000 annually in rental income. It was suggested that, "the council form a committee of parents that could study options for the conceived playground elsewhere. The council felt that might be the best approach.""' Summary Ross considers itself too small for a formal PE Plan, addressing and reacting to issues as necessary. s The Grand Jury did not receive enough responses from residents to make any relevant observations. Ross may be small,but issues can be seen as "big" when it comes to public engagement. 46 Rodriguez,Adrian."Ross nature park nixed to restore workforce house."Marin Independent Journal.9 Dec.2016. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 22 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin San Anselmo has ao ulation of 1 p p 2,336 with a median family income of$122,800. As with other areas in Marin,parts of San Anselmo are unincorporated, including Sleepy Hollow and an area at the end of San Francisco Boulevard. Six percent of San Anselmo's population is less than 5 years old and 13.5% are over 65. View from the Town San Anselmo does not currently have a PE Plan,but says they intend to design a "Public Engagement Guide" this year, formalizing and instituting a "guide for use by staff that will be modified as new methods of reaching the public are created, discovered or changed." San, Anselmo stated, "We want people to become involved, ask questions, provide feedback and be part of the decision-making process. We feel that making the effort to get the community involved is integral to our work." The town already makes use of many modern platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, webcasting, texting, and Nextdoor as well as workshops and surveys. However, San Anselmo's responses to our Information Request indicate that these tools are not necessarily used to collect community feedback regarding their PE processes. Views From the Residents There were 19 responses from San Anselmo residents. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 57.9%have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 78.9% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 52.6% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Full consideration, advance information,and clear language are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness Websitc, email,and surveys are most familiar Some of their responses to our invitation to make general comments are below: At all levels staff attempts citizen input to significant and small issues effecting[sicJ residents. San Anselmo refuses to do anything about the flooding other than purchase expensive buildings and let them sit there. They do nothing about cleaning the creek and spend all of our money on consuhants saying in S years they will do something. `Language for town council meetings are dense, not accessible. By the time an item reaches Town Council it seems a decision has already been made and the input at the meeting is disregarded. It's a two way street: citizens must make an appropriate effort to stay informed. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 23 of 61 Public Engagernew In IINIarin View from the Media Flooding and how to deal with it continues to be a major concern in Ross Valley. Over 100 people showed up to a "scoping session"held in February of this year to consider the environmental impacts of a major flood prevention program that residents say, "could undermine their livelihood," according the Marin U. Several San Anseli no merchants at the meeting maintained that some of the [plan's] "structural modifications" would mean "the possible loss and relocation of beloved businesses." One resident stated, "County officials should be more clear in their presentations and that when addressing a building,rather than numbering it as one, two or three, it should be called by the business it represents." Other residents voiced anxieties over the plan that ranged from concern for coho and steelhcad salmon populations to the safety and effectiveness of detention basins. The county capital planning and project manager has "heard the fl-ustration" and "staff has been working to keep up the pace on communicating and making progress. We are trying to take this as a watershed community wide approach and everyone's participation is going to be really important."47 Summary San Anselmo has no PE Plan to guide them yet. Community feedback could be better prioritized. Public wants to be engaged more. Clear and advance in=formation would help to achieve this. The media echoes what the public says. 4' Rodrieiiez.Adrian-"Debate_continues over Ross Valley flood plan."Marin I.J. 17 Feb.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 24 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin f ...... ......_ ... _.... San Rafael is a city and the county seat of Matin. According to the 2010 census, San Rafael has a population of 57,713 which makes it the largest municipality in Marin. The median family income is $96,000. Although parts of Santa Venetia, Lucas Valley, Marinwood and other unincorporated areas have a San Rafael address and zip code,residents of these areas responded to our survey as residents of unincorporated Marin. If all residents with either 94901 or 94903 zip codes were included in San Rafael census data, the total would be over 70,000 or almost 25% of Marin's total population. San Rafael is nearly 71%white with the largest Hispanic or Latino population in Marin at about 30%, or 17,000 people as of 2010. View from the City The City of San Rafael has the largest population of any municipality in Marin. As such, in January of 2015 they adopted a formal PE Plan: the Connnunity Engag;ementAction Plan.48 To get there, though, they first conducted a survey and held community workshops. Goals included demystifying local government, engaging earlier, and enhancing their technological tools. San Rafael's plan calls for considering the hiring of a Public Information Officer or Communications Coordinator. The city states that "...our commitment to robust community engagement continues—we recognize the value that [such] engagement brings to civic discourse and decision-making." San Rafael's newly-adopted Community Engagement Action Plan was put to use right away. Key tenets from this plan were developed into a specific communications plan 49 that addressed ongoing efforts to rebuild two fire stations and establish a new downtown public safety center. Members of the public and key stakeholder groups were involved from the outset and information has been made available via email,Nextdoor, YouTube, and open house events at the fire stations. The Grand Jury commends San Rafael for receiving the Davenport Institute for Public Engagement and Civic Leadership's highest award (Platinum) for public engagement in 2016. Further evidence of San Rafael's public engagement efforts can be seen on their"Engage and Connect"website page.50 o 4R c> "Community En�a�ement Action Plan."Cite q/San Rafael. 49"Essential Facilities Communications Plan."Citp gfSan Rafael. o.<. F _ ge and Connect."City of San Rafael.Accessed on 28 Apr.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 25 of 61 Public Engcr;emeni In Marin Views from the Residents A total of 78 San Rafael residents responded to our survey. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 66.7% have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 78.2% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 56.4% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Informs, full consideration,and advance information are ranked worst PE Tool Awareness website, email, surveys, and social media are most familiar There was a mix of views on the City's efforts to engage the public, including a'nunber of respondents who felt the City was not responsive or made decisions prior to filly engaging the public. Some of their responses are noted below: With the drop in daily newspaper readership we don't really know what's on the city council agenda, though I suppose you can go to the city's website and it should be there. A lot of announcements about what civic meetings are going on where and when are posted by neighbors on the nextdoor.com website. Council demonstrates openness to community input. Staff have worked well with Gerstle Park neighborhood on many topics.I observe a sense ofpride in the work staff do. They sometimes reach out but do not listen. The process seems designed to support decisions already made. Feel used and manipulated Seems decisions take forever to be made...also how the place works seems stacked against the regular people. Only those who know what's what in the civil domain can get things done. But I'm trying to speak out. Need to create more awareness of communication channels. View from the Media The IJ has commended San Rafael's outreach inviting residents to become involved in fire station design 51 and public input for the redesign of Albert Park.52 Marin Ws February 2016 editorial had this to say about the fire station project: Son Rafael is holding the door-ivide open for the ptthlic to get involved in the design of fire stations those taxpa.vers are payingfor. Instead o/7ceeping all of those decisions limited to the agendas of the Citi• Council and its hoards, the city has posted architects'drai,vings of proposed changes online and held open houses at the sites before [Wednesday's meeting of the cite Design Review Board. The process is an invitation to local residents to be part of the:process. It was noted that instead of relegating public outreach to the background since the tax was approved, the City has made an effort to keep residents engaged in the decision making. 51 "City 1-laII seeks hubli.c comment on San Rafacl fire sotions."Murhi 15 Feb.2016.;"Ciri I Dill -seeks public comment on$an Rafael fisc stations."Marin independent Journal. 15 Feb.2016. 52 Rodriguez,Adrian."San Rafacl's Albert Park redesign near timil hurdles."Marin Indehendent Jom-nal.20 March 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 26 of 61 Public Engagement In Morin After two years and multiple public meetings, San Rafael's City Council is expected to consider an upgrade to Albert Park. Gathering over 60 responses suggesting improvements for the park, the City determined that the play area was in need of an update. After hearing support for the project, and in concert with a citizen's group's efforts toward park cleanups, the City Council allocated $250,000 in finding. If the commission approves the plan, construction could begin by the end of the year. Summary San Rafael has a PE Plan, created in part with information from the community, that is utilized for effective PE. There is already a high level of engagement by the public, but interest in engagement is even higher. The public is calling on the City to listen more. Media reports good efforts on the part of the City and its residents,resulting in action. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 27 of 61 Pathic Engageinew h?Mai-in Sausalito has a population of 7,061 and a median family income of$180,900. Owner-occupied and renter-occupied homes are nearly equal at 50.8% and 49.2% respectively. Twenty-one percent of Sausalito's population is over 65 and 4.3% are under 5. There are over 400 houseboats in Sausalito 53 (many of which are outside the city limits) and although the resident population is relatively small, weekends and vacation times bring thousands of tourists to the town, impacting the community in multiple ways including traffic, commerce and bicycle safety issues. View from the City Although currently without a formal PE Plan, Sausalito says it intends to adopt one. According to the town, "Sausalito is proud to have a highly engaged population of well-educated and active community members. "They describe their PE process as "...on a project-by-project basis [where] individual community outreach plans are created to ensure that the public is provided with more and better information and is afforded all opportunities to influence public decisions." An example of this approach is the ongoing Ferry Landing project where "The public engagement process has resulted in the City challenging the originally-proposed design in order to tailor the project appropriately." Since early 2015, when the City Council approved a public review process regarding this project, Sausalito has provided many opportunities to engage their residents. These included holding a number of stakeholder meetings; two public hearings; the installation of an exhibit in City Hall; and an on-the-water buoy demonstration to give the public a visual representation of the dimensions of the project. The City states, "Although the project is still ongoing(currently pending a lawsuit), the public,engagement process has resulted in the City challenging the originally-proposed design in order to tailor the project appropriately." According to the official Nextdoor page of the City of Sausalito,54 the city librarian now also serves as Director of Communications for the City of Sausalito. 3 Carber,Kristine."Floatine through life Sausalito houseboat community ill shoe offits.. of a I ind dwellings oil Sunday." -- SFGate.4 Oct.2003. 54 ,City ol'Sausal ito."Nestdoor.Accessed 28 Apr.2017 June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 28 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin Views from the Residents There were five respondents to our survey and one comment regarding resident views of PE efforts in Sausalito: The history of Sausalito contains repeated episodes of citizens becoming engaged only after becoming awar e of a decision (or near decision), with staff'maintaining that "we held xxx hearings and surveys months (or years) ergo"to justi&the action. City agendas and packets come out on the Friday afternoon (late) before the next Tuesday's meeting, leaving little time to review or mount participation. Important issues have been decided late at night, or at midday during the work week, or during summer/winter vacation periods. Often the same people, or people with special interests, are appointed to cornuriittees/comrnissions. Staff and Council have long made overturesand efforts to include "stakeholders": ie nonresident tourists, bicyclists, development interests, non-resident property and business owners-whose voices and interests can h�ach the decision malting process. View from the Media A Superior Court judge has ruled against the Golden Gate Bridge district in its attempt to get parts of a Sausalito lawsuit over a planned $11 million ferry terminal thrown out." Filing the lawsuit last September, Sausalito alleged the bridge district is violating a 1995 lease agreement that requires city approval for"major alterations"to the ferry landing, hl 2014 the district proposed that a new dock replace the current, aging float, "which will not meet future federal rules for accessibility." Residents claimed that the proposed larger design "didn't fit the waterfront character of the small town and would only encourage more people—including tourists on bicycles to crowd the area. Others said the new dock was a needed safety improvement.""The district is expected to challenge the legal grounds of the case on May 4, when another hearing will take place. In December 2016 Sausalito became the first city in Marin to approve an age-friendly action plan aimed at seniors. The city's Age-Friendly Task Force crafted the plan with the hope that sonic elements could be included in the general plan. They began meeting in April 2013 and created a survey "to determine how Sausalito would be accessible and inclusive for its older residents." Along with transportation and housing, "social participation, respect, social inclusion, civic participation, employment, communication, information along with community support, health services and safety are other topics addressed in the action plan."56 Summary Sausalito intends to adopt a PE Plan. Currently, PE is conducted on a project-by-project basis. The Grand Jury did not receive enough responses from residents to make any relevant observations. `` Sausalito is attempting to put the city's interests first in the face of change. They recognize their aging population. 's Prado,Mirk. 'Saus Tito scores Ic,._gl\ictory in turr_docl dispute."Marin Independent Jourwal.25 April 2017. sr,Prado. Mark "Saustlitopasscs tn�t scnior action pl;ui_in c�,untv."Marin I2dependm0ou•naL 20 Dec.2016. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 29 of 61 Public Enoo,-einem In Morin .Emu= Tiburon has a population of 8,962 and a median family income of$170,000. Twenty-one percent of its residents are over 65 and one-third are families with children under 18. View from the Town Tiburon does not have and has no plans to adopt a formal PE Plan since, "At this point, a demonstrated need has not been established."With knowledge of"principles of effective public relations and interrelationships with community groups and agencies,private businesses and firms, and other levels of government" as a stated essential qualification of the town manager, Tiburon has incorporated elements of PE into at least one job description.57 One of Tiburon's most active community issues is that of residential building design and review. A significant PE process recently completed in Tiburon was their Building and Planning Forum, a public discussion led by an outside facilitator. The forum provided an opportunity for residents, contractors and architects to hear"a brief review from staff on the Planning and Building process in Tiburon and then have an opportunity to ask questions." This resulted in the town making several immediate changes to their processes and studying several other potential future changes. Views from the Residents There were two respondents to our survey and no comments regarding resident views of PE efforts in Tiburon. View from the Media The Marin IJ reported in April that a neighborhood group in Tiburon has proposed removing a grove of 42 trees along Tiburon Boulevard, most of them on toxon property.58 They say the trees are a fire and safety hazard and have offered to pay for their removal. Some opponents, however, think that an underlying motive of the plan is to open up bay views for homes on the hillside. In a similar attempt to get the trees removed in 1996, "Residents tried to get the Town Council to weigh in,but they failed to produce a plan that would be paid for by the homeowners." The current proposal for the grove was to be aired at an upcoming Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission meeting at Tiburon's Town Hall. More than 50 letters and petitions on both sides have been submitted to the town. * A plan to improve bicycle routes is expected to find its way to Tiburon's Planning Commission and Town Council by June. "The plan is part of a 5200,000 grant-funded push by the Transportation Authority of Marin. The goal is to develop multimodal-friendly communities countywide that improve safety -- and to identify gaps in bicycle and pedestrian connectivity with neighboring towns and cities," said the Marin IJ in April.'`' While the plan is aimed at making the roads and paths safe for everyone, acconnnnodating children is a specific goal. But some who live on a particular stretch of what is part of The Bay Trail are concerned that the plan will encourage even more bikers, who "run through frequently in droves...and [the road] has become dangerous," 5 7 ,,FoNvii Manager."Town of Tiburon. Sep. 1994. SS Rodribuez,Adrian."Tiburon tree killim-,plan has nei,hbors Morin h7dependentJ0711-1701.23 April 2017. 59 Rodrinucz,Adrian."Tiburon's bin c and pedcsti i an draft plan,stir 5 debate o ci 13m Frail routc."Marin Independent Jozernal.3 April 2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 30 of 61 Public En ogemew In Marin according to one resident. Officials have attempted to compromise with the residents by proposing signage and "slow zones." Summary The Town of Tiburon does not think there is a need for a formal PE Plan. Planning and design issues are a recurring topic of engagement. The Grand Jury did not receive enough responses from residents to make any relevant observations. The media reports additional issues of importance to residents that are addressed at town meetings. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 31 of 61 Public Engagetnenl In Marin Marin is the fourth-smallest county in California by land area. It has a population of 252,409 with a median family income of$120,000. Census data from 2010 shows 72.8% of Marin's population is white, 15.5% Hispanic or Latino, 5.4% Asian and 2.6% Black or African American. Like many California cities and counties, the Hispanic or Latino population has increased over the years, going from 4.2% in 1980 to 15.5% in 2010. Age distribution is consistent with average demographics in Marin towns and cities with: ■ Children under 5 = 5.5% ■ Age 5 to 17 = 15.2% ■ Age 18 to 64 = 62.6% • Over 65 = 16.7% According to an article in the Huffington Post, "An estimated 54 percent of adults 25 and older in Marin have a bachelor's degree and 22.5 percent have an advanced degree, more than in any other California county and among the highest rates nationwide, according to new survey data from the U.S. Census Bureau."60 The average number of adults in the U.S. with at least a bachelor's degree is 22%. View from the County, In January of 2012 Marin County adopted the County of Marin Public Communications Plan.61 With a clear vision, mission and strategy, the plan speaks to specific strategies and actions. As stated on the first page, "The County's approach to public communications is grounded in its mission statement and input from Board of Supervisor members, community partners and staff." The County's mission statement, which appears both on the County website and in their Plan, is "...to provide excellent services that support healthy, safe and sustainable communities; preserve Marin's unique environmental heritage; and encourage meaningful participation in the governance of the County by all."An ongoing commitment to public engagement is also stated in the County of Marin 5 Year Business Plan 2015-2020, which among other things focuses on being a responsive government.62 Clearly, PE is important to and actively practiced by our county representatives and employees. However, some of the County's PE processes differ in scope from the individual cities and towns discussed above. Because of the size of their constituency, PE efforts are executed and spread out among supervisorial'districts, departments, and agencies embedded within Marin's government. Therefore, Marin County discourages posting information in more than one location on their website. As a`strategy that may effectively serve a single city or town, the County feels doing so only serves to sow confusion when navigating their intricate site. Likewise the question of whether or not(and how) an agency publishes a regular newsletter is more complicated for the County. With many different departments as well as the Board of Supervisors and their respective districts reporting to the public, multiple newsletters get curated and distributed, most of them online. The County commented that, "Above all, a resident's level of involvement in a County decision- making process greatly depends on that resident's personal investment in that topic or issue."In 60 Jason,Will. "Marin named California's most eclucated County."Marin independent Journal.21 April,2013 _ _. _..__ _ 6i "CotmtV_of\9arin Public ConlnitlnlCatlo115 Plan."Counh-of Marin.Jan.2012. 62"County of Marin 5 Year Busincss Plan 201 5-2020."Comm;of Morin.Jan.2012. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 32 of 61 Public Engct,enzent In Marin addition, the County said, "...decisions made by the Board of Supervisors tend to garner higher rates of engagement from the public." The County cited its recent engagement process around medical cannabis dispensary bids as very successful. "Using targeted neighborhood outreach via Nextdoor.com combined with traditional outreach tactics (media outreach, mailers, etc.),residents in those potentially affected communities have been very engaged in the various public meetings held around the County and have been submitting relevant public feedback through the appropriate comment channels (letter and email)." Views from the Residents A total of 451 residents of both the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County responded to our survey. By the numbers: Meeting Attendance 43.2% have attended at least one meeting annually Engagement Interest 55.9% want to be engaged more PE Satisfaction 37.3% are at least"somewhat satisfied"by efforts Detailed PE Issues Informs, full consideration,and advance information are ranked worst PE Too] Awareness Website, email, and social media are most familiar- Some of the views expressed by County residents were:' The county continuously selects Unincorporated Marin for any regulation that is likely to be opposed by the cities. This singles out Unincorporated Marin for all the bad or trial regulation instead of working with the Incorporated areas to make sure everyone is served consistently. The time of the Board of Supervisor meetings is challenging for those of us who work!Please consider making them at a later time during the day. Thank you! 1 get most oCounty updates on Nextdoor, and appreciate the notifications and information. Ifl didn't subscribe to the Marin Y doubt that 1 would have much real information on actions render consideration by the county. Perhaps better outreach to the public is in order. Three minutes,before the Board ofSrtpervisors is inadequate. There should be extensive workshops in all locations of the County, not just in southern Marin County. County'is in a tough place. They are the City Council to the unincorporated areas but for those who have a Citi• Council...outreach from the County is not as vital. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 33 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin View from the Media m Since the IJ's December 2016 article urging the County to obtain more public involvement in setting annual goals, recent articles note that the County has begun public meetings with residents in the Ross Valley Flood Control District63 and launched an Open Data Portal.64 In addition, two County supervisors called for public input and discussion regarding the effects of climate change on Marin by announcing three public meetings on the subject. "There will be no progress without public engagement," stated the authors in an April 2017 submission to the Mai-in Independent .1our I,a1.6" Officials again had their say in the IJ in March, stating, "We believe now is the time to step up and get more fully engaged, right here, where we live. Civic engagement. At the local level. Serving our neighborhoods and cities and towns. Attending a city or town council meeting or a Board of Supervisors meeting may not be glamorous but it matters. Or, attend a local flood control zone meeting -you can learn a lot about what we're doing and what needs to be done to protect our future. Call or email your elected officials we want to hear from you and we can do out-jobs better 11-you're in touch with us."66 Summary Marin County has both a formal PE Plan and a S Year Business Plan that focus on public communication and government response, respectively. Engagement efforts are relatively more complex at the county level. Less than half of survey respondents reported having attended at least one meeting per year but over half say they want to be engaged more. PE satisfaction is low. Reports in the IJ show the County is making efforts to encourage the public to engage more and is creating opportunity to do so. 63 Rojas,Raul "Public paoicipauon all im po�ant )an.of flood-control planning."Marin independent Journal. 15 Feb.2017. 64"Mann launches online ti-me of public Mari."Marin Independent Journal.20 Feb.2017. 6? Scats. Kate and Connolly. Damon ",Harm voice: 1 he county moves forward with climate action."Marin h?dependerat Jom-nnl. 17 Apr.2017. GG Sears. Kate and Fryday.Josh "Mai-in Voice:e: A\hat.\er c,ntse is important to you- tr v to en- gc locally."Marin Independent Join-nal. 11 Mar.2017. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 34 of 61 Public En cigement In Marin Sharing Our Data As stated in our public PE surveys, "The Marin County Civil Grand Jury is seeking your input. The information provided will be treated confidentially by the Grand Jury for its research and report: Your name and email will not be shared with anyone, and your responses will not be attributed to you." With the rise of the Open Data Movement (examples include: Data.gov, the Data Foundation, OpenGov, Marin County's Open Data Portal, and the City of Sausalito's Budget Transparency Tool), we wanted other organizations—including future grand juries- to be able to leverage our public data. Therefore, we are sharing all the public survey responses (removing all personal identification) in two spreadsheets (one for Unincorporated Marin and one for the towns and cities of Marin) online here: httpsHgoo.gl/hdWGf8. Jule 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 35 of 61 Public Engagenaenl In Marin CONCLUSION Public engagement is at the heart of inclusive governance. It should be the responsibility of each agency to give full consideration to public input before making decisions that affect the community-at-large. The Grand Jury agrees with agency leaders that public engagement need not be a "one size fits all" strategy; it should vary based on the needs of the community. Whatever engagement approach an agency chooses, we believe that simply having good intentions to engage is not sufficient—each agency should formally state its public engagement plan or guidelines. A published statement(in the form of a municipal resolution, for example) would ensure that the staff, the public, and community-based organizations work to solve common problems using transparent processes. In fact, the process of developing and publishing such a statement is another opportunity to understand the needs of the community. Agencies should also collaborate with conununity-based organizations (CBOs)tohelp reach traditionally disenfranchised groups. Such groups are often unaware of issues likely to affect them until last-minute decision-making. Collaboration with civic leaders and CBOs can increase both the amount and quality of public engagement. Consistent public engagement is a goal that requires agency commitment and adaptation. Public engagement is not something done to simply"calm the public"over controversial issues. PE must be used early and effectively to build trust, achieve community buy-in and support for agency decisions with less contentiousness. The PE Plan or Guidelines should be revisited often to ensure that it continues to "work" for everyone. Otherwise,PE becomes just another box that an agency must check-off rather than a beneficial experience for all involved. A fundamental premise of engaging the community is providing clear, consistent, easily available modes of communication. Many of the residents responding to our survey reported being unaware of available resources for obtaining and communicating information. Over a quarter of respondents reported not knowing whether their local government agencies provided any avenues at all to engage the public. It is important that the public understands the availability of these avenues and whether agencies are doing what is needed to make it known that such avenues exist. Equally important isthe participation of the people of Marin in the public engagement dialogue. Residents frequently become involved in their community when a specific issue arises that is of particular interest or consequence to them personally. When that issue is resolved, how active or concerned or even interested do they remain in other areas of their community? At its most effective, public engagement is a path to inclusive governance. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 36 of 61 Public En cWement In Marin FINDINGS F1. Having a formal'PE Plan or PE Guidelines in place helps to foster better and faster community involvement. F2. Not everyone conducts PE in the same way. F3. Agencies' perception of the need for PE is in response to a controversy, not an ongoing process. F4. Smaller municipalities do not necessarily have the need, the budget or the will to develop a formal plan. F5. Larger municipalities recognize the need for a formal PE Plan. F6. Some agencies are close to having a PE Plan; it wouldn't take too much effort to formalize one or to develop PE Guidelines. F7. All Marin agencies agree that PE is important, and all are engaged to some degree. F8. There is a disconnect between how agencies rate their PE efforts and how the public views their efforts. F9. Most agencies believe they are doing a good job of PE. F10. Marinites want to be engaged more. F l l. The public perceives a need for more and better engagement opportunities, including follow-up. F12. Only a few municipalities have an employee dedicated to PE. F13. Building relationships between civic leaders and community-based organizations contributes to the inclusion of traditionally disenfranchised groups, increasing the amount and quality of PE—and providing support for the agencies. F14. Marin agencies are using various and multiple modes of technology to engage the public, but the public isn't necessarily aware of this. F15. Moving beyond the minimum requirements of The Brown Act is essential for modern day PE. F16. Marin agencies and their public are statistically comparable to the Bay Area in terms of PE satisfaction and involvement levels. FIT PE is a two-way street, requiring vigilance on the part of the public as well as the agencies who serve them. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 37 of 61 Public EngageMent h7 Marin RECOMMENDATIONS R1. Each agency without a formal PE Plan should develop either a PE Plan or PE Guidelines tailored to the needs of their public and publish the results. R2. Each agency should obtain input from the public in the planning and design or update of its plan/guidelines. R3. Agency managers should regularly share their PE Plans and "lessons learned"with their counterparts in other Marin agencies. R4. Each agency should provide early and ample opportunity for PE in the form of proactive engagement in order to ensure that the public is aware of all their PE opportunities. R5. Post-engagement, each agency should follow up with the public, informing them of the results of projects and issues. R6. Each agency should create an easy-to-find area on their website dedicated to describing current community issues and explaining how the public can get involved. R7. Each agency should make PE a required responsibility of at least one staff person and publicize that responsibility. R8. Each agency should offer regular PE professional development to its staff. R9. Each agency should develop meaningful and ongoing partnerships with their local community-based organizations. R10. Each agency should include on all written communications the social media platforms they use. R11. Each agency should communicate and emphasize to the public the importance of participation in PE. R12. Each agency should publish an annual report describing the effectiveness of their PE efforts. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 38 of 61 Public Eng(agennent In Marin REQUEST FOR RESPONSES Pursuant to Penal code section 933.05, the grand jury requests responses as follows: From the following governing bodies: ■ City of Belvedere (R1-R12) ■ City of Larkspur(R 1-R 12) ■ City of Mill Valley (R2-R12) ■ City of Novato (R2-R12) ■ City of San Rafael (R2-R12) ■ City of Sausalito (R 1-R 12) ■ County of Marin (R2-R12) ■ Town of Corte Madera (R1-R12) ■ Town of Fairfax (R1-R12) ■ Town of Ross (R 1-R 12) ■ Town of San Anselmo (Rl-R12) ■ Town of Tiburon (R1-R12) The governing bodies indicated above should be aware that the comment or response of the governing body must be conducted in accordance with Penal Code section 933 (c) and subject to the notice, agenda and open meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Note:At the time this report was prepared information was available at the websites listed. Reports issued by the Civil Grand Jury do not identify individuals`intcrviewed.Penal Code Section 929 requires that reports of the Grand Jury not contain the name of any person or facts leading to the identity of any person who provides information to the Civil Grand Jury.The California State Legislature has stated that it intends the provisions of Penal Code Section 929 prohibiting disclosure of witness identities to encourage full candor in testimony in Grand Jury investigations by protecting the privacy and confidentiality of those who participate in any Civil Grand Jury investigation. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 39 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency Public Engagement Information Request Rz;ri,ired A.Public Engagement(PE):Abroad range of methods through which government agencies provide the public with more and better information about,and meaningful opportunities to influence,public decisions. B.PE Plan:A formal,written plan or policy that a government agency makes easily accessible to the public it serves and outlines the methods through which it provides the public with more and better information about,and meaningful opportunities to influence,public decisions. C.Community-Based Organization(CBO):A group of individuals organized by and for a particular community of people or entities based on shared interests and/or attributes. Members may include various stakeholders,such as the public,advocacy groups,businesses and business leaders. D.Transparency Portal:An easy to find agency website location containing or providing access to anticipated information the public needs from all agency departments. E."You"or"Your":The agency responding to this survey Name of Responding Agency Your Name Your Email June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 40 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1.Please state whether you agree or disagree that each of the following is a potential benefit of effective PE:-. Agree Neutral Disagree Improved agency doe is ion-rd a king and actions,with better impacts and outcomes 0 More communitybuy-in and support for agency p•-ry decisions,with less contentiousness 0 Better identification of public's values,ideas and 1 ^ recommendations `^,✓ 0 l More informed residents--about issues and about local agencies 0 More civil discussions and decision-making 0 0 Faster project implementation with less need to revisit ,a^-., again) 1....i More trust in each other and in local government 0 0 0 Higher rates of community participation and (^,, d—Z leadership development t,.,v 2.Do you have and follow a PE Plan? 0 Yes 0 No 3a.When did you formally adopt your PE Plan?R If your agency does not have and follow a PE plan,please enter N/A 3b.When did you last review and update your PE Plan?.r If your agency does not have and follow a PE plan,please choose N/A 0 Within the last year 0 Within the last 3 years 0 Within the last 5 years 0 N/A 3c.Do you have a commitment to review and update your PE Plan periodically? If ynu do not have and follow a PE Plan,please choose NIA. 0 Yes 0 No 0 N/A June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 41 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.If you do not have a PE Plan,do you intend to design one?" If you already have a PF Plan,please choose N/A 0 Yes 0 No N/A 5.If you do not intend to design a PE Plan,please state why. If you already have or intend to design a PE Plan,please enter N/A 6.Have you adopted a resolution demonstrating a commitment to effective PE? 0 Yes 0 No r;The planning and design of a public engagement process includes input from appropriate local officials as well as from members of intended participant communities. 7.Have you developed a current database or contact list of potentially interested residents and CBOs in order to engage them in your PE processes? 0 Yes 0 No 8.Did you(or will you)obtain input from CBOs and other members of the public in the planning and design of your existing(or potential) PE Plan?" If you do not already have or intend to design a PE Plan,please choose N/A. 0 Yes No 0 N/A Jule 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 42 of 61 Public En ageinew In 1Vlarin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9.Please state whether you agree or disagree that each of the following is an area for application of PE: Agree Neutral Disagree N/A Parks&R—ealion 0 0 0 0 Land Use&Planning 0 0 0 0 Transportation&infrastructure 0 0 0 0 Law Enforcement 0 0 0 0 Housing 0 0 0 Homelessness 0 0 0 0 ElectoralNotin9 ("}.. `(y_'j 0. 0... Budgeting 0 0 0 0 Hsatrh/Social Services Delivery 0 0 0 0 Education 0 0 0 O Immigrant lntegration/Related Issues 0 0 0 Pensions&Other Postemployment Benefits ':,+� 0 U 0 7:There is clarity and transparency about public engagement process,sponsorship,purpose,design,and how decision makers will use the process results. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 43 of 61 Public Engagement In Mm nn APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10. Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to improve transparency in your PE process: Use Don't Use Publish a newsletter regularly 0 0 Distribute that newsletter by USMaii 0 0. Distribute that newsletter by Ernail 0 0 Distribute that newsletter through Website 0 0 Maintain a websile page where recent community news can b....ssed p^) 0 Offer opportunities to the public you serve to view draft budgets online and engage in the budgeting process Your website includes a Transparency Penal(see Definition ,^°Z above) -- 0 Accept online public records requests 0 0 Regularly post frequently requested public records on your �-+� website 0 G;A primary purpose of the public engagement process is to generate publicvievvs and ideas to help shape local government action or policy,rather than persuade residents to accept a decision that has already been made. 11.Do you have any communications that contain"government-speak,""legalese"or similar jargon that most people would have trouble understanding? Yes 0 No 12.If so,are you considering revision of these types of communications in order to make them more understandable? If not,please choose N/A 0 Yes 0 No 0 N/A June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 44 of 61 Public Enagemenl by Mann APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13.Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to improve the authentic intent of your PE process: Regularly Use Sometimes Use Don't Use PE is an assigned responsibility in the job description of one or more of your staf f 0 0 0 members Within the past 24 months,staff members and/or elected officials of your agency have received training in how to Identify and apply they most effective PE strategies to the range of issues that affect your agency and the public you serve. Summarize complex communications into key y- points. 0 Use clear and simple language in your written f"`q - and verbal communications `�.,J+` Distribute meaningful and timely information to allow public views and ideas to shape actions and policies 14.Please rate the culture within your agency with respect to PE on the following: Excellent Good Needs Improvement Thinking of PE us a method for improving �`� decision-making rather than being the 0 0 0 same as public relations Viewing members of the public as r^ i^^t . partners oolb.,than clients '*-.+" 0 ,•-y1.1 Giving full consideration to public input r^�A before making decisions 0 0 l v-y' Making proactive efforts to contact and. engage community members in order to reach a broad spectrum of people, including those not typically"engaged"' 15.Please describe a significant public engagement process that you completed during the past 24 months,including whether the process resulted in a more informed and/or better decision. 16.In your experience,what circumstances have prompted the public you serve to become broadly engaged in your decision making process? The public engagement process includes people and viewpoints that are broadly reflective of the local agency's population of affected residents. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 45 of 61 Public Engage/new In Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 17.Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to broaden participation in your PE process:* Regularly Use Sometimes Use Don't Use Build and nurture relationships with key i individuals and CBOs that are broadly n 0 0 reflective of the public you serve Regularly distribute information and solicit `� Input n i issues of potential importance 10 0 0 such key individuals and Ms Provide participants in your PE process with timely information andior access to ,r expertise consistent with the work you 00 request them to co Your PE process reflects,honors and 0welcomes the community Deliver PE presentations in high schools ,�^^,, and community college V ,.Participants in the public engagement process have information and/or access to expertise consistent with the work that sponsors and conveners ask them to do. 18.Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to improve informed participation in your PE process: Regularly Use Sometimes Use Dont Use Your website includes information that the public needs in order to understand issues, 0 prior to agency decisions on those issues Such proactive information is available in more than one place on your website 0 0 Such proactive information is communicated on other platforms heyond your website 0 �..✓f^�y ` You have adopted and implement a procedure for timely identifying,collecting and +, ,r'� /'� distributing the information necessary for an 0 0 0 effective PE process CBOs and other members of the public receive the information they need,and with f ,� enough lead time,to participate effectively in `�•,1 0 0 your PE process ?�Public engagement processes are broadly accessible in terms of location,time,and language,and support the engagement of residentswith disabilities June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 46 of 61 Public Engogeinent M Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 19.Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to improve accessibility in your PE process:* Regularly Use Sometimes Use Dann Use Your website incorporates a"translate"function allowing visitors to read your site in languages 0 �� 0 other than English Key print communications are translated into languages other than English and distributed gr. .. -q r--i made available to the appropriate residents and `�-..I. `,,...' l.. community groups Use PE processes that are broad) accessible in terms of location,time and language C Use PE processes that support the engagement (} of residents with disabilities '0 Deliver PE presentations in alternative living ] locations for the elderly Offer multiple ways,beyond attending public meetings,for contributing input and feedback 0 0 � during the PE process. i The public engagement process utilizes one or more discussion formats that are responsiveto the needs of identified participant groups,and encourages full,authentic,effective and equitable participation consistent with process purposes.This may include relationships with existing community forums. 20.Please check any and all of the following strategies that you use to improve the process of effective PE: Regularly Use Sornetimes Use Dont Use Work with universities and community partners to organize training programs for /�y CDOs,residents and neighborhood leaders 1..+' 0 (i so that they can gain the skills and experience needed for effective PE. Use local facilitators to help organize and run community dialogues and surveys to �} solicit resident input on key community 0 issues Independent and impartial people 0 /$--, moderate PE processes 0 4'r Residents participate in the selling and defining of agendas With input from residents,you identify and use local experts as participants You follow through on the input provided i and make known to participants and the public how that input influenced your `—f 0 0 decisions or actions June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 47 of 61 Public Engagement In Mai-in APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 a.Please check any and all of the following ONLINE platforms that you use to engage and communicate with the public Use Dont Use Polsincwebsin, 0 0 Wobcashng 0 0 Focelbcok 0 0 Online Neighborhood sites(such as Next[)oor)" 0 0 Twitter 0 0 text 0 0 Email 0 0 Mobile apps 0 0 Online forums 0 0 21 b.Please check any and all of the following PRINT platforms that you use to engage and communicate with the public* Use Don't Use Public notices 0 0 Press releases 0 0 Direct mail 0 0 Newspapefads i 0 0 Magazine ads 0 0 ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 48 of 61 Public En;ageinent In Mai-in APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21 c.Please check any and all of the following IN-PERSON INTERACTIVE platforms that you use to engage and communicate with the public," Use Doli t Use Public hearings Q 0 Town Hall meetings 0 0 Other large-action forums 0 t._.J Small face-to-face discussions 0 v Personal interactions(such as visits,speeches,in-person /-� informational exchanges) `.,.1 0 Focus groups 0 0 Workshops 0 0 21d.Please check any and all of the following UNIDIRECTIONAL platforms that you use to engage and communicate with the public* use Dont Use Surveys t), 0 Polls 0 0 Local access television 0 0 Telephone message 0 O 21e.Please describe any other communication methods you use: i_:rS i.The ideas,preferences,and/or recommendations contributed by the public are documented and seriously considered by decision makers.Local officials communicate ultimate decisions back to process participants and the broader public,whh a description of how the public input was considered and used.Sponsors and participants evaluate each public engagement process with the collected feedback and learning shared broadly and applied to future engagement efforts. 22.Do you regularly inform residents of follow-up,progress,outcomes,and impacts concerning decisions made based on public involvement?x 0 Yes 0 No June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Pagc 49 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX A: Information Request From Agency (cont'd) ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 23.Do you regularly assess your PE efforts for effectiveness and the public's satisfaction? O Yes 0 No 24.Do you regularly ask participants for feedback and advice concerning their PE experience? 0 Yes 0 No 25.Do you periodically evaluate and adjust your PE strategies with the collected feedback and your experience?a 0 Yes \.J No 26a.Please provide the URL or hardcopy of your PE Plan See Definition above for PE Plan.If you have a hardcopy,please either scan the document and email to gtandlury:audig@.ma,nncountycrg. or mail to:Marin County Civil Grand Jury•3501 Civic Center Drive,Room 275•San Rafael,CA 94903 26b.Please provide the URL or hardcopy of your resolution As described in item 6.If you have a hardcopy,please either scan the document and email to orandiurv-audits marincounN.ore or mail to: Marin County Civil Grand Jury-3501 Civic Center Drive,Room 275•San Rafael,CA 94903 26c.Please provide the URL or hardcopy of your newsletter If applicable,please provide the URL or hardcopy of your newsletter(either scan the newsletter and email to orandiurv- a9d S��marincgun]y.org or mail to:Marin County Civil Grand Jury-3501 Civic Center Drive,Room 275•San Rafael,CA94903) 26d.Please provide the URL of your Transparency Portal See Definition above for Transparency Portal.If applicable,please provide the URL of your Transparency Portal June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 50 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX B: Survey of Residents of Unincorporated Marin County Public Engagement Survey For Residents Of Unincorporated Marin County The Marin County Civil Grand Jury is seeking your input.The information provided will be treated confidentially by the Grand Jury for its research and report:your name and email will not be shared with anvone,and your responses will not be:attributed to you. Public engagement is a general term used for abroad range of methods through which government agencies provide the public with more and better information about,and meaningful opportunities to influence,government decisions.This sun•e)•respectfully requeats your views on public engagement in the County of Marin. If you have any questions about this survey,please contact:GrandJury@MarinCounty.org h'eyuired Your Name Your Email Ya s,.it.r>•.<r 1.On average how many County public hearings,meetings and/or workshops do you attend each year? 00 0 1-2 0 3 or more 0 Don't know 2.Are you interested in becoming more engaged in the decision making process of the County? 0 Yes No 0 Don't know June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 51 of 61 Public Engogemew In Marisa APPENDIX B: Survey of Residents of Unincorporated Marin County (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3.How satisfied are you with the County's efforts to include the public in government decision making? 0 Satisfied 0 Somewhat satisfied 0 Somewhat dissatisfied 0 Dissatisfied 0 No opinion 4.Please rate how the County is doing in the following areas of public engagement: Poor Fair Satisfactory Very Good &cellent Dont Know County is making more of an effort to engage a wide variety (} /"t,.f� "�..l ^..,i of people in government 0 �.' decision making. Countyengeges the public in ways that are broadly accessible in terms of 0 0 0 0 0 0 location,facilities,time,and language Residents have ample opportunity to Participate in {� j'� j^ '��County's government `^-' *-' 0 0 0 decisions. County provides the public with the information it needs, and with enough lead time,to 0 0 0 0 0 �„J ° effective ly engage in the decision making process. County gives full consideration to public input before making 0 0 0 0 0 0 gmeouneut decismus.. County regularly informs residents of follow-up, progress,outcomes,and j-g /'^� t� 3 impacts concerning decisions. 0 i P ✓ L_ made based on public involvement. County builds relationships with commun¢y-based groups /' and interested residents that 0 0 0 0 0 are broadly reflective of the public it serves. County regularly uses clear _ and simple language in 0 0 0 U 0 communications. June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 52 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX B: Survey of Residents of Unincorporated Marin County (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5.Does the County use the following to engage and communicate with the public? Yes No Don't Know Direct mail 0 0 0 Website 0 0 0 Email Social media 0 0 0 Newsletter (�J C Surveys 0 0 0 6.Please provide any additional feedback on the County's public engagement efforts June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 53 of 61 Public Engagemem M Man-iii, APPENDIX C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities & Incorporated Towns Public Engagement Survey For Residents Of Marin Cities& Incorporated Towns The Marin County Civil Grand Jury is seeking your input.The information provided will be treated confidentially by the Grand Jury for its research and report:your name and email will not be shared with anyone,and your responses will not be attributed to you. Public engagement is a general term used for a broad range of methods through which government agencies provide the public with more and better information about,and meaningful opportunities to influence,government decisions.This survey respectfully requests your views on public engagement in your city or incorporated town,and the County of Marin. If you have any questions about this survey,please contact:GrandJury@MarinCounty.org Required Your Name Your Email k Your City or Incorporated Town of Residence Choose 1.On average how many city or town public hearings,meetings and/or workshops do you attend each year? 00 0 1-2 3 or more 0 Don't know June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 54 of 61 Public Ens;ageme»t In Marin APPENDIX C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities & Incorporated Towns (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.Are you interested in becoming more engaged in the decision making process of your city or town? Yes 0 No 0 Don't know 3.How satisfied are you with your city's or town's efforts to include the public in government decision making? 0 Satisfied 0 Somewhat satisfied 0 Somewhat dissatisfied 0 Dissatisfied 0 No opinion June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 55 of 61 Public En c� gementhy Mari APPENDIX C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities & Incorporated Towns (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.Please rate how your city or town is doing in the following areas: Poor Iair Satisfactory Very Good Lxcellent Dont Know Your city/town is making more of an effort to engage a wide �� 0 variety of people in � government decision making. i `= Your city/town engages the public in ways that are broadly accessible In terms of1,} `l 0 < CJ C.� location,facilities,time,and language. Residents have ample opportunity to panicipate in 0 /--; =lj ,^q your city's/town's government =' 0 0 4.'l �.a decisions. Your cityitown provides the public with the information it .needs,and with enough lead i { (' 0 time,to effectively engage in the decision.making process. Your city/town gives full consideration to public input �^i 0 fl � before making government ..ff decisions. Your city/town regularly ' informs residents of follow- up,progress,outcomes.and /' impacts concerning decisions 0 0 0 0 0 `�✓ made based on public involvement. Your cityitown builds relationships with community- based groups and interested residents that are broadly 0 0("'� � � `—� t�.� reflective of the public it SP,fVeS. Your city/town regularly uses clear and simple language in 0 0 0 0 0 0 communications. 5.Does your city/town use the following to engage and communicate with the public?k Yes No Dant Know Direct mail Website 0 (�j 0 Email 0 0 0 Sociaimedia 0 t,,; 0 l Newsletter 0 (,,1 Surveys 0 0 June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 56 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities & Incorporated Towns (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6.Please provide any additional feedback on your city's or town's public engagement efforts t P Q 7.On average how many COUNTY public hearings,meetings and/or workshops do you attend each year?' 00 0 1-2 0 3 or more f l Don't know B.Are you interested in becoming more engaged in the decision making process of THE COUNTY?* 0 Yes j No 0 Don't know 9.How satisfied are you with THE COUNTY'S efforts to include the public in government decision making?'� ( Satisfied Somewhat satisfied 0 Somewhat dissatisfied 0 Dissatisfied 0 Noopinion ................................................................................................................... June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 57 of 61 Pztblic Erygagemerit h7 Mari» APPENDIX C: Survey of Residents of Marin Cities & Incorporated Towns (cont'd) .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 10.Please rate how THE COUNTY is doing in the following areas of public engagement: Poor Fair Sansfaclery Very Good Excellent Dont Know County is making more of an effort to engage a wide variety r r-� of people in government 0k-,r -- :-. C� 0 decision making. County engages the public in ways that are broadly �'`� accessible in terns of 0 0 0 0 0 location,facilities,time,and language. Residents have ample opponunilyt.participate in �- �-? ?-� � Countys government decisions. County provides the public with the information it needs, r� and with enough lead time,to �j 0 0 0 0 effectively engage in the decision making process. Courtly gives full consideration r ! to public input before making 0 0 0 1.1 government decisions. County regularly informs residents of follow-up, progress,outcomes,and t impacts concerning decisions i`�"� 0 0 0 0 made based on public involvement. County builds relationships with communly-based groups and Interested residents that O 0 0 are broadly reflective of the public it selves. County regularly uses clear _ _ and simple language in t� _} �} t '. communications. 11.Does THE COUNTY use the following to engage and communicate with the public? Yes No Don't Know Direct mail l_1 0 0 website 0 0 0 Email Social media 0 Newsletters i Surveys {..10 } 12.Please provide any additional feedback on THE COUNTY'S public engagement efforts June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 58 of 61 Pztblie Engagement In Marin APPENDIX D: Summary Agency Views of Public Engagement Benefits of PR Agree Neutral Disagree Improved decision making 12 0 0 More community buy-in X10 2 0 Better identification of public's values i l 1 0 More informed residents i l 1 0° More civil discussions 9 3 0' Faster project implementation 7 3 2' More trust i 1 1 0 Higher rates of participation 10 2 0 PE Plan Yes No Have and follow a PE Plan 4 8 PE Area for Use Agree Neutral Disagree N/A Parks& Recreation 12 0 0 0 Land Use&Planning 12 0" 0 0 Transportation& Infrastructure 12 01: 0 0 Law Enforcement 10 1 01: 1 Housing 12 0 0 0 Homelessness 8 2 0 2 Electoral/Voting 10 1 0 1 Budgeting 12 0 0 0 Hcalth/Social Services Delivery 5 2 0 5 Education 5 2 0 5 Immigrant Integration/Related Issues 7 1 0 4 Pensions&OPEB 10 1 0 1 Strategies Used Use Don't Newsletter 12 0 Newsletter by Mail 5 7 Newsletter by Email 12 0 Newsletter on Website 12 0 Community News on Website 12 0 Draft Budgets Online 12 0 Data Transparency Portal 8 4 Online Public Records Request 10 2 Freq.Requests on Website 7 5 June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 59 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX D: Summary Agency Views of Public Engagement (cont'd) Improve Intent Strategies Regularly Sometimes Don't Use Use Use In Job Description 6_ 4 2 Received Training 5' 5 2 1 Summarize Complexity I0 2 0 Clear Language II I 0 Timely Communication 12 0 0 Rate the PE Culture Excellent Good Needs Improvement Improves decision-making 6 6 0 Public as Partners 6 6 0 Full Public Consideration 2 0 Proactive&Wide b_ 6 0 How Broaden Participation Regularly Sometimes Don't Use Use Use Build and Nurture Relationships 10 2 0 Regularly Distribute Information $ 4 0 Timely Information 9 3 0 Welcoming In HS & Colleges 2, 4 6 June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 60 of 61 Public Engagement In Marin APPENDIX E: Platforms Used to Engage The Public Technology Platforms Agencies Using Webcasting Corte Madera, Larkspur,Mill Valley,Novato, San Ansclrno, San Rafael, Sausalito, Tiburon, County of Marin Facebook Corte Madera,Larkspur,Mill Valley,Novato, San Anselno, San Rafael, Sausalito, Tiburon, County of Marin Twitter Larkspur,Mill Valley,Novato, San Ansehno, San Rafael, Sausalito, Tiburon, County of Marin Texts Belvedere, Corte Madera,Larkspur,Mill Valley,Novato, San Anselrno, San Rafael, Sausalito, Tiburon, County of Marin Mobile Apps Corte Madera,Mill Valley, San Rafael, Sausalito;Tiburon, County of Marin Online forums Fairfax,Novato, Sausalito, County of Marin Platforms All Agencies Use ✓ Websites ✓ Public Notices ✓ Public Hearings ✓ Nextdoor ✓ Press Releases ✓ Town Hall Meetings ✓ Emailing ✓ . Direct Mailing ✓ Small face-to-face discussions & personal interactions Workshops ✓ Surveys June 15, 2017 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Page 61 of 61 EXHIBIT"NO. RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT FORM Town of Tiburon Report Title: Public Engagement in Marin-A Pathway to Inclusive Governance Report Date: June 15, 2017 Public Release: June 26, 2017 Response By: Town of Tiburon FINDINGS • We agree with the findings numbered: No response required. • We disagree with wholly or partially with the findings numbered: No response required RECOMMENDATIONS • Recommendations numbered _R3, R4, R6, R7, R8, R9, and R11_have been implemented. ■ Recommendations numbered: have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. ■ Recommendations numbered: require further analysis. ■ Recommendations numbered: _R1, R2, R5,R10, and R12 will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. Date: Signed: Number of pages attached:_ 1 ... a. _ Office of the Town Manager Town of Tiburon October 4, 2017 The Honorable Kelly Simmons Mr. Jay Hamilton-Roth, Foreperson Judge of the Marin County Superior Marin County Civil Grand Jury Court 3501 Civic Center Drive, Room 275 Post Office Box 4988 San Rafael, CA 94903 San Rafael, CA 94913-4988 Re: Response to Grand Jury Report Public Engagement in MarinA Pathway to Inclusive Government Dear Honorable Judge Simmons and Mr. Hamilton-Roth: This letter explains in detail the Town of Tiburon's response to the Civil Grand Jury Report dated June 15, 2017. The Report directs the Town to respond to Recommendations Nos. 1-12. RECOMMENDATIONS and RESOPONSES Recommendation 1. Each agency without a formal PE Plan should develop either a PE Plan or PE Guidelines tailored to the needs of their public and publish the results. Town's Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. As stated in the Grand Jury report, the Town does not currently have a formal Public Engagement Plan. CA Penal Code 933.05(b)(3) allows a response indicating a recommendation requires further analysis, which in Tiburon's case will occur at some point in the future with regard to the development of a formal Public Engagement Plan, or set of guidelines. However, PEN 933.05(b)(3) also requires the analysis be conducted within 6 months from the publication of the grand jury report, or before December 15, 2017. The analysis of this issue will likely not occur within that timeframe. Recommendation2. Each agency should obtain input from the public in the planning and design or update of its plan/guidelines. Town's Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. As stated in the Grand Jury report, the Town does not currently have a formal Public Engagement Plan. However, if at some point the Town chooses to develop a PE Plan, or set of guidelines, as discussed in the response to Recommendation 1,public input will be a key component of its development. 1 Recommendation 3. Agency managers should regularly share their PE Plans and "lessons learned" with their counterparts in other Marin agencies. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. Managers from all Marin municipalities meet on a monthly basis to discuss a wide variety of topics, including experiences in engaging the public on a range of issues important to our communities. Recommendation 4. Each agency should provide early and ample opportunity for PE in the form of proactive engagement in order to ensure that the public is aware of all their PE opportunities. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. Although Tiburon does not have a formal Public Engagement Plan, or set of guidelines, staff strives to provide residents ample opportunity to participate in the decision-making process and provide input and feedback on a broad range of issues. Recommendation 5. Post-engagement, each agency should follow up with the public, informing them of the results of projects and issues. Town's Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. As stated in the Grand Jury report, the Town does not currently have a formal Public Engagement Plan. However, if at some point the Town chooses to develop a PE Plan, or set of guidelines, as discussed in the response to Recommendation 1, developing and implementing strategies to provide feedback and post-engagement communication to the public will be considered. Recommendation 6. Each agency should create an easy-to-find area on their website dedicated to describing current community issues and explaining how the public can get involved. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. The homepage of Town's website includes a prominent section called `Tiburon News'. Here, residents will find comprehensive information on current issues and projects, as well as information on how to get involved or voice their opinions on these matters. Recommendation 7. Each agency should make PE a required responsibility of at least one staff person and publicize that responsibility. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. As stated in the grand jury report(page 30), the Town has incorporated elements of Public Engagement as one of the essential functions in the job description for Town Manager. Recommendation 8. Each agency should offer regular PE professional development to its staff. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented The Town currently provides funding in every department budget for training and/or professional development, and we encourage staff to seek diverse training opportunities that will allow them to improve the level of service we offer our residents. In addition, we strive to provide staff targeted information on customer service and public engagement. This includes resources available through the Institute for Local Government, City Management Foundation and International City/County Management Association. Recommendation 9. Each agency should develop meaningful and ongoing partnerships with their local community-based organizations. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. Town elected officials and staff foster and maintain strong relationships, and actively participate on numerous issues and projects with a variety of community based organizations. These include the Tiburon Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Club(s), Tiburon Peninsula Foundation, Belvedere Community Foundation, The Foundation for Reed Schools, Tiburon Peninsula Soccer Club, Tiburon Green Team, Tiburon Open Space, Belvedere-Tiburon Landmarks Society, Belvedere-Tiburon Library Foundation, Tiburon Romberg Center, Richardson Bay Audubon and Destination Tiburon In addition to these organizations, Town elected officials and staff engage with numerous Homeowners Associations on a range of issues. Recommendation 10. Each agency should include on all written communications the social media platforms they use. Town's Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable. The Town does not currently actively utilize social media platforms. However, on August 16, 2017, the Tiburon Town Council adopted a comprehensive Social Media Policy, which provides a framework for the use of social media platforms. If in the future, the Town begins to use social media platforms, staff will include this information on all written communication. Recommendation 11 . Each agency should communicate and emphasize to the public the importance of participation in PE. Town's Response: This recommendation has already been implemented. As stated previously, the Town does not currently have a formal Public Engagement Plan. However, staff and elected/appointed Town officials are committed to engaging our residents to the greatest extent possible. This engagement occurs both formally, through extensive outreach and noticing on individual issues as they arise, and informally, by meeting with and engaging residents on a variety of issues every day. Recommendation 12. Each agency should publish an annual report describing the effectiveness of their PE. Town's Response: This recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted, or is not reasonable. As stated in the Grand Jury report, the Town does not currently have a formal Public Engagement Plan. However, if at some point the Town chooses to develop a Public Engagement Plan, or set of guidelines, as discussed in the response to Recommendation 1, consideration will be given to requiring an annual report as part of that process. The Tiburon Town Council reviewed and approved this response on October 4, 2017, at a duly noticed and agendized public meeting. If you have further questions on this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, GREG CHANIS Town Manager cc: Town Council Town Attorney `r TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting October 4,2017 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Tiburon,CA 94920 Agenda Item:Al STAFF REPORT 1 , • To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Office of the Town Clerk Subject: Appointments to Fill Vacancies on Town Boards, Commissions and Co ittees: Design Review Board Reviewed By: `" BACKGROUND The Design Review Board has had one vacancy since June 1, 2017, following the resignation of Mike Tollini. The vacancy has been formally announced at a Town Council meeting, advertised for in the Ark, Tib Talk, on the Town of Tiburon website and in posted notices at the Library and Town Hall. Staff accepted applications until July 14, and the Town Council interviewed the only applicant(Stephen Wanat) on July 19. Given the timing of this vacancy and the application period during the early summer, when many Tiburon residents are travelling, staff became aware that perhaps not all interested parties may have been able to submit a timely application for this vacancy. For that reason, staff reopened the application period and accepted applications until September 28. Five applications have been received for this vacancy: Stephen Wanat (interviewed 7/19), Suzanne Kim (int. 9/12), Shara Coletta (int. 10/4), Karen Ripenburg (int. 10/4), and Leonor Noguez. Ms. Noguez was part of a recent recruitment for the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission, and therefore, will not be required to re-interview for this position before the Town Council (Tiburon Town Council Resolution No. 16-2007 [Appointments Procedure]). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council: 1. Consider making appointment(s) to Design Review Board; or 2. Continue the item and direct staff to continue to accept applications and schedule interviews for the vacancies at an upcoming Council meeting. Exhibits: 1) Design Review Board Applications Prepared By: Lea Stefani,Town Clerk Tiburon Town Council October 4, 2017 Design Review Board Applications 1. Shara Coletta 2. Suzanne Kim 3. Leonor Noguez 4. Karen Ripenburg 5. Stephen Wanat PERSONAL DATA (PLEASE PRINT OR'TYPE—A RESUME MAY BE ATTACHED AS WELL) NAME: Shara Coletta MAILING ADDRESS: 4747 Paradise Drive, Tiburon, CA 94920 E-mail address (optional): Shara.coletta@gmail.com or Shara.l.coletta@jpmorgan.com TELEPHONE: Home: 415-971-1301 Work: 415-315-8490 Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years)4 DATE SUBMITTED: 9/13/2017 REASONS FOR SELECTING YOUR AREAS OF INTEREST I am applying for the position open in Mike T's absence on the Design Review Board.I built a house in Tiburon and have been through the process. I've worked in real estate development for more than 15 years and see the impacts of development and appriciate both the process and outcome. As a community member-I would like to advocate for development and seek to be helpful in working with the planning department as needed. My husband grew up in town and I understand that it has a charm that should be preserved-I recognize new construction should build on the existing charm. APPLICABLE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE' See attached resume. ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of interest in Numerical Order (#i Being the Greatest Interest) 2 PLANNING 6 PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 1 DESIGN REVIEW 7 RECREATION 4 HERITAGE & ARTS 5 DISASTER PREPAREDNESS 9 LIBRARY 8 COMMISSION ON AGING 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 10 OTHER S:dcrane%omm.app 1 Shara L. Coletta 4747 Paradise Drive,Tiburon,CA 94920 5bara.Colett<aLq)g aiLco�� - (415) 971-1301 WORK EXPERIENCE: JP Morgan Chase,San Francisco,CA Executive Director—Community Development Bank(2/16—Present) • Senior community development banker focused on providing debt products to real estate developers in the Northwest.Debt products are mainly structured with taxable and tax-exempt construction and/or permanent financing for affordable housing projects utilizing federal LII PI'C,ITC,NMTC and/or I ITCs. • Also maintain a focus on development of profitable new business opportunities,preliminary loan underwriting,and maintaining a portfolio of high credit quality.Mainly focused on Identifying and aggressively soliciting appropriate debt opportunities for affordable housing transactions. • Work with a dedicated underwriting team to insure the timely completion of due diligence and preparation of comprehensive credit approval packages. • 2016 Goal of$65MM—Closed$300MM+ • 2017 Goal of$75MM—YTD Closed$200MM+ Charles Schwab,San Francisco,CA Director—Community Development(3/15—2/16) • Act as the sole underwriter of loans and investments in the Community Development Group of Charles Schwab Bank; • Currently focused on structuring community development loans and investments,which are CRA eligible in the Batik's CRA Assessment Areas; • Underwrote and presented to credit committee five affordable multifamily housing fund investments financed with low-income housing tax credits amounting to approximately$50 MM in equity investments; • Underwrote and presented to credit committee four debt transactions for CDFI partners amounting to$60 MM in term loans or LOCs;and • Assist the Community Development Team with business development opportunities and maintaining active relationships with Bay Area and national business partners,including banks,Community Development Financial Institutions,real estate developers,affordable housing lenders,small business lenders,tax credit syndicators,and community,charitable,and non-profit organizations. S4 Development and Investments,Berkeley,CA Consultant—Real Estate Debt and Equity Underwriter(8/11—4/15) • Currently focused on structuring and raising tax credit equity and construction debt for development of mixed-use urban infill and multi-family housing for both investors and developers; • As an independent consultant,prepare financial models,underwrite transactions,and write credit presentations that include detailed financial,management,business,and industry analysis; • Complete detailed market and asset level due diligence(including reviews of all 3rd party reports)to support all investment decisions,write investment memos and present them to senior managers,assist in deal structuring and negotiation of terms with sponsors; • Underwrote affordable multifamily housing transactions financed with housing revenue bonds and low-income housing tax credits—over$550 MM in equity underwritings completed;and • Underwrote Freddie debt transactions for multifamily housing financed with tax exempt bonds and low-income housing tax credits—over$350 MM in debt underwritings completed for TEBS or T AH deals;and • Underwrote Fannie Mare debt transactions for market rate multifamily apartments and student housing amounting to$950MM. Bank of America,555 California San Francisco,CA Commercial Real Estate Banking-Vice President—Debt Underwriter/Portfolio Manager(9/07—8/11) • Lead cross-functional teams to structure loans and submit term sheets to bid on prospective deals,which include commercial construction loans or loans for project financing of LIHTC Developments,or/and mezz lending; • Worked closely with the deal teams to ensure loans were closed as applied for and in a timely manner; • Prepared comprehensive transaction packages,presented transactions to Credit and recommended loan terms; • Provided feedback and recommendations to senior management on project feasibility prior to issuance of term sheets; • Collaborated with originators,senior management,and investors to facilitate client needs while mitigating risk; • Researched and analyzed real estate developers,borrower credit risk,tax-credit investors,management companies, contractors and architects in order to accurately assess transaction risks and mitigants;and • Drafted quarterly performance reports for a portfolio of 30 commercial properties with an aggregate value of$500MM. Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency,Berkeley,CA Member of the Board of Directors(5/11—5/13) • Participate as a key member of the fundraising,Strategy,and Executive Committees; • Counseled key leaders on various special interest including strategy,fundraising,and hiring of a new Executive Director;& • Hosted the Golf Tournament or two years,which was the most successful fundraiser of 2012 and 2013; • Chaired the Executive Director Hiring Committee. AEGON Realty Advisors,505 Sansome,San Francisco,CA Community Development/Acquisitions-Underwriter/Acquisitions Associate(9/06—9/07) • Underwrote affordable multifamily housing transactions financed with housing revenue bonds and low-income housing tax credits(I IHTC)—over$150 MM in equity underwritings completed. • Reviewed and analyzed prospective deal opportunities,including project feasibility,strength of general partner,and financial return opportunities.Established pricing,structure deal terns,and prepare proposal letter for general partner's execution; • Oversaw deal due diligence process,including financial analysis,market analysis,and review of all material required to evaluate project; • Served as primary contact for all third party activity,including legal,tax,engineering,consulting,asset management,and other services. • Reviewed financial investment and analysis and market feasibility of deals,evaluate deal strengths and issues,prepare Executive Committee memo and deal packages and present summary to Committee members; • Maintained and enhanced underwriting procedures,including revising and updating investment models,processes and templates to ensure consistency of underwriting practices,and soundness of deal structure; • Identified and evaluated possible solutions to potential deal issues.Worked with deal team to determine optimal strategy to mitigate deal risk and lead client negotiation to achieve successful resolution of issues;and • Reviewed all legal and deal documentation to ensure consistency with deal terms,and coordinate deal closing. MMA Financial,101 Arch Street,Boston,MA Investment Valuation Group-Sr.Market Analyst(9/04—9/06) • Analyzed appraisals,market studies,plans and specs,and tax credit applications as provided for new deals; • Provided a review of market analysis by conducting additional research to confirm the accuracy and completeness of data in the report; • Traveled to subject market area and canvassed markets by interviewing market participants; • Collected primary and secondary market data using phone surveys and internet; • Negotiated conclusions where reasonable with the acquisitions associates; • Prepared written market study or internal review memorandums and effectively explain data in the financial models; • Presented conclusions at a formal Investment Committee; • Created a procedures template,which was used to acquire all deal due diligence;and • Trained analysts in the due diligence and presentation processes. Boston Capital Corp.,One Boston Place,Suite 2100,Boston,MA Asset Management-Asset Manager(09/01—8/04) • Created an online data system for organizing,monitoring,and reporting on company's real estate assets; • Managed a portfolio of over 150 properties consisting of 8,250 units. • Served as primary contact for General Partners and Management Agents; • Monitored construction and occupancy tracking during development; • Prepared analysis to support the release of capital installments to the developer during construction and through stabilization; • Reported quarterly on stabilized properties,including review of financial statements and partnership tax returns; • Researched rental market trends and operational or other property issues and preparing analytical materials for management plans; • Analyzed performance deficiencies and develop projections and workout scenarios for troubled properties;and • Investigated and explained unusual variances in financial analyses and identified,researched,and reported operational, market trends that impacted performance of the portfolio. ADDITIONAL WORK EXPERIENCE: MASSPORT,Communications-Boston,MA Executive Communications Assistant(full-time)(2000-2001) Executive Office of the Governor-Boston,MA Press Assistant(full-time)(1999-2000) George W.Bush Campaign Committees-Boston,MA Intern(part-time)(1999) Massachusetts's Governor's Intern—Boston,MA Full-time(1998-2001) Cellucci/Swift Campaign Committees-Boston,MA Intern(full-time) (1998) EDUCATION: Boston University Bachelors of Arts:International Relations,concentrations in Business&Economics Masters of Administrative Studies&Financial Economics,GPA of 3.5 (Additional courses taken in Real Estate Development and Intercity Planning) Real Estate Finance Certificate:courses taken in RE Development and Finance TECHNICAL TRAINING: Certified in tax credit housing;attended business seminars in negotiation,business writing,financial analysis,and real estate sales; completed courses in real estate practice,real estate principles,real estate finance,real estate appraisal,and real estate law;proficient in Access,Word,Excel,PowerPoint;and have intermediate reading and writing abilities in Spanish. INTERESTS: Community:Board Member for Squaw Valley Alpine Meadows Foundation,Tiburon Little League—Coach and Board Member, Tiburon Soccer Club—Coach and Age Group Coordinator,Foundation for Reed Schools—Directory Fundraiser,Auction Committee Member,Member of the BU Alumni Association and the Belden Club,JP Morgan Chase Ambassador,Chase Volunteer Leadership Group Member&NorCal Leadership Committee member for Enterprise Community Partners Sports:Current USATF National American Record Holder in the 100M Shuttle Hurdles,USATF National Title Holder in the Pentathlon,Hurdles,High Jump,Long Jump,"Triple Jump,100M Hurdles,4X400M;and participate regularly in T&F,marathons, triathlons,and century cycling rides. Arts:Photography(had photos displayed at the BU Gallery and at West Point) Other hobbies:Travel(lived in the Czech Republic for 18 months),Flying(Cessnas),Skiing(won The Vertical Challenge at Squaw 2017)and Scuba Diving(certified open water diver) } PERSONAL DATA z (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE„ A RESYTNfE MAY B�ATT ACHED AS,WELL) NAME: i11� MAILING ADDRESS: Iq A fW -DP-lV 6, I OuWo c-A 9q-91;?,o E-mail address (optional): I{u1 ( I COO TELEPHONE: Home: Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: &/--,W- 4 n s OrIR ��A.'S� Vic, —�' r 7 LV)C__W 0 -)IOC V W-EMXW) r v D�MMU6J)-(V2- P/2-OVID �c& r —(44P , T Ir5 (,416i5 1c 9c- n1i _F49- X4M-KS log niV p. e yAfw I,( l C 0 6J l 1 c h,,,412cu ASf Aa4kGree,3114 & It Ai--he CIS'60 15P"i w q--zo/ ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (1/1 Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS _/ DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION :T HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER S:dcrane%omm.app 1 -SUZANNE KIM , CFA SuzanneSKim@gmail.com 20 Mateo Drive +1 415 637 2064 Tiburon, CA 94920 • HARVARD UNIVERSITY Master in Architecture (Graduate School of Design) 2001 HARVARD UNIVERSITY Dual Master in Public Policy& Urban Planning (JFK School of Government) 1997 DARTMOUTH COLLEGE AB in History with Honors 1993 SELECTED WORK EXPERIENCE 0 REAL ESTATE CONSULTANT Independent Real Estate Consultant(05/2017—Present) San Francisco;CA= • Client: Real Estate Private Equity (Multifamily). Prepared analysis of firm's prospective investment strategy. Used GIS software, regression functionality in Excel, and other software to analyze the potential of several multifamily markets and to present findings/recommendations to management team and potential investors. Reviewed markets on the following metrics: valuation (cap rates/cap rate spreads/$ per unit/$ per sf), demographics(income, renter vs ownership, age, rent tenure, education, affordability, etc.), real/nominal rent growth, occupancy, supply (permits vs actual delivery), employment trends and local employment drivers, construction costs, operating expenses, unit amenities, locational amenities, local tenant regulations, solar potential, market risk, among others. Also reviewed CIMs and other investor presentation material and provided financial analysis of potential investments. • Client: Family Office/Real Estate (Retaillindustrial). Provided strategic analysis of firm's current strategy and recommended options for current and potential holdings. Reviewed shopping center assets and provided potential exit and asset management options. Recommended development options for industrial land holdings. NEW FORESTS. Manager,.Real Estate investmentAnalyt*s (12/2012— 12/2015) = San Francisco;CA' • Diligence of Real Estate Acquisitions for Principal Investing. Analyzed more than $600 million in potential land-focused investment opportunities (both real asset and project finance)for current and new funds managed by New Forests (USD 2+ billion AUM), a global private equity firm with funds focused on timber, conservation forestry, carbon, and other land-based strategies. Performed due diligence of potential investments, including creation of pro forma models to document sensitivity of assets to various scenarios; review of financial statements, title, and other key documents; and analysis of potential risks and risk mitigation. Forecasted commodity pricing based on historical data using regressions. Prepared & presented investment committee memorandum, private placement memorandum, and investment presentations for investors. • Real Estate Portfolio/Asset Management. Created and maintained financial models and budgets for existing US funds. Oversaw third party operators of indirectly managed assets and contractors for directly managed assets to ensure operation is in line with expectations. Communicated with investors to keep them apprised of capital calls and capital distributions, returns expectations, and general asset management operations. Reviewed contracts and LP agreements, among other agreements. Oversaw fund audits, accounting/bookkeeping, and other related functions. • Strategic Development. Played a key role in developing and implementing other investment opportunities and ideas to grow the US platform. GREENLEAf POWER Financial Analyst, Real Estate Acquisitions (11/2011 — 11/2012) Sacramento, CA • Diligence of Real Estate Investments for Principal Investing. Analyzed more than $50 million in prospective real asset investment opportunities for Greenleaf Power, a portfolio company focused on biomass power plant sector. Presented analysis of investment opportunities via formal investment committee memorandum to private equity sponsor, Denham Capital Management(USD 7.9 billion AUM). • Capitalization. Created financial models to analyze company and asset level capitalization strategies. Built relationships with potential capital (both debt and equity) providers. Prepared support material to secure project level financing. CREDIT SUISSE Senior Associate Analyst, Real Estate Equities (01120T0-:I 1/20.11 San Francisco, CA' • Office, Industrial, Healthcare REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts). Wrote research and built financial models distributed to institutional investors. Prepared written research on individual REITs and commercial real estate industry, regional real estate, and macroeconomic trends. Conducted due diligence on potential IPOs and other capital transactions, including debt and equity offerings, asset acquisitions and dispositions, and other transformative actions. • Client/Management Team Facing. Established and maintained relationships with executive REIT management teams and high-level institutional clients, providing them with investment strategy ideas and market outlooks. KENSINGTON INVESTMENT GP Sr.Analyst; RE Equities/Debt(10/2005 12/2008) Orinda, CA! • Domestic & International Real Estate Equities Research. Developed company/sector level analysis reports and proprietary net asset value & discounted cash flow models for REITs and REOCs (Real Estate Operating Companies) in coverage universe. Sectors included US office, industrial, healthcare, NNN, timber, and mortgage REITs; and Canadian, European, UK, Australian, and Japanese REITs. Created company models requiring modeling of each company's individual real estate assets (i.e. commercial real estate buildings and land holdings) and other holdings. • Fixed Income, Distressed Asset, & High Yield Research. Key role in structuring & implementing the investment process for income &opportunity strategies. Asset classes included equities, IG/HY corporate bonds, preferred securities, CMBS, CDS, CDOs, and convertible debt. • Macroeconomic Research. Instrumental in developing tools(interest rates, inflation, property-related policy changes like taxation, property sector trends)to guide geographic sector rotation decisions for three international funds. • Product Development Research. Worked closely with management team to determine and design potential products for the firm, including closed end funds, opportunity funds, green building funds (direct asset management), infrastructure funds, and other direct asset management opportunities. SKIDMORE OWINGS &:MERRILL Unlicensed Architect(2002.—2005) Sari.Francisco,.CA HARVARD CENTER FOR URBAN - Research Analyst(1997=2001) Cambridge, MA' DEVELOPMENT STUDIES • Urban 211UNESCO. Co-wrote "Decentralization and Urban Infrastructure Management Capacity"for major UNESCO publication. Provided research and writing for"Local Indicators of Sustainability", presented at Urban 21: Global Conference on Urban Future. • South Africa Infrastructure. Assessed the South Africa Municipal Infrastructure Program to determine how well it has delivered services and promoted capacity building (notably with regard to municipal finance &governance). • UNESCOIWorld Bank. Provided design and editorial assistance for a major exhibit, "Culture and Development at the Millennium", publicizing a collaborative initiative among international NGO's including UNESCO &the World Bank to promote culturally sensitive economic development. HARVARD JOINT ,CENTER FOR A Research Analyst'(1995-1997) Cambridge, M HOUSING STUDIES • Econometric Forecasting Model. Provided technical assistance in the development of econometric forecasting models used for the Remodeling Futures Program, whose purpose is to quantify and assess the variation in home improvement activity and the levels of home improvement financing across various metropolitan areas and households in the US. US SENATE Staff for Bil!Bradley(NJ) &Dianne Feinstein (CA) (1993-1995) Washington, DG CERTIFICATIONS CFA Institute. ID #450044 California Architecture License (In process of obtaining license - CAB#30753; NCARB #97754) BOARDS US Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Finance Advisory Board, (Appointed by the US EPA) 2013 to Present Treasure Island Citizens' Advisory Board. Board Member, (Appointed by San Francisco Board of Supervisors for major development project) 2004 —2014 KEY SKILLS Q Microsoft software: Advanced Excel, Word, PowerPoint Mapping software: ArcGIS (ArcMap), Mapinfo Presentation software: Illustrator, Photoshop, InDesign, AutoCAD, 3DStudio Max INTERESTS Running, Cycling, Surfing, Skiing, Soccer, Golf, Drawing/Painting, Piano PERSONAL DATA (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE A RESUIvfE`MAY BE ATTACHED AS'W,ELL)' NAME: LEONOR NOGUEZ MAILING ADDRESS: 346 Karen Way, Tiburon, CA 94920 E-mail address (optional): yosoynora gmai .com TELEPHONE: Home: 960-4404 Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years)14 DATE SUBMITTED:July 26, 2017 �REASOI� �'a�SELECTI�YGY s r selected the indicated areas of interest ecause I believe that I have ideas, time an experience that I can contribute to enhance the work of the indicated commissions. am particularly interested in the Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission ecause enjoy and regularly use our parks, open space and trails. I am also committed to protecting and preserving these areas sot at they can be enjoyed and avai a e to everyone. A.PPLIG'ABLEY f�?:�ALI��CATalO.1VS , f am Chair for the Marin County Personnel Commission. Prior tot at, I was a eputy City Attorney for San Francisco working in the litigation section. Prior tot at, was a Public Defender for San Francisco representing indigent defendants. Before I went to law school, I waste Director of Administration for a non-profit, neighborhood base mediation program that taught conflict resolution skills to San Francisco residents. was responsible for grants management, personnel policies, budgeting an panning. ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use ------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 RECEIVED JUL 26 2017 TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON TOWN OFTIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1) year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#I Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING XXX PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS "XXX—DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY —COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER S:dcrane%omm.app 1 Leonor Noguez 346 Karen Way Tiburon, CA 94920 (415)960-4404 (cell) lyosoynora@gmail.com APPOINTMENTS Marin County Personnel Commission, San Rafael, CA January 2016-present, elected Chair July 2017 EMPLOYMENT San Francisco City Attorney's Office, San Francisco, CA Deputy City Attorney, August 1995 to May 2013 Litigation Section-1998-2013. Represented the City in personal injury cases. Litigated bail forfeiture matters including appeals and represented the Department of Human Services in affirmative litigation including cases in bankruptcy. Advised the Court and court staff concerning bail forfeiture law. Code Enforcement-1996-1998. Assigned to Code Enforcement to develop the unit to aggressively pursue litigation. Litigation Section-1995-1996. Represented the City in both state and federal court cases including dangerous conditions and civil rights. San Francisco Public Defender's Office, San Francisco, CA Deputy Public Defender,October 1991 to August 1995 Felony Attorney. Represented indigent persons charged with misdemeanor and felony crimes. Responsible for all aspects of criminal defense from arraignment, through preliminary hearings to trial and sentencing. Marin County District Attorney's Office Law Clerk, Family Support Division 1990 Worked up cases and prosecuted delinquent parents to recover child support payments. Appeared in court as a certified law student. Honorable Daniel M. Hanlon, San Francisco Superior Court Law Clerk, 1989 California Land Title Company of Marin Escrow Bookkeeper, 1985-1986 Community Board Program Director of Administration, 1980-1984 Emporium/Capwell Sales Manager, 1979-1980 EDUCATION University of San Francisco, School of Law,J.D. 1990 University of San Francisco, BA Government 1979 BAR MEMBERSHIP Admitted to the California State Bar in 1991 LANGUAGES Fluent Spanish, Conversational French 4ma__C, NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: J t, te"r CAA-!21 E-mail address (optional): ­_/ t 323, 3 (a • 202- TELEPHONE: Home: Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) 6e] y"off � . TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years) DATE SUBMITTED: �� l V 1/� { u4)��� b 1 - 3 ttci -rrt - r 's2 01 jtcENV fd �"F' !"z'`'�4 �'^ `�`�3r" l& +�• �E�E�E��� ,- 1 �Y S i �L '( s T Town Hall Use Date Application Received: Interview Date: Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 Zo .enc }�-�' c.�.- TV P r o oW cer- ��r- a4j-CA �sS5�2e 0-�- 44Qzr- lToVKe or -�� -� � elft r�-e sS af- �;r +O SLS �� . G��_P.✓ s i ( W D u-�- ,� �(G�-til WWI( -f-GA� s TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies.In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to. the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) PLANNING PARKS,OPEN SPACE & TRAILS _DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER SAcrane%mm.app 1 PERSONAL DATA y (PLEASE PRINT OR TYpE=A RESUME MAY BE ATTACHED AS WELL), NAME: Stephen Wanat MAILING ADDRESS: 1811 Mar West, Tiburon E-mail address (optional): sjwanat@yahoo.com TELEPHONE: Home: 415-435-1651 Work: Fax No. PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. (If applicable) TIBURON RESIDENT: (Years)41 DATE SUBMITTED: 7/10/17 r REASONS ItOREECG �ay �s ` I have extensive experience in urban planning, design and architecture. I am retired now and would like to share what I know with my community. s � SaZ 4y�� h AND EPERIEIYCE I have studied architecture, urban design and planning at Princeton, Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania. I have been an instructor and assistant professor in these subjects at the University of Oregon and Cal Poly. I have worked in these fields in this country and abroad for about 50 years. I would like to continue to be involved in what has been my life's work. ----------------------------------------------Town Hall Use------------------------------------------------- Date Application Received: -.4-11H 11 Interview Date: -4-11611201-1 Appointed to: (Date) Date Term Expires: Length of Term: 2 E EIVED J U L -112017 TOWN CLERK TOWN OF TIBURON TOWN OF TIBURON COMMISSION, BOARD & COMMITTEE APPLICATION The Town Council considers appointments to its various Town commissions, boards and committee throughout the year due to term expirations and unforeseen vacancies. In its effort to broaden participation by local residents in Tiburon's local governmental process and activities, the Council needs to know your interest in serving the Town in some capacity. Please indicate your specific areas of interest and special skills or experience which would be beneficial to the Town, by completing both sides of this form and returning it to Town Hall. Copies will be forwarded to the Town Council and informal applicant/Council interviews are scheduled periodically during the year. Your application will also remain on file at Town Hall for a period of one (1)year. Thank you for your willingness to serve the Tiburon community. Lea Stefani Town Clerk AREAS OF INTEREST Indicate Your Area(s)of Interest in Numerical Order (#1 Being the Greatest Interest) 2 PLANNING PARKS, OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 1 DESIGN REVIEW RECREATION HERITAGE & ARTS DISASTER PREPAREDNESS LIBRARY COMMISSION ON AGING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OTHER S:dcrane%omm.app 1 STEPHEN J. WANAT EDUCATION o University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, M. Arch. , 1966, M.C.P. , 1966 o Harvard University, Graduate School of Design, B. Arch. 1964 o Princeton University, A.B. (Magna cum laude) , Architecture, 1962 REGISTRATION o American Institute of Certified Planners, Member o Registered Architect, State of New South Wales, Australia PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE o Senior Planner/Project Manager with responsibilities in project management, project design and planning, liaison with government agencies and the public, coordination of consultants, and management of schedules and budgets. o Project Manager of over 30 environmental impact reports and statements for commercial, residential, institutional, aviation, rapid transit, and redevelopment projects in California, including the core area redevelopment plan for Sacramento. o Project Planner of numerous residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, and institutional projects in California, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Australia. o Land Use Planner and Project Director of numerous specific area plans in California and Australia, and the general plan for Hobart, the capital of Tasmania. o Expert witness regarding planning and urban development issues in court proceedings. o Chief Planner and Regional Manager for Urban Design and Planning Associates, Sydney, Australia (1970-1975). o Assistant Professor in Urban Planning and Architecture at the University of Oregon and California State Polytechnic University in San Luis Obispo (1967-1969). AFFILIATIONS o American Planning Association, Member 0 American Institute of Architects, Affiliate Member EXHIBIT NO. Lea Stefani Tiburon Town Hall Tiburon, CA Re: Town Council Vacancy Dear Lea Stefani: I would like to be considered for one of the vacancies on the Town Council. I am a 40 year resident of Tiburon. I am a retired urban planner and have experience in development, environmental issues and traffic issues. I think I could contribute to the decision making process that the Town Council is involved in. I have taught urban planning and architecture at university level and have worked for large and small firms and as a consultant in the US and overseas. As a retired professional I would have the time to study the issues before the Council. I will be out of town in May until the 19th and would be available for an interview anytime after that. Yours truly, Stephen Wana 1811 Mar West Street Tiburon Phone: 415.435.1651 1-71 TOWN OF TIBURON Town Council Meeting October 4, 2017 1505 Tiburon Boulevard F Tiburon, CA 94920 Agenda Item: STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Members of the Town Council From: Department of Public Works Subject: Consideration of Projects to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions and/or Reduce Town Energy Expenditures. Reviewed By: K. F BACKGROUND The Town of Tiburon understands climate change has the potential to significantly affect Tiburon's residents and businesses, and recognizes local governments can play a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions to help mitigate the potential impacts of climate change. In 2011, the Town Council adopted the Town of Tiburon Climate Action Plan (CAP), that identified potential strategies the town government can take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to town operations. The CAP is attached as Exhibit I In this report, staff analyzes four projects identified in the CAP that, if implemented, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to Town operations. They include: 1. Electric Vehicle Charging Station installation. 2. Photovoltaic solar array located at the Police Station 3. Retrofitting cobra head streetlights to LED 4. Deep Green energy purchases through Marin Clean Energy ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS In February 2015, staff brought to Council for consideration a mid-year budget amendment totaling $25,000 for installation of an Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station at Lyford/Tiburon Boulevard Parking Lot (Lyford lot). The proposed charging station was dual port and would charge two vehicles simultaneously. Council decided not to fund the charging station due to the estimated on-going costs of electricity and maintenance. At the 2017 Council Retreat, councilmembers expressed interest in revisiting the idea of installing EV charging stations on town owned property. Accordingly, staff has developed updated information, and received an updated cost proposal, for the Lyford lot project. The cost proposal and associated schematic diagram are attached as Exhibit 2. This location is the least expensive and most practical location for a charging station in any public parking lot owned by the Town. TOWN of TIBURON PAGE I OF 6 Town Council -Mectino October 4, 2017 In addition to the updated information mentioned above, there has also been a change in the American Disability Act (ADA) standards regarding access to EV charging stations since Council considered this project in 2015. The updated standards include new requirements related to path of travel, and require one charging station be ADA van accessible. Incorporating these new requirements into the design for the I.,yford lot would result in the loss of five open parking spaces to create two parking spaces with EV charging stations. Regarding cost, due to inflation and the new ADA requirements, the total cost to construct the project is now estimated at $30,500. After installation, the ongoing fixed costs to maintain the charger (2 ports) is estimated at $2.19 per day ($1.53 per day charge from Chargepoint and a $0.66 per day charge from PG&E), a total of about $800 per year. Table I below shows the total estimated annual subsidy for various charging costs and average hours used. The amounts listed in unshaded cells represent the estimated annual subsidy the Town would pay in those scenarios, while the amounts in the shaded cells represent the estimated netamou-nt the-Town-would receive annually-in-those-scenarios.--- TABLE cenarios.--TABLE l: Estimated Annual Subsidy for EV Chargers Average _ Charge for Use Hours Use per Day per $1.00/hr $1.50/hr $2.00/hr $0.25/KwH $0.30/KwH head 1 $1,223.86 $895.36 $566.86 $676.36 $435.46 2 $1,626.82 $969.82 $312.82 $531.82 $50.02 3 $2,029.78 $1,044.28 $58.78 $387.28 4 $2,432.74 $1,118.74 $242.74 3 � �� 5 $2,835.70 $1,193.20 , $98.20 � k ' MM dv R 6 $3,238.66 $1,267.66a a�� c}MA 7 $3,641.62 $1,342.12 8 $4,044.58 $1,416.58 �MR ,. :.. Note that for a plug-in hybrid, both $1.00/hour and $0.25/KwH (the lowest cost options) are currently more expensive than gasoline. There is a price point where the Town could lose customers and may have limited use and therefore, no environmental benefit. If no one uses the charging stations, the Town would still have fixed charges of about$800/year. -- --- -It isdifficultto quantify the-environmental benefits from the project as-there is little information- - - on industry averages, and future use of the charger(s) would likely be dependent on the subsidy provided by the Town. Staff recommends not proceeding with this project at this time. SOLAR PANELS ON THE POLICE STATION TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 2 OF 6 Town Council 'Meetin Ocwher 4,2017 Two solar providers have provided a total of four scenarios for solar power installations at the Police station. Two of these options include solar on the Police Station Roof, however, staff has identified several issues with placing solar power on the Police Station roof, including: 1. The roofing material on the Police Station is very brittle, no longer produced, and is the subject of a class action lawsuit. While we are not experiencing problems with the current roof, placing a solar array on the roof could cause problems in the future. 2. The size of the roof limits the solar array to a size smaller than needed for optimal offset of electricity use. Two options were received for a carport type solar array in front of the Police Station, which are attached as Exhibits 3 and 4. Both options have the following advantages: 1. They produce over twice the electricity compared to a rooftop system, covering an estimated 91% of the annual cost of electricity for the Police Station. 2. A simple payback of eleven years compared to 15 years for the rooftop array. 3. They do not impact the Police Station roof. 4. They will provide shade and rain protection for the Police Vehicles parked underneath. The difference between the two options is aesthetics: 1. The lower cost option (Exhibit 3) is estimated at about $229,275. The look is industrial using a cantilevered T, made out of rectangular, round, or oval metal profiles. This cost includes painting and waterproofing the structure to act as a rain cover for the police vehicle area. 2. The higher cost option (Exhibit 4) is estimated at about $252,872. It is a cantilevered metal structure as well, but was designed for the look of the Police Station and is bolted together. This option is also waterproof The metal is powder coated, which would be an additional cost for the lower cost option. Depending on the option selected, the project would break even in ten to eleven years, and generate $844K to $868K in cost savings over 30 years. We have also attached as Exhibit 5, a schematic diagram depicting the approximate size of the proposed array in relation to the existing police station and parking lot. The proposals for the carport options came from Cooperative Community Energy (CCE) CCE is a member-owned business cooperative, comprised of individuals and organizations (including governments) that want to power their homes and businesses with solar energy. As a buyers' cooperative, they are a non-profit member-benefit business organization. CCE has established direct vendor relationships with manufacturers in the solar industry and uses its aggregated purchasing power to get discounted prices, passing the savings along to it members. CCE provides design services, project management and performs an inspection at system commissioning to ensure proper installation. CCE does not perform installations of solar equipment. CCE has developed a network of solar contractors to perform the installation services for projects that they design and for which CCF, provides the PV equipment. CCE was started in 2001 and currently has over 500 members, including municipalities. Tiburon became a member in 2004 when CCE designed the solar power system at Town Hall_ TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 3 OF 6 Town Council Meering October 4,2017 This Police Station solar project was included as placeholder in the FY 2017-18 CIP,with the funding source identified as General Fund Infrastructure & Facility Replacement Reserves. The current balance of this reserve fund is estimated at $615,000. No actual dollar funding was allocated in the approved FY 2017-18 budget since costs were not yet known. Given the options outlined above and the relatively early state of design, staff recommends allocating $260,000 for the project, the cost of the more expensive option with a slight contingency. If Council approves this solar parking structure project and provides funding, staff will enter into a contract with CCE for the design, and work with CCE to create a construction contract. That construction contract will be brought back to Council for approval. LED STREETLIGHT CONVERSION The Town of Tiburon has 129 cobrahead streetlight fixtures throughout the Town that could be converted to LED. A map showing the approximate location of the existing lights is attached as Exhibit 6. Assuming that the Town would replace the existing lights with lights of similar intensity, the change out would be the following: • 116 of the 129 fixtures are currently 70OW HPS Cobra and would be converted to 24W LED • 10 of the 129 fixtures are currently 100W HPS Cobra and would be converted to 38W LED • 3 of the 129 fixtures are currently 20OW HPS Cobra and would be converted to 88W LED There are per fixture rebates currently available from PG&E for this conversion. After rebate, the cost of converting all of these streetlights is estimated at $24,728. The cost proposal for this project is attached as Exhibit 7. This would result in a savings of about 23,000 KWh per year and $5,500 per year in electrical costs. This is about a 4.5-year payback. Changing streetlights can be controversial and there are several options for light color and intensity. If Council approves this project and provides funding, staff will have DC electric change three to four streetlights along Mar West near the Tiburon Peninsula Club and collect feedback from Council and the public. After considering the feedback, staff will seek final --- approval from Council-,-and then enter into a minor public works contract with-DC-Electric to- - - -- - - complete the work. Staff recommends allocating $30,000 to this project to cover the contract costs stated above plus costs for testing and contingency. Funding would for this project would come from the State Gas Tax Reserve Fund, which has an estimated current balance of$1.4M. MARIN CLEAN ENERGY DEEP GREEN PROGRAM TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 4 OF 6 Town Council Mectino October 4,2017 Marin was the first county in California to establish a community choice aggregation (CCA) program under AB 117 legislation passed in 2002. Marin Clean Energy (MCE) is a public agency overseen by a board of elected local officials and owned by its ratepayers. Since establishment in 2010, it has expanded to serve more than 175,000 residents and businesses in Marin and Napa Counties and the Cities of Richmond, Benicia, El Cerrito, San Pablo, Walnut Creek and Lafayette. Following in MCE's footsteps, other CCA programs are launching across the state of California with the objective of increasing renewable energy supply and fostering energy efficiency.Pursuant to the CCA enabling legislation, all electricity customers within MCE's service area are automatically enrolled in MCE. Those wishing to stay with PG&E are required to affirmatively opt out. MCE is responsible for procuring power while PG&E remains responsible for delivery of power to customers' homes or businesses, for infrastructure maintenance, and for billing. From the outset, MCE has offered 50 percent ("Light Green") and 100 percent ("Deep Green") renewable energy options. Most MCE customers were originally enrolled in the "Light Green" energy program. The Light Green program provides at least 50 percent renewable energy from sources such as solar, wind, bioenergy, geothermal and small hydropower. As an alternative, customers may upgrade to the "Deep Green" program, which is 100 percent renewable energy currently consisting of solar and wind. It is important to note since customers all receive power through a central electric grid, an individual's purchase of green energy does not necessarily mean he or she is buying electrons directly from a known renewable source. Rather, the individual's purchase through MCE causes that amount of renewable energy to be added to the grid, displacing an equivalent demand for fossil fuel-based energy. The Town is currently enrolled in the Light Green program with Marin Clean Energy (MCE), which means the electricity for all government operations in Town are from 50%renewable energy sources. If the Town enrolled in Deep Green the electricity for Town operated buildings would be from 100% renewable sources. Switching to Deep Green power through MCE would cost the Town an estimated additional $3,245 per year based on the Town's actual electrical use over 12 months (See communication from NICE attached as Exhibit 8). This would result in an emission reduction of 49 metric Tons of CO2 per year, the equivalent of taking about 10.4 cars from the roadway, or 2.1 million lbs. of CO2 over 20 years. ANALYSIS Staff notes that the Town adopted a Climate Action Plan in 2011, which looked at a number of technologies and their potential benefit for reducing greenhouse gases. Technology has changed since the adoption of the plan and so the direct comparisons in the plan cannot be used today. For instance, in the 2011 Plan Deep Green resulted in 61.7 metric tons of GHG reductions, today it is 49 metric tons. In the 2011 report, the energy produced by solar on the Police Station was estimated at 18,557 kWh per year, in the plan presented above it is 74,118 kWh per year. Further complicating any analysis is that there is an interplay between the alternatives. For example, if the Town decides on switching to Deep Green, then all the electrical power the Town buys would be from renewable sources. Therefore, no other measure would offset additional TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 5 OF 6 Town Council \lectina Octobcr 4,2017 greenhouse gases since all the electricity used by the Town would be 100% renewable and not generate any greenhouse gases. Another way toanalyze information to determine which alternative is "best", is to assess which approach provides the greatest reduction in greenhouse gas per dollar spent. Using this method, the time frame under consideration has a significant effect on the analysis. For instance, if the goal was to lower greenhouse gas emissions for one year, certainly the lowest cost option is Deep Green which would only cost $3,245 for that year. However, the picture changes over a longer timeframe such as 20 or 30 years. Over a longer time frame some options do not cost money—they save money. For example, over a 20-year time frame the LED Streetlight Conversion will result in an estimated $85,000 net savings, and over a 30-year time frame the Solar Array on the Police Station will result in an estimated $844,000 net savings. Given these savings, there is a fiscal advantage to completing the LED streetlight project and the Police Station solar project even if the Town decides to go Deep Green. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council: 1. Not approve installation of an EV Charging Station at this time and direct staff to continue evaluating options for a future project to install EV Charging Stations. 2. Approve a budget amendment in the amount of$30,000 to fund a capital improvement project to convert all cobra head streetlights to LED. Funding to come from the State Gas Tax Reserve Fund. 3. Approve a budget amendment in the amount of$260,000 to fund the capital improvement project for a solar parking shade structure at the Police Station. Funding to come from the Infrastructure and Facility Replacement Reserve Fund. 4. Authorize staff to convert all Town electric utility accounts with NICE to Deep Green. Exhibits: 1. 2011 Town of Tiburon Climate Action Plan 2. Cost proposal from DC Electric for EV Charging Station installation 3. Preliminary quote from Cooperative Community Energy Baja(low cost option) 4. Preliminary quote from Cooperative Community Energy Custom(high cost option) 5. Site Layout for Solar at Police Station 6. Map of existing streetlight locations 7. Quote from DC electric for streetlight LED conversions 8. Email from MCE regarding Deep Green cost Prepared by: Patrick Barnes,Director of Public Works TOWN OF TIBURON PAGE 6 OF 6 CLIMATE ACTION --PLAN a TOWN OF TIBURON w APRIL 2011 CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Town Council Town Staff Jeff Slavitz, Mayor Peggy Curran,Town Manager Jim Fraser,Vice Mayor Scott Anderson, Community Development Director Alice Fredericks Laurie Tyler,Associate Planner Emmett O'Donnell Fred Lustenberger, Building Official Richard Collins Nicholas Nguyen, Public Works Director Michael Cronin, Police Chief Planning Commission Cathy Frymier, Chair Marin Climate & Energy Partnership John Corcoran,Vice Chair Christine O'Rourke, Sustainability Coordinator Frank Doyle John Kunzweiler Erin Tollini Graphic Design Elissa Park Support for development of this Climate Action Plan [Alas provided by a grant from the Marin Community Foundation to the Marin Climate&Energy Partnership. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 3. Actions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4. Plan Implementation 31 1.1 Purpose of the Climate Action Plan 1 3.1 Summary of Greenhouse Gas Reduction 18 1.2 Relationship to the General Plan 2 Strategies 1.3 Climate Change Background 3 3.2 Land Use and Transportation 19 1.4 Climate Change Mitigation Activities in 3.3 Green Building, Energy Efficiency and 22 Tiburon 6 Renewable Energy 1.5 Regulation of Climate Change — Federal, 3.4 Waste Reduction, Recycling and Zero 24 State & Regional Levels 8 Waste 3.5 Water and Wastewater 26 3.6 State Actions 28 3.7 Adaptation 30 2. Tiburon's Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2.1 Tiburon's Profile 13 2.2 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions APPENDICES Inventory 14 2.3 Forecast for 2020 Emissions 16 A. Data Sources, Assumptions and Calculations A-1 2.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction B. Summary of Recommended Actions A-13 Target 17 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES TABLES Figure 1: The Greenhouse Effect 3 Table 1: 2005 Government Operations Emissions by Sector 15 Figure 2: Inundation Effect of 16-Inch Sea Level Rise 4 Table 2: Forecast for 2020 Emissions 16 Figure 3: Inundation Effect of 55-Inch Sea Level Rise 5 Table 3: Mitigation Measures for Community Emissions 18 Figure 4: Ecological Footprint Comparison 10 Table 4: Mitigation Measures for Government Operations Emissions 18 Figure 5: Marin County Emissions by Sector (2005) 11 Table 5: Section 3.2 Community Mitigation Measures 19 Figure 6: Marin County Emissions 1990-2005 11 Table 6: Section 3.2 Government Operations Mitigation Measures 19 Figure 7: 2005 Community CO2e Emissions 14 Table 7: Section 3.3 Community Mitigation Measures 22 Figure 8: Emissions Reduction Target 17 Table 8: Section 3.3 Government Operations Mitigation Measures 22 Figure 9: Energy Used in California Homes (2005) 27 Table 9: Section 3.4 Community Mitigation Measures 24 Table 10: Section 3.4 Government Operations Mitigation Measures 24 Table 11: Section 3.5 Community Mitigation Measure 26 Table 12: Section 3.6 Community Mitigation Measures 28 Table 13: Section 3.6 Government Operations Mitigation Measures 28 Io6vII Cif . hi f;n ".. .;3%B "'Cron PI n 1 . INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of the Climate Action Plan Specifically, this Plan does the following: The Town of Tiburon understands that climate change has the potential to • Summarizes the various regulations at the federal, state, and regional levels. significantly affect Tiburon's residents and businesses, as well as other communities • Incorporates the Town's 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory, which around the world.The Town also recognizes that local governments can play a identified sources of greenhouse gas emissions generated by both the strong role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating the potential community and the Town's government operations. impacts of climate change. • Estimates how these emissions may change over time and establishes a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 15% below 2005 levels by 2020. The purpose of this Climate Action Plan, which is advisory in nature, is to compile • Provides natural system, energy use, transportation, land use, green existing and potential strategies (i.e., actions, projects, and programs) that the purchasing,waste and water use strategies necessary to minimize Tiburon's Town's government operations and the community can take to address climate impacts on climate change and meet the established greenhouse gas change. It provides a brief background on what climate change is and its potential emissions reduction target. impacts, but focuses on the efforts Tiburon can take to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate, to the extent feasible at the local level, the potential impacts of climate change. Through actions outlined in this plan, such as increasing energy efficiency in buildings, encouraging less dependence on the automobile, and using clean, renewable energy sources, the community can experience lower energy bills, improved air quality, reduced emissions, and an enhanced quality of life. The Town's preparation of a 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and this Climate Action b Plan are the beginning of an ongoing planning process that includes assessing, planning, mitigating and adapting to climate change. lovvn of 'ibuon Climate:,C,;r t F-1„n 1.2 Relationship to the General Plan Many of the goals, policies and programs of the Tiburon General Plan 2020 support the vision for a sustainable community that minimizes its impact on the environment. In the downtown, the General Plan policies seek to encourage . mixed-use and affordable housing, and local-serving uses and facilities which . would reduce reliance on the automobile and decrease transportation emissions. ' O Policies and programs are also in place to improve the Town's pedestrian and bicycle network and provide facilities and incentives to encourage alternative transportation throughout Tiburon. �� � Though both the General Plan and the Climate Action Plan are intended as long- range plans,the Climate Action Plan may be updated on a more regular basis to add ' and amend strategies as new information, policy guidance, and regulations regarding r climate change evolve, and new technologies to address it are developed. It is intended that a future update of the Tiburon General Plan will integrate and reference this plan, instead of including the plan in the General Plan itself. e . 2 Tovvn of 'ibur-on C1 rnate,,�cton Plan 1.3 Climate Change Background • Precipitation is the most important hydrologic variable and most difficult to forecast. A balance of naturally occurring gases dispersed in the atmosphere determines • Warming raises the elevation of snow levels with reduced spring snowmelt the Earth's climate by trapping infrared radiation (heat), a phenomenon known and more winter runoff. as the "greenhouse effect". Significant evidence suggests that human activities • Less snowmelt runoff means lower early summer storage at major foothill are increasing the concentration of these gases (known as "greenhouse gases" reservoirs with less hydroelectric power production. or GHG) in the atmosphere, causing a rise in global average surface temperature • Higher temperatures and reduced snowmelt compounds the problem of and consequent global climate change.The greenhouse gases include carbon providing suitable cold-water habitat for salmon species. dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, halocarbons, ozone, and water vapor. Each one • Rising sea levels would adversely affect many coastal marshes and wildlife has a different degree of impact on climate change.To facilitate comparison across reserves. different emission sources with mixed and varied compositions of several GHG, • Higher temperatures increase the demand for water by plants. the term "carbon dioxide equivalent" or CO2e is used. One metric ton of CO2e may • Climate change in California will result in a higher frequency of large consist of any combination of GHG, and has the equivalent Global Warming Potential damaging fires. (GWP) as one metric ton of carbon dioxide (CO2).According to the U.S. Environmental • Regional climates that are hotter and drier will result in increased pest and Protection Agency's April 2009, "Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions,"the insect epidemics within California's forests. majority of GHG emissions comes from fossil fuel combustion,which in turn is used for electricity, transportation, industry, and heating, etc. Collectively, these gases intensify the natural greenhouse effect, causing global average surface temperatures to rise, which affects local and global climate ' patterns.These changes in climate are forecasted to manifest themselves in a number of ways that might impact Tiburon as well as other changes to local and regional weather patterns and species migration. i According to a 2006 Summary Report from the California Climate Change Center, global 1 1 warming could significantly impact California water and forest resources. The Center's 2006 Summary Report noted the following findings and potential risks to California': IrV � ct• 1 1 A Summary Report from: California Climate Change Center.Our Changing Climate:Assess- ing the Risks to California. Document No.CEO-500-2006-077.July 2006, http://www.energy. Figure 1:The Greenhouse Effect ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-500-2006-077/CEO-500-2006-077.PDF,accessed 3/22/10. Town of?iburon Climate;°,ct on Plan Sea Level Rise Because of scientific uncertainties, it is difficult to k \\ s a predict with a high degree of accuracy the sea level rise that will Impact Marin County residents. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission's (BCDC) most recent assessment assumes a 1.8° to 5.4° F (1° to 3° C) rise in global temperature over the next century and a corresponding sea level � �;\ rise in San Francisco Bay of 16 inches by mid- century and 55 inches by 2100.2 Sea level rise of this ........... €' magnitude would have dramatic impacts on residences, \ businesses, schools, and public infrastructure located s r near the shoreline. Inundation maps created by BCDC ~ ' \\ (see Figure 2) integrate GIS data from the USGS and sea level rise projections to assess the vulnerability of Bay Area communities to different sea level rise scenarios.A 16-inch rise in sea level would result in the \ flooding of 180,000 acres of shoreline, which is roughly equivalent to today's 100-year floodplain. A 55-inch rise in sea level would flood over 213,000 acres of shoreline, putting billions of dollars of private and public �f • ���`� development at risk. Changes In climate and sea level J!F could cause an increase in storm activity, storm surges, and even greater flooding. Figure 2: Inundation Effect of 16-Inch Sea Level Rise SOURCE: http://www.bcdc.ca.gov/planning/climate—change/maps/1 6/cbay_ The areas in blue identify the land area that is subject north.pdf; Inundation data from Knowles,2008.Aerial imagery is NAIP to inundation from a 16-inch rise in sea level. 2005 data.Accessed 7/2/10. DISCLAIMER:Inundation data does not account for existing shoreline protection or wave activity.These maps are for informational purposes only. 2 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Draft Staff Report,"Living with a Rising Bay:Vulnerability and Adaptation in San Francisco Bay and on its Shoreline,"April 7,2009, hftp://www.bcdc.ca,gov/ proposed_bay_plan/bp_1-08_cc_draft.pdf,accessed 3/30/10. 4 fovdn of `iburon Climate Acton flan In Tiburon, a 16-inch rise in sea level would impact the f �\ downtown and Keil Cove in the unincorporated area. As shown in Figure 3, a 55-inch sea level rise would` inundate a greater area in the downtown and Blackie's pasture. Paradise Cay in the County's jurisdiction would also be at risk from inundation. o� \ i f Figure 3: Inundation Effect of 55-inch Sea Level Rise SOURCE:Inundation data from Knowles,2008.Additional salt pond elevation data by Siegel and Bachand,2002.Aerial imagery is NAIP 2005 data. The areas in blue identify the land area that is subject to inundation from a 55-inch rise in sea level. DISCLAIMER:Inundation data does not account for existing shoreline protection or wave activity.These maps are for informational purposes only.Users,by their use,agree to hold harmless and blameless the State of California and its representatives and its agents for any liability associated with its use in any form. The maps and data shall not be used to access actual coastal hazards,insurance requirements,or property values or be used in lieu of Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). 5 1ov,,-n of Iburon Cl:mate Action Plan 1.4 Climate Change Mitigation Activities in Tiburon c) Repaint ladder crosswalks at: • Tiburon Blvd. @ Trestle Glen (one existing painted white) The Town has taken a number of initiatives in recent years to reduce greenhouse gas • Tiburon Blvd. @ Stewart Drive (one existing on south side painted white) emissions. These include the following early actions: • Avenida Miraflores @ Hilary Drive (two existing yellow) • Avenida Miraflores @ Felipa Court (three existing yellow) 1.The Town purchased two hybrid vehicles—a Honda Civic Hybrid for use by the • Rowley Circle @ Hilary Drive (one existing yellow) Building Inspector,and a Ford Escape Hybrid for the parking enforcement officer. • Howard Drive @ Hilary Drive (one existing yellow) 2. The Police Department has purchased four fuel-efficient vehicles. The new d) Upgraded existing sidewalk ramps for ADA compliance with the Dodge Chargers use only four cylinders while idling, but can switch to eight incorporation of yellow truncated domes: cylinders in the "pursuit ready" mode. The Police Department plans to phase • Tiburon Blvd @ Stewart Drive (two ramps) these fuel-efficient models into the police fleet as vehicles are replaced. Two • Tiburon Blvd. @ Avenida Miraflores and Pine Terrace (seven ramps) of the Town's five patrol cars are currently Dodge Chargers, with purchase of • Hilary Drive @ Rowley Circle (two ramps) another two Dodge Chargers in the works, • Avenida Miraflores @ Felipa Court (three ramps) • Tiburon Blvd. @ Rock Hill Drive (two ramps) 3. The Town installed a 158-panel photovoltaic system, rated at 22KW output, on • Tiburon Blvd. @ Lyford Drive (six ramps) top of Town Hall in 2006. 5. Working with funding through the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program, 4. Working with funding from the Safe Routes to School program, the Town has which is intended to increase the mode share of cycling and walking for implemented a bicycle and pedestrian project to improve accessibility and everyday transportation, the Town has made the following improvements: safety surrounding Del Mar Middle School through the following improvements: a) Rehabilitated the existing walking path at Lower Raccoon Lane from a) New pedestrian bulb-out beginning at Tiburon Blvd.and extending east along the Centro West Street to Mar West Street by upgrading the surface of the north side of Avenida Miraflores towards the Del Mar School driveway entrance. path, improving the surface drainage, adding stairs and handrails at the b) New yellow ladder crosswalks at: steepest locations, and providing new landscaping. • Tiburon Blvd. @ Lyford Drive (north, east and south)—only yellow b) Rehabilitated the existing walking path at Cayford Drive by upgrading the outlines exists at these crosswalks surface with a more stable, firm and durable surface, and provided an • Tiburon Blvd.@ Rock Hill Drive(north)—only yellow outline exists at this ADA ramp. crosswalk c) Rehabilitated the pedestrian steps and walking path from Jefferson Drive • Tiburon Blvd. @ Avenida Miraflores (north & 2 on the east side)—only to Reed Ranch Road, by replacing the existing wood and asphalt steps yellow outlines exist with new concrete steps and installing new handrails • Tiburon Blvd. @ Pine Terrace (west) —only yellow outlines exist ° fav,,n of "iburon C.I mate.4,M: Pham 6. The Town has purchased numerous pieces of Energy Star-rated computer equipment to phase out older, less energy-efficient equipment. 11.The Town adopted the Town of Tiburon Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Update in 2008 which outlines future bicycle and pedestrian improvement programs and 7. In 2008, the Town adopted a Green Building Ordinance (Ord. No. 512 N.S.) projects throughout the Town to promote increased bicycle and pedestrian travel which outlined minimum GreenPointTM building thresholds for new residential and decrease the use of vehicles. structures and additions, and minimum LEED standards for new commercial structures and additions, as well as all Town-sponsored facilities. In 2011, this 12. The Town joined the Marin Energy Authority and chose Marin Clean Energy ordinance was retracted as new CalGreen standards were released. electricity with a minimum 25% (light green) renewable energy source content for all Town operations. 8. In 2011,the Town adopted the new CalGreen standards as part of the new California Building Code, and began to consider drafting an amendment to CalGreen , with updated thresholds based on the work of the Building Energy Retrofit and Solar Transformation Committee (BERST), a countywide committee organized by the City of San Rafael, to update and unify green building standards for the County; this update will most likely be added as an amendment to CalGreen in 2011/2012. 9. In 2005, the Town adopted Resolution 05-2005 to create a policy to encourage. the installation of solar collector panels, while still protecting and maintaining the valued aesthetic qualities which make the Town unique.This policy waived the building permit fees associated with the installation of flush-mounted roof solar panels that meet certain guidelines. 10. In 2008 the Town adopted Enhanced Energy Efficiency Standards(Ord.No.506 N.S.)which requires single-family dwellings greater than 3,500 square feet to comply with more restrictive energy standards than what is normally required by the California Energy Code. In 2011,this ordinance became an amendment to the adopted CalGreen standards. Town of "iburon Ci mate,`�c'rn Plan 1.5 Regulation of Climate Change — Federal, State and Regional Levels Federal Climate Policy Currently,there is no federal legislation mandating comprehensive greenhouse gas emission reporting or reduction in the United States. Efforts, however, are underway in Congress to develop and enact climate and energy legislation.The U.S. House of Representatives passed a GHG emissions cap-and-trade bill,Waxman-Markey, in June 2009.The U.S. Senate considered, but failed to pass,various cap-and-trade bills in r 2009 and 2010, Absent congressional action, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) has used t a its rulemaking authority under the Clean Air Act to begin to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. In 2009,the EPA made an "endangerment finding"that GHGs threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.'This finding provided the statutory prerequisite for EPA regulation of GHG emissions from motor vehicles and State Climate Policy has led to a number of GHG regulations for stationary sources. In May 2010,the EPA issued a"tailoring" rule that enables the agency to control GHG emissions from the nation's largest GHG sources, including California produces roughly 1.4 percent of the world's and 6.2 percent of the total U.S. g g power plants, refineries, cement production greenhouse gases (GHG). The State of California has taken the lead in setting specific facilities, industrial manufacturers and solid waste landfills,when these facilities are newly constructed or substantially modified.The EPA reports that its GHG permitting targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels in both requirements will address 70% of the national GHG emissions from stationary sources.' Power plants and vehicles through the following legislation: These rules went into effect in January 2011. California Solar Initiative Program, 2006.Comprehensive$2.8 billion program that In April of 2010,the Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Transportation provides incentives toward residential and commercial solar development over 11 years. finalized new fuel efficiency standards for model year 2012 through 2016 cars and light trucks.These vehicles will have to meet a combined average emissions level of 250 3 Final Rule,EPA,Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under the Clean grams of carbon dioxide per mile, or the equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon (MPG), up Air Act,74 Fed.Reg.66495(Dec.7,2009). from the current standard of 27.5 MPG.The EPA and the Department of Transportation 4 Final Rule:Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule Fact Sheet,EPA,http://www.epa,gov/NSR/documents/20100413fs.pdf. are currently developing first-ever regulations for medium and heavy-duty vehicles. 5 U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations.htm#1-1,accessed 12/9/10. £; 1 nrn,of "ibw,o!i ,,..rr::,ate Senate Bill 1078 Sher, 2002. Established a Renewable Portfolio Standard requiring Senate Bill 375 Steinberg, 2008. Assigns a greenhouse gas reduction target electricity providers to increase purchases of renewable energy resources by 1% per year for car and light truck emissions for each region in the State represented until they have attained a portfolio of 20% renewable resources. by a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) that is to be addressed with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS). Also touches on planning for Executive Order S-21-09, In September 2009, California Governor Arnold transportation, housing and the environment and requires Alternative Planning Schwarzenegger signed an executive order directing the State's Air Resources Strategy documents where a SCS will not achieve the GHG reduction targets. Board to adopt regulations increasing California's Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to 33 percent by 2020.The RPS will apply to investor-owned utilities, The most significant of these initiatives are AB 32 and SB 375; the first requires publicly-owned utilities, direct access providers, and community choice California to reduce its GHG to 1990 levels by 2020, and the second begins to tie aggregators, including Marin Energy Authority. GHG reductions to land use. In 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) conducted an emissions inventory for the state to identify emissions levels in 1990 Assembly Bill 1493 Pavley, 2002. Requires the California Air Resources Board that figure 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. The inventory (CARB) to develop and adopt regulations that achieve the maximum feasible revealed that transportation was the largest single sector (35% of the state's total reduction of greenhouse gasses from vehicles primarily used for non-commercial 1990 emissions), followed by industrial emissions (24%), imported electricity transportation by January 2005, In 2009, CARB adopted final regulations that are (14%), in-state electricity generation (11%), residential use (7%), agriculture (5%), expected to reduce GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles by about 22 and commercial use (3%).6 percent in 2012 and about 30 percent in 2016. Preliminary estimates indicate that California's 2020 emission projections could be Senate Bill 1771 Sher,2000. Requires the California Energy Commission (CEC)to prepare 600 million tons of CO2e if no actions are taken to reduce GHG. This means that an inventory of the State's greenhouse gas emissions,to study data on global climate California must prevent 173 million tons of CO2e from being emitted by 2020 in change,and to provide government agencies and businesses with information on the order to meet the 1990 levels as required by AB 32. costs and methods for reducing greenhouse gases.Also establishes the California Climate Action Registry to serve as a certifying agency for companies and local governments to CARB is responsible for monitoring and reducing GHG emissions set forth in AB quantify and register their greenhouse gas emissions for possible future trading systems. 32, and is, therefore, coordinating statewide efforts. In December 2008, CARB adopted a Scoping Plan that outlines the actions required for California to reach Assembly Bill 32 Nunez&Pavley,2006.Also known as The Global Warming Solutions its 2020 emission target.The actions include a broad set of clean energy, clean Act of 2006, institutes a mandatory limit on greenhouse gas pollution and requires transportation, and efficiency standards. a reduction in emissions in California to 1990 levels by the year 2020.The bill also directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to establish a mandatory 6 http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nrl206D7.htm,accessed 1/1/10. reporting system to track and monitor emission levels and requires CARB to develop various compliance options and enforcement mechanisms. 9 In 2009, CARB identified and implemented nine discrete early action measures those resources is the "ecological footprint." It can be calculated for individuals, including regulations affecting landfills, motor vehicle fuels, refrigerants in cars, regions, countries, or the entire earth and is expressed as the number of global tire pressure, port operations and consumer products.Additional reduction acres (acres with world average biological productivity) that it takes to support measures to meet the 2020 target will be adopted in 2011one person. As Figure 3 shows, the average American uses 24 global acres per capita, while the average Marin resident requires 27 global acres. Other western Key strategies identified in the Scoping Plan that are best developed and democracies, such as France, Germany, and Italy, have footprints of 13, 12, supported by local governments in achieving the climate protection and emission and 9.5 global acres per person, respectively.According to the Global Footprint reduction goals include: network, if every person lived the lifestyle of one American, we would need five • Transportation and community design planets to sustain us. • Local and regional emission targets • Recycling and waste reduction 30 • Clean energy 27 • Green buildings 25 IIIIIIIIIIIN 24 • Water 20 Q The CARB Climate Change Scoping Plan "encourages local governments to adopt Q 15 13 a reduction goal for municipal operations emissions and move toward establishing m 12 similar goals for community emissions that parallel the State commitment to 10 9.5 reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 15 percent from current CD5.5 5l levels by 2020."' However, CARB does not yet require cities to adopt climate action plans as part of AB32 implementation efforts. 0 Marin United France Germany Italy World Marin County Climate Policy County States Average Figure 4: Ecological Footprint Comparison Underpinning sustainability and climate change efforts in Marin County is the recognition that Marin residents consume resources at a far greater rate Source: Redefining Progress, Sustainable Sonoma County,Worldwide Fund for Nature, than most industrialized nations, and that the worldwide use of resources is as quoted in the Marin Countywide Plan, adopted November 6, 2007. exceeding the earth's capacity to renew them. One way to measure the use of natural resources against the planet's actual biocapacity and ability to renew 7 California Air Resources Board,"Climate Change Scoping Plan,"December 2008, p.27,http://www.arb. ca.gov/cc/scop ingplan/document/adopted_scoping_pIan.pdf,accessed 3/31/10. Ti,v,.n of Tibuion ..,..rmate ,M o , Pkan In 2006, Marin County developed a strategic plan to reduce annual GHG emissions to Figure 5: Marin County Emissions by Sector(2005) 15% below 1990 levels by 2020. In 2007, the County re-inventoried their greenhouse Waste gas emissions. Figures 4 and 5 show the distribution of County-wide GHG emissions 2% Industrial 2% Commercial by sector in 2005 and emission trends between 1990 and 2005.Total countywide Agriculture 4% greenhouse gas emissions increased by approximately 6% between 1990 and 2005, Energy use 12% , ; from 3,005,674 to 3,188,522 tons CO2e.1 This 6% rate of increase can be used as a proxy to estimate the increase in Tiburon's emissions between 1990 and 2005,since actual data is unavailable. While the County has taken important steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, a large portion of Marin County is operated and governed by the eleven local jurisdictions and numerous special districts. It is therefore important that the municipalities, such as Tiburon, participate in developing local emission reduction Residential measures and policies. Energy Use 19% Transportation 62% Figure 6: Marin County Emissions 1990-2005 3500 3000 2500 0 2000 o � 1500 m 1000 �e — 8 "Marin County Re-Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions,"Marin County Community Development 500 Agency,September 2007. 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 ( l -v%in of Tiburon O rotate;'ct on Plan Coordinated Multi-Jurisdictional Approach: Marin Climate and Energy Partnership Created in 2007,the mission of the Marin Climate&Energy Partnership (MCEP) is to reduce greenhouse gas emission levels to the targets of Marin County and local municipalities,consistent with the standards set by AB32. All eleven Marin cities and towns,the Marin County Community Development Agency,the Transportation Authority of Marin,and the Marin Municipal Water District are members.The Marin General Services Authority is the joint powers authority with fiscal responsibility for the Partnership. One of MCEP's first projects was to work with ICLEI—Local Governments for u Sustainability, a nonprofit organization, to develop greenhouse gas emissions inventories for the partner jurisdictions. With Bay Area Air Quality Management � � District grant funding, MCEP also worked on programs related to reducing energy use in municipal buildings, establishing a green purchasing collaborative, reducing energy " y use in residential and commercial buildings, reducing emissions from private and R municipal vehicles, and reducing energy use and emissions from waste. ' , In 2009, MCEP developed a green building strategic plan and green building policies which resulted in the Marin Green BERST model ordinance. The Marin Community x Foundation provided funding for this effort, as well as funds to develop climate action plans for six partner jurisdictions. Partner members have agreed to use their adopted climate action plans to identify mutual measures to reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions and develop policies and programs to support priority measures. The Town has worked closely with the Marin Climate and Energy Partnership b, to complete this climate action plan, and to implement a coordinated approach to local and regional emissions reduction targets and climate action planning goals. 2. TIBURON'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 2.1 Tiburon's Profile Located on a peninsula in Marin County approximately seven miles north of the Golden �� Y Gate Bridge,Tiburon is a small town with a land area of 4.5 square miles and an estimated current population of 8,962.1 Primarily a residential community of single- family homes,Tiburon has a relative) of land devoted to multi-family � . y small percentage e g y development and commercial uses.There are two commercial areas that provide p necessary goods and services for residents, as well as public and private schools for grades K-8, a post office, a library, police and fire stations, and a Town Hall. WithN f, abundant parks and open space, and both public and private recreational facilities, j there are many recreational opportunities within town. Although some residents work in Tiburon, a majority commute to jobs in San Francisco, elsewhere in Marin County, and other locations outside Marin County. i xry Tiburon Boulevard, a state highway maintained by Caltrans, runs along the length ofn the peninsula and connects to Highway 101.As the principal roadway on a peninsula, most vehicle trips in Tiburon require some segment to be driven on this roadway. Walking or biking are viable ways to get around the flatter areas of town, especially in the neighborhoods located close to schools and commercial areas.There is one Class 1 multi-use path that runs along the Richardson Bay shoreline to the downtown area, where it becomes a striped bicycle lane for a short segment. Public transit is limited within Tiburon, with two bus routes serving Tiburon Boulevard primarily during morning and evening commute periods. Ferry service is located in the downtown and provides a convenient way for residents to commute to San Francisco. 9 2010 U.S.Census,Table P1 12, lav,in of 'ib„r;n .,..mate;'SCM.) Plan 2.2 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and would not produce the most accurate inventory.According to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2009,Tiburon's population was 8,800 in 2005, The first step toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions is to identify sources and there were approximately 3,760 households. Included as an indicator of commercial of emissions and establish baseline levels.This information can then inform the activity,the number of jobs within Tiburon in 2005 was 3,180. selection of a reduction target and possible reduction measures to be included in the climate action plan. In 2009,the Town prepared a report that inventories greenhouse Community Inventory Results gas emissions from the Tiburon community and, as a subset of that analysis, local government operations.The report provides a detailed understanding of where the In 2005,the Tiburon community emitted approximately 53,143 metric tons of 002e.As highest emissions are coming from, and, therefore, where the greatest opportunities shown in Figure 6 below,the Transportation sector was the largest source of emissions, for emissions reductions lie.The inventory also establishes a baseline emission generating approximately 23,453 metric tons of CO2e, or 44.1% of total 2005 inventory against which to measure future progress. emissions. Transportation emissions are the result of diesel and gasoline combustion in vehicles traveling on local roads and Tiburon Boulevard. Electricity and natural gas The inventory analyzes four primary sectors of community emissions: residential, use in the Residential sector emitted 22,515 metric tons CO2e, representing 42.4% of commercial, transportation, and waste. Residential and commercial emissions total emissions.The Commercial/Industrial sector,the third greatest source of 2005 come primarily from the on-site combustion of natural gas and the off-site emissions, generated 5,036 metric tons CO2e, or 9.5% of the total.The remaining 4% generation of electricity for heating, cooling, lighting, cooking, and the operation (2,138 metric tons) are the estimated future methane emissions that will result from the of appliances and electrical devices.Transportation emissions result from the decomposition of waste that was generated by the Tiburon community during 2005. combustion of diesel and gasoline on roadways within the Town of Tiburon. Waste emissions come from the decomposition of waste generated by residents and businesses in landfills outside the Town limits. waste 4.0% Government operations emissions are categorized according to six primary sectors: \ /f buildings; streetlights and park lighting;water delivery facilities such as irrigation Residential d 42.4% systems; vehicle fleet, including police and public works vehicles; government-generated solid waste, including public trash cans and street sweepings; and employee commute. Transportation ti The inventor utilizes 2005 as the baseline year, as this year is increasingly becoming the 41.1% Y Y Y g Y g standard for such inventories. Due to lack of city-specific data,the 1990 baseline year utilized by the State of California is usually too difficult for most local governments to meet Commercial/Industrial 9.5% Figure 7: 2005 Community CO2e Emissions 1^ 1C)tain of .ihr n "I ;'te Action Finn Government Operations Inventory Results In 2005,Tiburon government operations emitted approximately 389 metric tons of CO2e. As shown in Table 1, the Vehicle Fleet sector was the largest emitter (33%) in 2005. Emissions from the Employee Commute sector produced the second highest quantity of emissions, resulting in 28.3% of total CO2e; and the Buildings sector produced 21% of total emissions.The remainder of emissions came from the Waste sector (9.9%) and the Lighting sector (7.8%), with nominal emissions from the Water sector. Emissions from government operations produced approximately 0.7% of total community emissions. Table 1: 2005 Government Operations Emissions by Sector 1 MEN=, a Buildings 82 21.0% 1,254 $42,032 45.4% 'Vehicle deet 128 33 D/u I,766 99,5% Lighting 31 7.8% 445 $14,487 15.7% iNater Waste 38 9.9% 0 n/a 0.0% -Bmalaye Gomtnut 10 ' $3°/a 1,41.81. n/a 0,0°lq .- i�9 coo , Energy cost for electricity, natural gas, gasoline and diesel in 2005. 10 This number includes all Scope 1 emissions from the on-site combustion of fuels in facilities and vehicles,Scope 2 emissions from the purchase of electricity,and Scope 3 emissions from waste generated by local government operations and emissions associated with employee commute patterns. 1' Imran of Tiburon „l mate i'ict'rn Plan 2.3 Forecast for 2020 Emissions Analysis contained within California Energy Demand 2008-2018:Staff Revised Forecast", a report by the California Energy Commission (CEC), shows that To illustrate the potential emissions growth based on projected trends in energy commercial floor space and the number of jobs have closely tracked the growth in use, driving habits, job growth, and population growth from the baseline year energy use in the Commercial Sector.ABAG projects job growth will increase from going forward, this plan includes an emissions forecast for the year 2020. Under a 3,180 jobs in 2005 to 3,770 in 2020. Using this growth projection of 590 jobs, it business-as-usual scenario, Tiburon's emissions will grow by approximately 9.3% was calculated that the average annual growth in energy use in the commercial by the year 2020, from 53,142 to 58,095 metric tons CO2e.Table 2 shows the sector between 2005 and 2020 would be 1.14%. result of the forecast by sector.A variety of different reports and projections were used to create the emissions forecast, as profiled below. For the transportation sector,the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) projects that county-wide vehicle miles traveled in Marin County will increase at a rate of 0.78% a For the residential and waste sectors, population projections for Tiburon, as year between 2006 and 2020,or approximately 12.4% between 2005 and 2020.12 released by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in 2009, were used to estimate average annual compound growth in energy demand.ABAG estimates As no significant expansion of government services is expected over the next ten the Tiburon population will increase from 8,800 in 2005 to 9,200 in 2020.This years, government operations emissions are projected to remain consistent with increase of 400 persons is projected to result in an annual growth in residential 2005 levels under a business as usual scenario. and waste emissions of 0.3%. Table 2: Forecast for 2020 Emissions ®� Residential 22,515 23,538 0.30% 4.5% Coarmereial 5,0'36 �5,�7q 1.1,4°l0 � 18:610 ra Transportation 23,453 26,351 0.78% 12.4% Waste 2,13& 2.235 „ . 11 http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-200-2007-015/CEC-200-2007-015-SF2.PDF 12 Transportation 2035 Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area-Travel Forecasts Data Summary 16 lovdn of ?ibi ron ,.rr:..te Fiction Plan 2.4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Target This Climate Action Plan proposes an emissions reduction target of 15% below 2005 levels by 2020,which is Figure 8: Emissions Reduction Target consistent with the State's direction to local governments 60,000 in the AB 32 Scoping Plan.13 A target of 15% below 2005 emissions levels would limit community emissions 2020 BAU to 45,170 metric tons in 2020. Figure 7 provides a 9.3% Increase comparison of the business-as-usual forecast for 2020 to the 2005 baseline year and the 15% reduction target. 55,000 Figure 7 is also a depiction of Tiburon's challenge in attempting to meet its reduction targets. Emissions will continue to increase along the business-as-usual 2005 Baseline scenario while reduction efforts are initiated.Achieving 50,000 the target is therefore more than a 15% decrease— 2020 Reduction Target rather, it is a 22.2% reduction from projected 2020 15% Decrease i emissions levels for the Tiburon community. 45,000 40,000 2005 2020 13 California Air Resources Board,"Climate Change Scoping Plan,"December 2008,p.27,http://www.arb. ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_plan.pdf,accessed 3/31/10. 17 Ton,:of iburom ,,..-cr.te-ctrn Plan 3. ACTIONS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS 3.1 Summary of Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies Table 3: Mitigation Measures for Community Emissions _ V The mitigation measures presented in this chapter, as summarized in the tables below, achieve greenhouse 3.2 Land Use and Transportation- -- - - 1,284 - -- - - 3.3 Green Building,Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 9,669 gas emissions reductions in the community of 12,501 3.4 Waste Reduction,Recycling and Zero Waste 869 metric tons CO2e or approximately 24% below the 2005 3.5 water and wastewater 679 ....... .. baseline.When state reductions are added, emissions in SUBTOTAL 12,501 Tiburon would be approximately 32% below 2005 levels °l4 helovu 2or}5le pis " 23.5°l0 -- enough to allow the Town to surpass a reduction target 3.6 state Actions 4,270 %below 20051euals 8.a of 15% below the 2005 baseline by 2020. moussnommum MEN= Within government operations,the Town could achieve reductions of 137 metric tons CO z e, or approximately 35% below 2005 levels by implementing all of the specific, Table 4: Mitigation Measures for Government Operations Emissions measurable actions listed in the following sections.A IMMEMMOMMEM wide range of programs that exceed the Town's reduction ' goal have been included to allow for the consideration 3.2 Land Use and Transportation 32.2 and prioritization of each program, based on Its estimated 3.3 Green Building,Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 95.5 cost, annual savings, and GHG reduction benefit, during 3.4 waste Reduction,Recycling and Zero Waste 9.6 SUBTOTAL 137.3 the consideration of new programs, development °la bIv�ir20g51eue1s __r 3°(0 projects,and funding opportunities.State actions would 3.6 State Actions 28.7 reduce emissions by another 7%, and programs to offset belou20451effts„ ... . , ?. °la emissions could reduce emissions by an additional 27% 3.2,3.3 carbon offsets 104.8 18, TTovvn of `iburon „i m,.ate`;c'G l Flan 3.2 Land Use and Transportation Transportation and land use development are strongly interrelated. The more suburban the development Table 5: Section 3.2 Community Mitigation Measures (i.e., low density housing which causes residents to , , , live further from urban centers), the less viable are Measure GHG Reductions mass transit systems and other alternative modes (Metric Tons) 3.2.C1 Encourage Workforce Housing and Transit-oriented Development 13 of transportation such as walking or biking, and the - - -- - - - - - -- 3.2.C2 Increase Walking and Biking for Local Trips 524 more dependent residents become on the automobile. 3.2.C3 Increase Public Transit Use 535 . Studies have shown that people who live near transit 3.2.C4 Increase Ridesharing 63 drive between 10 and 30% less and that low-density 3.2.C5 Accelerate Adoption of Electric Vehicles 149 suburban development generates twice as much TOTAL l,zs4 °la Reduced frpm�2005 LecrelsL '2.4°l6 � . GHG emissions per capita than a more dense urban development pattern.As a result, the transportation sector is one of the largest sources of GHG emissions. Though Marin County is known for its environmental Table 6: Section 3.2 Government Operations Mitigation Measures consciousness, it is also known for its low-density developments, larger homes, multi-vehicle households, Measure Costto Implement Annual GHG Reductions Savings (Metric Tons) and consumerism. It also ranks among the highest in 3.2.G1 Replace Town Vehicles with Hybrid or Electric As replaced $2,200 6.0 the U.S. in terms of per capita GHG emissions. Vehicles ........ 3.2.G2 Encourage Town Employees to Commute by Variable n/a 11.0 Alternative Means of Transportation Schools in Marin County also generate a high number of G3 Replace Police Patrol Cars with More Fuel- 3.2. As replaced $6,000 15,2 vehicle trips.According to the Transportation Authority Efficient _ 3.2.G 4 Offset Emissions from Town Vehicles $1,200/year n/a 92.1 of Marin, 21% of all AM peak hour trips are home-to- _ _ .... .... TOTAL 124.3 school trips.The most recent Safe Routes to School Q ' 32 0% surveys show that 9% of Reed School students, 15% of Bel Aire students, and 23% of Del Mar students walk or bike to school. More students could be encouraged to walk or bike to school through safety enhancements and an expanded bike and pedestrian network. 19 loran of ibur,n GG.mate:'c rn Plan The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: 1. Reduce GHG emissions through the General Plan and project review processes. a. Promote compact and efficient development,such as orienting new development to capitalize on access to public transportation and local services and shopping. b. Encourage a "balanced" community, where residents do not have to travel long distances for service needs. ; c. Promote the development of workforce housing for local employees and second units for in-home providers of childcare, healthcare, building and grounds maintenance, and others. d. Make reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the use of alternative ° transportation high-priority criteria in the evaluation of policy, program ' yu and project alternatives. 2. Encourage bicycling and walking as a safe and efficient means to travel around Tiburon. a. Provide and maintain Class I, II and III bikeways as identified in the Tiburon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. " u b. Improve bicycle and pedestrian safety at intersections and install bicycle loop detectors at signalized intersections to help cyclists trip the traffic signal. c. Implement "Complete Streets" policies to ensure the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians and the disabled are considered in the transportation element x ;, of any new capital improvement or development project. d. Install walkways where feasible to provide a continuous pedestrian network. e. Provide bicycle racks at public destinations as identified in the Tiburon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. f, Provide bicycle parking at large public events. y � g. Encourage employers to provide secure, covered bicycle parking and shower and changing facilities for employees. yq� h. Promote "Share the Road" strategies to improve bicycle safety and improve compliance with traffic laws. °� - u i; io,n;n of 'ihurn cr.;n Fit:n i. Participate in programs that encourage bicycling and walking, such as 7• Purchase or lease low or zero-emissions vehicles and the most fuel efficient Safe Routes to School programs, models possible for the Town fleet where appropriate. 3. Support and promote public transit. 8. Provide Town employees with incentives to use alternatives to single occupant a. Work with neighboring cities, regional transit providers and the auto commuting, such as transit incentives, bicycle facilities, ridesharing Transportation Authority of Marin to increase both the frequency and types services and subsidies. of transit services available to Tiburon residents, employees and visitors. 9. Increase ownership of plug-in electric vehicles (EV) by providing EV charging 4. Support and promote ridesharing and car sharing programs. station infrastructure, where appropriate, and encouraging property owners and a. Encourage the creation of a system to facilitate informal carpools for developers to install EV charging stations in commercial and residential projects. Tiburon commuters. b. Promote ridesharing programs, such as SchoolPool Marin and 511 Rideshare. 10. Achieve further carbon reductions for Town fleet operations by purchasing c. Work with the County to develop a community car sharing program, when carbon offsets through a program such as TerraPass, after maximizing GHG determined to be feasible. reductions through alternative transportation measures. 5. Educate residents and employees about the health and environmental benefits of walking, cycling, taking public transit and ridesharing, and provide information to assist in these modes of travele. , .. ( g., information available in public places and a� employment centers regarding bus schedules, pedestrian pathways, bikeways and ridesharing programs). 6. Encourage the use of fuel-efficient and low GHG-emitting vehicles and driver ,� � behaviors. a. Encourage private development to provide prioritized parking for hybrid, JL electric and carpool vehicles. b. Adopt and implement a policy requiring limitations on idling for commercial vehicles, construction vehicles, buses and other similar vehicles beyond state law, where feasible. 35 ��� 21 1ov;n of 'ib„ro nl ....rn'ale,!''�c t r f'f„n 3.3 Green Building, Energy Efficiency And Renewable Energy The two fundamental means for reducing emissions from Table 7: Section 3.3 Community Mitigation Measures electricity and natural gas use are decreasing consumption through efficiency and switching from fossil fuels to Measure GHG Reductions renewable sources. According to the U.S. Department of - - (Metric Tons) 3.3.C1 Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Residential Buildings 901 Energy, buildings account for approximately 39% of total 3.3.C2 Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Commercial Buildings 201 energy use,over 12% of the total water consumption, 68% 3.3.C3 Reduce Energy 11 Use in New 1.Residential Constr1.uction 82 of total electricity consumption, and 38% of all carbon 3.3.C4 Reduce Energy Use in New Commercial Construction 119 dioxide emissions annually in the United States. 3.3.C5 Install Solar Energy Systems in 20%of Existing Residential Buildings 1,273 3.3.C6 Install Solar Energy Systems in 15%of Existing Commercial Buildings 395 3.3.C7 10%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Deep Green Electricity 815 Increasing the efficiency Of buildings IS the most cost-effective 3.3.C8 70%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Light Green Electricity 5,133 approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Programs 3.3.C9 Offset Emissions for 5%of Natural Gas Use 751 ....1..1..1.1 ....... which require minimum energy efficiency upgrade for home TOTAL 9,669 remodeling,such as increasing insulation and sealing heating °Iaeedraraa5 Leuels 18;2��a ducts,have demonstrated energy savings of up to 20%. Table 8: Section 3.3 Government Operations Mitigation Measures New construction techniques and building materials,known NIEMEN= o.OEMs ® !m• i collectively as"green building,"can significantly reduce Costto Annul GHG Reductions Measure the use of resources and energyand creation of waste in Implement savings (Metric Tons) ..... ..... our homes and commercial buildings. Green construction 3.3.G1 Install Energy Efficiency Upgrades in Town Buildings $51,200 $4,200 8.2 methods can be integrated into buildings at any stage,from 3.3.G2 Install Solar Energy System on Town Hall Completed $6,900 9.0 design and construction to renovation and deconstruction. 3.3.G3 Install solar Energy system on Police Station $96,500 $3,200 4.1 3.3.G4 Upgrade Street Lighting to Energy-efficient $146,200 $6,600 12.2 Technologies(LED) As an amendment to the new CalGreen standards,Tiburon 3.3.G5 Purchase Energy-efficient Appliances $1,950 $200 0.3 requires residential additions of over 500 square feet and Purchase Marin clean Energy Deep Green 3.3.G6 Electricity for Government Facilities $2,800 n/a 61.7 non-residential building additions of over 3,000 square 3.3.G7 Offset Emissions from Natural Gas Use $150/year n/a 12.6 feet,to meet certain green building requirements that TOTAL 108.2 are more restrictive than CalGreen. In addition,the Town °/a Re, a etlftorft, 005€esreis,. 27.8°l requires new single-family houses with over 3,500 square feet of conditioned space to use no more energy than allowed for a 3,500 square foot home. 22 lovin of The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: 10. Adopt policies and incentives to encourage residents and businesses to install solar and renewable energy systems, including solar panels to generate electricity and 1. Adopt energy efficiency requirements for residential projects under 3,500 square feet. solar water heating systems, and to construct solar ready buildings. 2. Consider adopting standards similar to the Marin Green BERST model green 11. Complete energy efficiency upgrades to Town facilities as recommended by building ordinance. the Marin Energy Management Team. 3. Provide incentives to development projects that exceed adopted green building standards. 12. Replace street lights and parking lot lights with energy-efficient technologies, such as LED lighting. 4. Develop a town-wide green building promotional campaign. Educate Town staff and policy makers about best practices; provide checklists and specification guidelines 13. Install additional photovoltaic panels at Town facilities, if feasible. for contractors; post green building information on the Town's website. 14. Design new and remodeled public facilities to meet LEED Silver requirements, 5. Require energy efficiency audits for residences and businesses during major or its equivalent, and, at a minimum, to not require any additional energy use remodeling projects. over existing facilities. 6. Consider methods to inform property owners of recommended energy upgrades at 15. Prioritize purchases of products and services with superior environmental time of property sale, such as weather stripping doors and windows and stopping performance and purchase energy-efficient office equipment and appliances. air leaks. 16. Implement operational policies to reduce energy use and conserve resources, 7. Support efforts of PG&E and the Marin Energy Authority to maximize residential such as setting the printer's default option to duplex printing and shutting off and business subscription rates for energy efficiency programs and to promote computers and imaging equipment at night whenever feasible. conservation and renewable energy use. 17. Consider purchasing Marin Clean Energy Deep Green 100% renewable 8. Support efforts of Marin Clean Energy to increase the renewable content of the electricity for all Town operations. electricity provided to Tiburon residents and businesses. 18. Achieve further carbon reductions by purchasing carbon offsets or participating 9. If available, participate in a countywide or regional property assessment district in programs such as ClimateSmart, after maximizing GHG reductions through financing program to assist homeowners in funding installation of energy efficiency conservation, energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. upgrades and renewable energy systems. 23 3.4 Waste Reduction, Recycling and Zero Waste The JPA has embraced an aggressive goal for achieving zero waste based upon realizing 80% diversion of waste from disposal by 2012 and achieving zero waste by 2025. The reduction of waste,as well as the reuse and recycling of products,is key to reducing impacts on the environment. It is necessary to rethink what has traditionally been regarded as The JPA supports the collection and processing of green waste and food waste to create garbage and treat all materials as valued resources instead of items to discard. This requires electricity from methane gas.The waste is processed in anaerobic digesters for soil shifting consumption patterns,more carefully managing purchases,and maximizing the reuse amendments and the production of biogas.Biogas is the gas produced by anaerobic of materials at the end of their useful life. digestion of organic matter and consists of 60-80% methane(natural gas), 30-40%carbon dioxide,and other trace gases such as hydrogen sulfide,ammonia and hydrogen.The The Town of Tiburon is a member of the Marin Hazardous and Solid Waste Joint Powers predominance of methane means it can be used as a fuel source. Authority(JPA),which works with private waste haulers and facility operators to implement recycling programs and achieve state-mandated targets for waste diversion rates. Marin The JPA proposes that the member agencies endorse an Extended Producer Responsibility County has a high rate of diversion,with a current rate of about 72%. resolution and sign the California Product Stewardship Council pledge to shift California's product waste management system from one focused on government funded and ratepayer In 2009,the JPA completed a zero-waste feasibility study which concluded that between 75% financed waste diversion to one that relies on extended producer responsibility(EPR) and 80%of the material that goes to the landfill can be diverted.Currently the JPA is targeting the in order to reduce public costs and drive improvements in product design that promote diversion of food waste and demolished building materials to increase the county's diversion rate. environmental sustainability. Table 9:Section 3.4 Community Mitigation Measures Measure GHG Reductions (Metric Tons) 3.4.C1 Divert All Food Waste from Landfill 413 _. 3.4.C2 Reduce All Other Solid Waste Disposal to Landfills by 25% 456 TOTAL 869 °IA R'educed,f'rom 2005 L6�els 16%"": Table 10: Section 3.4 Government Operations Mitigation Measures Costto Annual GHG Reductions Measure Implement Savin s g (Metric Tons) 3.4.G1 Reduce Solid Waste Disposal to Landfill by 25% n/a n/a 9.6 %Reduced from 2005 Levels o , , . v.. . z s a 24 ic:-n of lib,r;n ,, n;;te`,ct:w Plan The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: 6 `f 1. Adopt a policy to achieve zero waste going to landfills. 2. Endorse an Extended Producer Responsibility resolution as proposed by the JPA. 3. Provide education and publicity about reducing waste and available recycling services. 4. Adopt local amendments to the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code to require 50% construction and demolition waste diversion for construction, y �\ demolition and renovation projects, as proposed in the JPA's model ordinance. a°sem 5. Adopt and enforce a multi-family dwelling and business recycling ordinance. 6. Review and revise the Town's franchise agreement with its waste hauler to ensure waste reduction and diversion rates are maximized. 7. Promote commercial and residential composting. e a. Partner with Master Gardeners, Marin Food Scrap Recycling Task Force, and others to provide education and resources to residents on backyard and ` ` z curbside composting. 1 b.Work with Mill Valley Refuse Service and Redwood Landfill to promote commercial and residential food waste collection in Tiburon and to create " centrally located facilities to compost all green and food waste and process it into biogas. 8. Strengthen recycling programs, purchasing policies, and employee education at Town facilities. 2t 1av,/n of .ib,a on „is-mate.",c on PI;n 3.5 Water and Wastewater comply with CALGreen,the State's new Green Building code.The new CALGreen code requires every new building to reduce indoor and outdoor water use by 20%. MMWD has Water demand in California is increasing because of population expansion. In also adopted water-efficient landscaping requirements that apply to all newly constructed addition, demand for water for irrigation rises with warmer temperatures.The and rehabilitated developer-installed residential landscapes of 1,000 square feet or actual impacts of the climate-induced change in water quality, quantity and greater,as well as homeowner residential projects of 2,500 square feet or greater. demand will depend on the changes in water policy and operations, and on the water use patterns of all communities. In 2007, MMWD adopted a Water Conservation Plan intended to reduce water usage by approximately 9% by 2020. At the end of fiscal year 2009-2010, water usage The Marin Municipal Water District(MMWD) supplies clean drinking water to a 147 had fallen 8.7% below 2005 levels. Additional water conservation measures could square-mile area of south and central Marin. MMWD's water comes from three main further reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Tiburon.The most effective way to sources: local reservoirs, the Russian River in Sonoma County and recycled water. reduce emissions from water use is by reducing hot water use, as an estimated 35% of energy used in homes is for water heating. Tiburon falls within MMWD's jurisdiction and all properties in Tiburon are subject to the agency's water conservation regulations.The water conservation requirements, particularly irrigation efficiency, are fairly complex, and the Town relies on MMWD to provide technical review and oversight on water conservation and direction in regard to drought-tolerant landscaping. In December 2010, MMWD updated their regulations to Table 11: Section 3.5 Community Mitigation Measure Measure GHG Reductions (Metric Tons) 3.5.C1 Reduce Hot Water Use in Community by 15% 679 'Reduced from 20051 euels: fo R 26 lovvri of "ibur,n ; m ate;'ct o€ Plan The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: 1. Assess, maintain and repair existing plumbing fixtures, pipes, and irrigation Figure 9: Energy Used in California Homes (2005) systems in all Town buildings and facilities to minimize water use, including Refrigerators Air Conditioning landscaping, public rest rooms and parks, and other recreational facilities. As 5% 4% feasible, upgrade and retrofit agency plumbing and irrigation systems with state- of-the-art water conserving technology. 2. Encourage the use of plants which are native to northern California and Marin County, and the use of drought-tolerant plant material. Water Heating 35% Other Appliances and Lighting 3. Minimize turf areas and avoid narrow turf areas, such as in parking strips. 36% Encourage homeowners to avoid turf and replace existing turf areas. 'P3 4. Consider water heater upgrade incentives. , r 5. Conduct water audits on remodels and new homes. 6. Adopt a retrofit program to encourage or require installation of water conservation measures in existing businesses and homes. Space Heating 21% 7. Provide education about water conservation and available programs and incentives. 8. Allow for the use of grey water for irrigation and other suitable uses to decrease the amount of potable water need by the community. 9. Work cooperatively with MMWD to enforce water conservation requirements and participate in water conservation outreach programs. 27 Tov n of.,.ib!ron CIMlate;,r, on Plam 3.6 State Actions The following are state reduction strategies included in Table 12:Section 3.6 Community Mitigation Measures the AB 32 Scoping Plan and accounted for in the Town's 'i��J'1�I" adjustment of the business as usual forecast.To clarify, 3.6.C1 PG&E Achieves 33%Renewable Portfolio Standard by 2020 778 the State of California has approved, programmed, . _ 3.6.C2 AB 1493 Pavley Standards 1,824 _._— _ and/or adopted these actions. Furthermore,they are 3.6.C3 Low Carbon Fuel Standard 1,668 ......_.. ......... _ programs or projects that require no local involvement, TOTAL 4,266 771 Incorporating them into the forecast and reduction "la Reducedfram2flD5 Levels „ 8:O Io o assessment provides a more accurate picture of future emissions growth and the responsibility for action. Table 13: Section 3.6 Government Operations Mitigation Measures Low Carbon Fuel Standard 3.6.G1 AB 1493 Pavley Standards 15.0 .... ......... __. _ ... The State is proposing to reduce the carbon intensity of 3.6.G2 ! Low Carbon Fuel Standard 13.7 transportation fuels consumed in California.To achieve this, TOTAL 28.7 IQ Reduced CARB is developing a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), from2005 Lein Is.. .. .. . .,. :.... Ia 7.4 which would reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020 and 20% by 2035 as called for by Governor Schwarzenegger in Executive Order S 01 07. -CFS will incorporate compliance mechanisms that provide flexibility to fuel providers in how they meet the requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.CARB estimates the Low Carbon Fuel Standard will reduce California's projected 2020 transportation emissions by 6.7%. 1ovm of Tiburon Climate 1ct rn Plan Pavley(AB 1493) Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley), signed into law in 2002,will require carmakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions " from new passenger cars and light trucks beginning " in 2011.The California Air Resources Board adopted regulations in September 2004 that create two phases y of increasingly stringent standards for car manufacturersr '. between 2009 and 2020.The first phase, which has already been adopted, is expected to reduce California's projected 2020 transportation emissions by 7%. Renewable Portfolio Standard(RPS) Established in 2002 in Senate Bill 1078, the RPS program requires electricity providers to increase the portion of energy that comes from renewable sources to 20% by 2010 and to 33% by 2020. CARE estimates the RPS will reduce California's emissions from electricity use by 15.3% in 2020. 29 Tovvii o` `ib,rori C?s;rrae �cftn Pian 3.6 Adaptation 4. Coordinate development of private erosion and flood control measures with neighboring properties to avoid unintended off-site impacts. As the climate changes, so must Tiburon.To effectively address the challenges that a changing climate will bring,the Town must not only reduce its greenhouse gas 5. Encourage Federal, State and local agencies to be pro-active and supportive of emissions, but be prepared to respond to the expected impacts of climate change. efforts to combat the expected rise in sea levels. Many of the mitigation measures incorporated in this Climate Action Plan will help the community prepare for the effects of climate change. Reducing water use will 6. Coordinate internally and with water districts,wildlife agencies, flood control and fire ease competition for limited water supplies expected from higher temperatures and districts, Marin County,and other relevant organizations.Address human health and reduced snowmelt,while reducing electricity use will help ease demand for diminishing safety risks and the adaptability of natural systems, including the following: hydroelectric power. Other expected effects from climate change—such as a higher a.Water resources including expanded rainwater harvesting, water storage and frequency of large damaging fires and pest and insect epidemics—must be anticipated conservation techniques, water reuse, and water use and/or irrigation efficiency, through adequate public safety, emergency, and public health responses. b. Biological resources including land acquisition,creation of marshlands/wetlands as a buffer against sea level rise and flooding, and protection of existing natural barriers. Coastal communities like Tiburon will be especially challenged by rising sea levels. c. Public health including heat related health plans, vector control, safe water, and Existing development in inundation areas will need to be adequately protected improved sanitation. from flooding and erosion due to climate change. The most practical approach for d. Environmental hazards including seawalls, storm surge barriers, and fire protection. minimizing the effects from the adverse effect of sea level rise and storm activities is to carefully consider new development within areas vulnerable to inundation and erosion. The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: 1. Incorporate the likelihood of climate change impacts into Town emergency planning and training. 2. Partner with neighboring municipalities and regional agencies to develop and � � implement regional adaptation programs. 3. Partner with neighboring municipalities and regional agencies to prepare for and mitigate coastal inundation and cliffside erosion as a result of sea level rise. 3 1i,Wn of'ibison :,.m,te:;ct 4. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Tiburon recognizes that responding to and preparing for climate change is a critical step 4. Identify funding sources for recommended actions, and pursue local, regional, toward a sustainable future.The Town's early actions to reduce its contribution to climate state and federal grants as appropriate. change reflect the Town's history and commitment to decrease the impacts of day-to-day activities on the natural environment while enhancing its vibrant quality of life. Mitigating 5. Review and update the Climate Action Plan every five years. climate change will require everyone—residents, businesses,government agencies and nonprofit organizations—to work together to implement this plan. 6. Amend the Climate Action Plan as necessary to comply with state regulations. This plan provides a strategy to achieve emission reductions that will achieve the f, j Town's target of 15% below 2005 emissions by the year 2020. A wide range of programs that exceed the Town's reduction goal have been included to allow for the evaluation and prioritization of potential programs and capital improvement projects t as new program and funding opportunities arise. Successful implementation of the plan will require staff and the Town Council to identify and commit resources to climate change mitigation activities, and to monitor and report on progress towards meeting emissions reduction goals. The Town will consider the following list of recommended actions: r '7 1. Monitor and report on the Town's progress bi-annually. 2. Update the baseline greenhouse gas emissions inventory every five years. 3. Continue and expand public and private partnerships that support implementation of the Climate Action Plan, including membership in the Marin Climate and Energy Partnership. 31 iov,,n of . bi,.on .,..m:ate;"'c, an APPENDIX A Data Sources,Assumptions and Calculations 3.2 Land Use and Transportation All 2005 greenhouse gas emissions data for community and government operations are from the Measure 3.2.C1: Encourage Workforce Housing and Transit-oriented Development Town of Tiburon 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory,with emission factors as follows: Number of new housing units projected,2005-2020 60 l Emission Source GHG Emission Emission Factor Source j Factor Number of new housing units in workforce and TOD projected,2005-2020 30 The certifiedCO2emissionfactorfordeliveredelectricityispubliclyavailableat Vehicle miles traveled(VMT)on local roads,projected 2020 15,301,126 VMT CO. 0.489155 lbs/kWh h tp//www.climateregistry.org/CarrotDocs/19/2005/2005_PUP Report_V2_ PG&E Electricity j Number of households,projected 2020 3,820 Rev1 PGE_rev2_Dec 1.XIs 1 Local VMT per household,projected 2020 4,006 VMT i COZe 0.4928591bs/kWh PG&E 20%reduction in local VMT for transit-oriented units 24,033VMT CO 343.3 short tans/GWh'I Default Direct ICLEI/TellusInstitute(2005Region13-Western Systems Coordinating Council/ ! Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 13 metric tons CH a 0.035 short tons/GW h Access Electricity CNVAverage Grid Electricity Coefficients) — - N20 0.027 short tons/GWh PG&E/CCAR.Emission factors are derived from:California Energy Commission, Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:1990-1999(No- 1 COr 53.05kg/MMBm vember 20021;and Energy Information Administration,Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 200012001),Table 81,page 140. Natural Gas CCAR.Emission factors are derived from:U.S.EPA,"Inventory of U.S.Green- CH 0.0059 kg/MMeru house Gas Emissions and Sinks:1990-2000"(2002),Table C-2,page C-2.EPA N20 0.001 kg/MMbtu obtained original emission factors from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,Revised IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories:Refer- ence Manual(1996),Tables 1-15 through 1-19,pages 1.53-1.57. Avoided emissions are calculated using 2005 emission factors for comparative purposes. Population and household estimates and projections are from the Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projections and Priorities 2009: Building Momentum,"August 2009. Tmi%,1 of `ibu,.,, .,,.rn.te i ca rt Plrr,n Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Household projections from the Association of Bay Area Governments, "Projections and Priorities 2009: Building Momentum,"August 2009. Number of new transit-oriented housing units provided by Town of Tiburon Planning Department. Local roads Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMT) 2005 Data: Harold Brazil,Air Quality Associate, Metropolitan Transportation Commission(MTC), as reported in the Town of Tiburon 2005 Greenhouse Gas Inventory. Projected VMT based on Travel Forecasts Data Summary:Transportation 2035 Plan for the San Francisco Bay, Metro- politan Transportation Commission, December 2008.Transportation greenhouse gas emissions are based on emission factors as reported in the Town of Tiburon 2005 Greenhouse Gas Inventory as follows: Emission Factors: Provided by the BAAQMD, using EMFAC 2007 CO2 Rates j CH4 Rates N20 Rates CO2 Rates- j Fuel Efficiency (grams/mile) (grams/mile) (grams/mile) WIT Mix (grams/gallon) Fuel Usage (miles/gallon) i I Area Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel I Marin County 476 1,426 0.065 0.03 j 0.07 0.05 95.50% 4.50% 8,628 9,957 89.20% 10.80% 18.1 7 BAAQMD Average 463 1,389 0.063 0.03 0.07 0.05 94.90% 5.10% 8,607 10,091 87.80% 12.20% 18.6 7.3 Measure 3.2.C2: Increase Walking and Biking for Local Trips Average daily walking and bicycling for utilitarian purposes per adult in Marin 0.67 miles Estimated annual walking and biking miles traveled in Tiburon,year 2005 2,152,040 miles Increase walking and biking miles traveled by 50% by 2020 1,076,020 miles Estimated reduction in GHG emissions(metric tons) 524 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Average daily walking and bicycling data: Federal Highway Administration, "Interim Report to the U.S. Congress on the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program SAFETEA-LU Section 1807," November 2007.According to this survey data, 11.8%of utilitarian trips in 2007 were made by walking and 1.8% by bicycle,for a total mode share of 13.6%. Estimated annual walking and biking miles in Tiburon assumes same mileage for children,which were not surveyed due to privacy concerns. Measure 3.2.C3: Increase Public Transit Use Average daily transit miles per adult in Marin 1.37 miles Estimated transit miles traveled in Tiburon,year 2005 4,400,440 miles Increase transit miles traveled by 50% by 2020 1,100,110 miles Estimated reduction in GHG emissions(metric tons) 535 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Average daily transit data: Federal Highway Administration, "Interim Report to the U.S.Congress on the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program SAFETEA-LU Section 1807,"November 2007.According to this survey data,3.2%of trips in 2007 were made using public transit. Estimated transit miles traveled in Tiburon assumes same mileage for children,which were not surveyed due to privacy concerns. ,-(. lijtits 1 Of Iib, r, "..rmate�'tC.O i PI2n Measure 3.2.C4: Increase Ridesharing Projected vehicle miles traveled in Tiburon,year 2020 15,301,126 miles Ridesharing as a percentage of vehicle miles traveled, year 2007 1.7% Increase ridesharing miles traveled by 50% by 2020 130,060 miles Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 63 metric to Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Rideshare data: Federal Highway Administration, "Interim Report to the U.S. Congress on the Nonmotorized Trans- portation Pilot Program SAFETEA-LU Section 1807," November 2007. Measure 3.2.C5:Accelerate Adoption of Electric Vehicles Projected transportation GHG emissions from local road VMT in 2020 8,293 metric tons 2%of emissions displaced by electric vehicles 166 Electric vehicle VMT,year 2020 306,023 Electric vehicle electricity use 76,506 kWh Electric vehicle emissions from electricity use 17 metric;onsEstimated reduction in GHG emissions 149 metricns Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes electric vehicle energy efficiency of 4 miles per kWh, a generally accepted estimate. The 2011 Nissan Leaf,for example, is advertised to have a range of up to 100 miles on full battery charge of 24 kWh,which equates to approximately 4 miles per kWh. This measure counts transportation emissions reductions Tiburon could achieve by increasing the percentage of EVs in the community fleet 2%over State projections. For a discussion of the electric vehicle market and forecasts, see "Plugged in 2," Deutsche Bank, November 3, 2009, http://www. fullermoney.com/content/2009-11-03/ElectricCarsPluggedln2.pdf.This report projects U.S. market shares in 2020 of 12%for hybrid electric vehicles, 7%for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and 4%for electric vehicles. Measure 3.2.G1: Replace Town Vehicles with Hybrid or Electric Vehicles i New kWh Use Fuel Cost Vehicle VMT GHG Emissions Replacement GHG Emissions for EV Savings GHG Reduction 1999 Chevy Tahoe 5,043 3.03 2009 Ford Escape Hybrid 1.41 $625 1.61 2000 Ford Ranger 5,696 2.85 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid 1.22 $633 1.63 2002 Nissan Maxima 4,599 2.07 Electric Vehicle Proposed 0.26 1,150 ( $624 1.81 2001 Nissan Altima 2,600 1.10 Electric Vehicle Proposed 0.14 650 $331 0.96 TOTAL 17,938 9.05 3.04 1,800 $2,214 6.01 Data Source Notes and Assumptions: VMT data from Town of Tiburon 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory background data reports.Assumes elec- tric vehicle energy efficiency of 4 miles per kWh. Fuel cost savings assume an average price per gallon for gasoline of$3.50 and a per kWh cost of$0.157. ^` 3 Tev,m of��bu. n ,,..rr;:aec =i,:,n Measure 3.2.G2:Town Employees Commute by Alternative Means of Transportation 3.3 Green Building, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Employee commute GHG,year 2005 110.0 metric tons 10% reduction 11 metric tons Measure 3.3.C1: Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Residential Buildings Number of occupied households,year 2005 3,760 Measure 3.2.G3: Replace Police Patrol Cars with More Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Electricity use in residential sector,year 2005 32,005,155 kWh; Patrol car VMT,year 2005 164,486 VMT GHG emissions from residential sector,year 2005 22,515 metric tons Patrol car fuel(estimated),year 2005 7,477 gallons Expected energy efficiency achieved ZO% Patrol car GHG emissions,year 2005 67 metric tons Potential energy efficiency upgrade penetration 20% Projected fuel reduction,year 2020 1,725 gallons Number of housing units improved 752', Projected fuel savings,year 2020 $6,039 Estimated reduction in electricity use 1,280,206 kWh j Projected GHG emissions reduction,2020 15.2 metric tons Estimated GHG reduction in electricity use 300 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Assumes fuel-efficient patrol cars will be available,such as Total estimated GHG reduction 901 metric tons vehicles currently in development by Carbon Motors. As advertised,these have an ultra low-sulfur, "clean" diesel engine and fuel system that will improve fuel efficiency by up to 40%. Existing police Measure 3.3.C2: Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Commercial Buildings patrol fleet in 2005 had an average fuel economy of 22 mpg according to the 2005 Tiburon Green- GHG emissions from commercial sector,year 2005 5,036 metric tons house Gas Inventory, The Carbon Motors vehicle will have a combined city/highway fuel economy Electricity use in commercial sector,year 2005 12,596,041 kWh of 28-30 mpg.This estimate assumes a 30% improvement over 2005 patrol fleet fuel economy. Projected fuel savings assumes an average fuel cost of$3.50 per gallon. Expected energy efficiency achieved 20% Potential energy efficiency upgrade penetration 20% Measure 3.2.G4: Offset Emissions from Town Vehicles Estimated reduction in electricity use 503,842 kWh' Projected Town vehicle emissions in 2020 128.25 metric tons Estimated GHG reduction in electricity use 124 metric tons Emissions offset through other measures 36.12 metric tons Total estimated GHG reduction 201 metric tons Remaining GHG emissions to offset 92.1 metric tons Annual cost to offset vehicle emissions $1,209 Measure 3.3.C3: Reduce Energy Use in New Residential Construction Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes participation in TerraPass program at 2010 cost of Projected number of new homes(including teardown and rebuilds),2005-2020 1 80 $5.95 per 1,000 lbs.TerraPass is a private company that sells carbon offsets to balance vehicle Average residential electricity use per household,2005(I<Wh) 8,512 I<Wh emissions.TerraPass funds three different types of carbon reduction projects: clean energy Average residential GHG emissions per household,20051metric tons) 6.0 metric tons produced by wind power; landfill gas capture,and methane reduction projects at farms. TerraPass 15%reduction in electricity use due to CA 2008 Building Efficiency Standards offsets are verified annually against broadly accepted standards by independent third party verifiers. 2010-2020 68,096 kWh Their primary standards are the latest version of the Voluntary Carbon Standard(issued in 2008) and the Climate Action Reserve. Additional 15%reduction from Marin Green BERST Standards 2010-2020 % 68,096 kWh Estimated reduction in electricity use(kWh) 136,192 kWh 15%reduction in energy use due to CA 2008 Building Efficiency Standards 2010-2020 48 metric tons Additional 15%reduction from Marin Green BERST Standards 2010-2020 48 metric tons_ ------ ------- --- Estimated GHG reduction(metric tons) 96 metric tons I;v,, of .ib;r;;n .,.rr;.<telCc :O flan Data Source Notes and Assumptions:According to the CEC,the 2008 Building Efficiency Standards, Measure 3.3.C5: Install Solar Energy Systems in 20% of Existing Residential Buildings which took effect on January 1, 2010,require,on average,a 15%increase in energy efficiency Annual electricity use in residential sector,year 2005 32,005,155 kWh' savings compared with the 2005 Building Efficiency Standards. California Energy Commission, 2009 Integrated Energy Policy Report,Final Commission Report, December 2009,CEC-100-2009-003 GHG emissions from residential electricity use,year 2005 7,489 metric tons CMF,p.5.Marin Green BERST recommends an additional reduction from existing Title 24 Part 6 Number of households in 2005 3,790 energy budget requirements for new single and two-family residential construction as follows:500- ! Average annual residential energy use T 8,512 kWh 3,999 sq.ft., 15%;4,000—5,499 sq.ft.,20%;5,500—6,999 sq.ft., 30%;over 7,000 sq.ft., net % potential solar energy of total electricity use 85% zero energy. The Marin Green BERST recommendation for new multi-family buildings is 15%below Potential solar system penetration 20%1 Title 24 energy budget requirements. This analysis assumes an average 15%across all residential Potential number of homes 7521 building types.Every 1%increase over Title 24 requirements is assumed to result in a 0.2%decrease ; Estimated electricity saved 5,440,876 kWh in electricity use and a 1%decrease in natural gas use. Estimated GHG reduction 1,273 metric to Measure 3.3.C4: Reduce Energy Use in New Commercial Construction Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Number of Tiburon households in 2005 is based on estimates Projected increase in GHG emissions in commercial sector 2005-2020 934 metric tons provided by the Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG)Projections 2009.As of 10/6/10, Projected increase in electricity use in commercial sector 2005-2020 2,337,001 kWh Tiburon has 127 installed solar energy systems and a total capacity of 684 kW or approximately 15%reduction in electricity use due to CA 2008 Building Efficiency Standards, 5.4 kW per system,the majority of which are residential systems(Marin Energy Management Team and California Solar Initiative data).This number represents approximately 3%of the existing 3,790 year 2010-2020 233,700 kWh single family homes in Tiburon. Solar installation in Tiburon has occurred at a much greater rate than Additional 10% reduction from Marin Green BERST Standards 2010-2020 155,800 kWh California(0.4%)and Marin County(1.1%). Estimated reduction in electricity use 389,500 kWh Measure 3.3.C6:Install Solar Energy Systems in 15%of Existing Commercial Buildings 15%reduction in energy use due to CA 2008 Building Efficiency Standards, Annual electricity use in commercial sector in 2005 12,596,041 kWh years 2010-2020 93 metric tons GHG emissions from commercial electricity use in 2005 3,099 metric tons Additional 10%reduction from Marin Green BERST Standards 2010-2020 62 metric tons % potential solar energy of total electricity use 85% Estimated GHG reduction 156 metric tons - Potential solar system penetration 15% Data Source Notes and Assumptions:According to the CEC,the 2008 Building Efficiency Standards, Estimated electricity saved 1,605,995 kWh which took effect on January 1,2010,require,on average,a 15 percent increase in energy efficiency Estimated GHG reduction 395 metric tons savings compared with the 2005 Building Efficiency Standards.California Energy Commission,2009 Integrated Energy Policy Report,Final Commission Report,December 2009,CEC-100-2009-003-CMF, p.5.Marin Green BERST recommends an additional 15%reduction from existing Title 24 Part 6 energy budget requirements for new commercial construction over 5,000 sq.ft. This analysis assumes an av- erage 10%reduction across all commercial building sizes.Every 1%increase over Title 24 requirements is assumed to result in a 0.2%decrease in electricity use and a 1%decrease in natural gas use. A-5 login at . br;n ,',?:mate Fit;n Measure 3.3.C7: 10%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Deep Green Electricity Measure 3.3.C9:Offset Emissions for Natural Gas Use Projected electricity use in 2020 48,392,977 kWh', �5% jected residential natural gas usage,year 2020 2,937,076 therms Less direct access electricity 1,725,202 kWh natural gas usage reduced through offsets 146,854 therms Electricity use reduced by other measures 10,300,510 kWh' 'I GHG emissions offset 751 metric tons Electricity use added back for electric vehicles 76,506 kWh Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes participation in PG&E's ClimateSmart program at Remaining electricity use 36,443,770 kWh 2009 costs of$0.06528 per therm. PG&E's ClimateSmart program allows customers to balance out P p g Projected Deep Green Electricity Use in 2020 10% the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their own natural gas and electricity use. Under the Projected Deep Green kWh in 2020 3,644,377 kWh program,customers who participate are charged an extra$0.06528 per therm of natural gas,which ns is the volumetric rate set by the California Public Utilities Commission to make the GHG emissions GHG emissions reductions 815 metric to1, associated with their home or business energy use"carbon neutral." The revenues from the program Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes 10%of all ratepayers will purchase deep green, 100% are used solely to invest in new GHG emission reduction projects in California, including forestry,dairy, renewable energy in 2020. As of December 2010, Marin Energy Authority had enrolled approximately and landfill methane capture that reduce or absorb GHGs such as carbon dioxide and methane.All 4%of its Phase I customer prospects throughout Marin in the deep green option. of the GHG emission reduction projects are selected through a competitive solicitation with clear and stringent criteria and are independently verified under the rigorous protocols developed by the Climate Measure 3.3.C8:70%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Light Green Electricity Action Reserve(CAR),the successor organization to the California Climate Action Registry,to ensure Projected electricity use in year 2020 48,392,977 kWh the projects meet the commitment to make participating customers carbon neutral. Less direct access electricity 1,725,202 kWh Electricity use reduced by other measures j 10,300,510 kWh j Electricity use added back for electric vehicles 76,506 kWh; Remaining electricity use 36,443,770 kWh' Projected Light Green electricity use 25,510,639 kWh GHG emissions reduction 5,133 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes 70%of all PG&E ratepayers will purchase light green energy in 2020,and light green will be 90%renewable by 2020,as per Marin Energy Authority's projections. As of December 2010, Marin Energy Authority had enrolled approximately 76%of its Phase I customer prospects throughout Marin in the light green option. ', `ri loran of 1ibulon Achon Plan Measure 3.3.G1: Install Energy Efficiency Upgrades in Town Buildings Reduction in Reduction in Annual Reduction in Annual Electricity Natural Gas Estimated Project Annual Energy GHG emissions Energy-Efficiency Project Use (kWh) Use (therms) Cost Cost Savings (metric tons) Install energy-efficient lighting in Town Hall 1,939 0 $1,470 $304 0.43 Install energy-efficient lighting in Police Station 68 0 $270 $11 0.02 Install energy-efficient lighting in Corp Yard 5,247 0 $1,734 $824 1.17 Replace split gas heat condensers in Police Station 2,216 450 $34,083 $419 2.90 Replace heat pumps in Police Station 14,717 0 $13,500 $2,310 3.29 Install vending machine controller 1,402 0 $130 $220 0.31 Install window film or shade screens in Town Hall 624 (20) n/a $75 0.03 TOTAL 26,213 431 $51,187 $4,163 8.16 Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Proposed energy-efficiency projects, estimated project costs net of rebates,and estimated energy savings based on Energy Management Study for the Town of Tiburon prepared by the Marin Energy Management Team on December 9,2010. Measure 3.3.G2: Install Solar Energy System at Town Hall Reduction in GHG System SizeAnnual kWh Annual kWh Annual Cost Emissions Facility KW AC Produced Produced ProjectI Savings (metric tons) Town Hall 12.23 40,416 3,749 Completed .0$6,933 9 9.0 Data Source Notes and Assumptions: PV system data provided by Tiburon Planning Department. Annual electricity cost savings are based on an average of summer and winter rates of.17115 per kWh from PG&E's A-1 Electric Rate Schedule, effective June 1, 2010. Measure 3.3.G3: Install Solar Energy System at Police Station Reduction in GHG System Size Annual kWh Annual kWh Annual Cost Emissions j Facility KW AC Produced Produced Project Cost Savings (metric tons) j Town Hall 11.0 18,557 3,749 $96,470 $3,183 4.2 Data Source Notes and Assumptions: PV system data provided by Tiburon Police Department. Annual electricity cost savings are based on an average of summer and winter rates of.17115 per kWh from PG&E's A-1 Electric Rate Schedule, effective June 1, 2010. Town of °ibur,on „i m)te Act'on Plan Measure 3.3.G4: Upgrade Street Lighting to Energy-Efficient Technologies: LED Retrofit Annual GHG Annual GHG Reduction iReduction, GHG I Energy Emissions Potential Energy Emissions in Annual in Annual Emissions Use Annual (metric Replacement Use Annual (metric Replacement Energy Use Operating Reduction Lamp Type Quantity (kWh) Cost tons) Lamp* (kWh) Cost tons) Cost (kWh) Cost [metric tons) HPS 50w 8 2,016 $246 0.45 LED 30w 902 $110 0.20 $3,960 1,114 $137 0.25 HPS 70w 223 77,604 $9,446 17.35 LED 42w 38,802 $4,723 8.67 $112,615 38,802 $4,723 8.67 HPS 100w 10 4,920 $599 1.10 LED 60w 2,352 $286 0.53 $5,610 2,568 $313 0.57 HPS 150w 33 23,760 $2,892 5.31 LED 99w 13,187 $1,605 2.95 $21,978 10,573 $1,287 2.36 HPS 200w 3 2,880 $351 0.64 LED 117w 1,444 $176 0.32 $2,028 1,436 $175 0.32 TOTAL 277 111,180 $13,534 24.86 56,687 $6,900 12.67 $146,191 54,493 $6,634 12.18 Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Potential replacement lamps and estimated installation costs provided by Republic ITS for illustrative purposes only;actual replacement lamps will require further analysis. Costs assume that all fixtures are 120 volts and all fixtures are cobra heads,since material pricing and wattages vary based on the style of the fixture.Annual energy usage and costs provided by Marin Energy Management Team, Energy Management Study for the Town of Tiburon, December 9, 2010. Measure 3.3.135: Purchase Energy-efficient Appliances I Estimated Annual Reduction in GHG Estimated Energy Saving Per Annual Energy Annual Energy Emissions Equipment Quantity Installation Cost Unit(kWh) Savings(kWh) Cost Savings (metric tons) Refrigerators 3 $1,950 405 1,214 $209 0.27 Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Recommended appliance upgrade, installation cost, and annual energy usage and cost savings provided by Marin Energy Management Team, Energy Management Study for the Town of Tiburon, December 9, 2010. Measure 3.3.G6: Purchase Marin Clean Energy Deep Green Electricity for Government Facilities Projected electricity use in year 2020 415,160 kWh Electricity use reduced by other measures 140,893 kWh Electricity use added back for electric vehicles I 1,800 kWh Deep Green electricity purchase 276,067 kWh Annual Deep Green electricity cost $2,761 GHG emissions reduction 61.7 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Assumes 2010 deep green electricity cost of$0.01 per kWh. 8 1otrm of `ibi ron ..,..rn,te Ac o t Pi: Measure 3.3.G7:Offset Emissions from Natural Gas Use Government Operations Goal 3.4.G2:Switch to 30%Recycled Paper Projected natural gas usage,year 2020 2,734 therms Methane Emissions Natural gas usage reduced through other measures 429 therms CACP CIWMB % of Total (metric tons/ Remaining natural gas usage to be offset2,305 therms short ton of waste) Annual cost to offset natural gas j $150 Paper Products All a er t es 21 1.940 GHG emissions to be offset 12.6 metric tons Food Waste Food 14.6 1.098 Leaves and Grass, Prunings and Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Assumes participation in PG&E's ClimateSmart program at Plant Debris Trimmings, Branches and Stumps, 6.9 0.622 2009 costs of$0.06528 per therm. PG&E's ClimateSmart program allows customers to balance out Agricultural Crop Residues,and Manures j the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their own natural gas and electricity use. Under the program,customers who participate are charged an extra$0.06528 per therm of natural gas,which Textiles, Remainder/Composite is the volumetric rate set by the California Public Utilities Commission to make the GHG emissions Wood/Textiles Organics, Lumber, and Bulky Items 19.8 0.549 associated with their home or business energy use"carbon neutral." The revenues from the program are used solely to invest in new GHG emission reduction projects in California,including forestry,dairy, The other category includes all and landfill methane capture that reduce or absorb GHGs such as carbon dioxide and methane.All inorganic material types reported: of the GHG emission reduction projects are selected through a competitive solicitation with clear and All Other Waste Glass, Metal, Electronics, Plastics, 37.7 0.000 stringent criteria and are independently verified under the rigorous protocols developed by the Climate Non-organic C&D, and Special/ Action Reserve(CAR),the successor organization to the California Climate Action Registry,to ensure Hazardous Waste. the projects meet the commitment to make participating customers carbon neutral. The 75% methane recovery factor is derived from the Local Government Operations Protocol,Chapter 9.The methane emission factors used in ICLEI's CACP Software were derived from the EPA WARM 3.4 Waste Reduction, Recycling and Zero Waste model.For quantification of emissions,only methane generation(or gross Tiburon emissions)is taken into account.These emissions are estimated to take place over an extensive(up to 100 year)cycle, Measure 3.4.C1: Divert All Food Waste from Landfill as anaerobically degradable organic carbon decomposes in a landfill. More information on the WARM - ---- - - --- -- —---- --------- ---- — ----- Model is available at:http://epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/calculators/Warm_home.html Projected waste in 2020 9,081 tons Food waste in year 2020 1,503 tons Measure 3.4.C2: Reduce All Other Solid Waste Disposal to Landfills by 25% GHG emissions reduced 413 metric tons r i Projected waste in year 2020 9,081 tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions: ; Food waste diverted _ 1,503 tons Estimated food waste based on the CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study. This 1 Remaining landfilled waste in year 2020 7,577 tons state average waste characterization accounts for residential,commercial and self-haul waste. http:// GHG emissions from remaining waste 1,822 metric tons www,ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097 25% reduction in remaining waste 456 metric tons'. A-9 Tot-,m of Tiburon Ci.mate;coon Plan Measure 3.4.G1: Reduce Solid Waste Disposal to Landfill by 25% Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Per capita water use in Marin Municipal Water District FY Projected waste in 2020 151.2 tons 2005/2006 was 139 gallons per day,MMWD Report on Water Production and Related Statistics, GHG emissions from waste in 2020 38.4 metric tons June 30,2008, p.12. Indoor water use assumed to be 67%of total water use(Dan Carney, MMWD) and hot water use 30%of indoor water use(EBMUD Indoor Water Conservation Study(p.31),2003; 25% reduction in GHG emissions 9.6 metric tons see http://www.ebmud.com/about_ebmud/publications/technical_reports/residential_indoor_wc_ Data Source Notes and Assumptions:Waste Characterization based on California Integrated Waste study.pdf). Analysis assumes 0.0098 therms to heat one gallon of water,0.19 kWh to heat one gallon Management Board(CIWMB),derived specifically for the"Public Administration"sector,using the of water,and 58%of hot water heaters use natural gas(ICLEI CAPPA Beta). Business Waste Characterization portion of the CIWMB 1999 Statewide Waste Characterization Study: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/WasteChar/BizGrpCp.asp 3.6 State Actions CACP CIWMB Percent of Total Measure 3.6.C1: PG&E Achieves 33% Renewable Portfolio Standard by 2020 Paper Products All paper types 39.4 Projected community electricity use in year 2020 48,392,97�kW Food Waste Food 9.8 Less direct access electricity 1,725,20 Leaves and Grass, Prunings and Trimmings, Branches Electricity use reduced from other measures 39,455,527 kWh Plant Debris and Stumps, Remainder/Composite Organic 17 Electricity use added back for electric vehicles 76,506 kWh Remaining electricity usage 7,288,754 kWh Textiles(Under"Other Organic"'j, Lumber(Under"Con GHG emissions with year 2005 PG&E emission factor 1,629 metric tons Wood/Textiles struction and Demolition"), Remainder/Composite 6.7 ----- - -- ---- ---- GHG emissions with projected year 2020 PG&E emission factor 852 metric tons Construction and Demolition ---- ------ -- — --- --- - - Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 778 metric tons 1, The other category includes all inorganic material Data Source Notes and Assumptions: Projected 2020 PG&E CO e emission factor of 0.25763 is All Other Waste types reported: Glass, Metal, Electronics, Plastics, 27.1 based on PG&E's 2005 electric power mix as follows: 12%from renewable sources;20%from large Non-organic C&D, and Special/Hazardous Waste. hydro;24%from nuclear;42%from natural gas; 1%from coal;and I%from other GHG-emitting sources.Analysis assumes additional 21%renewable energy will displace GHG-emitting sources in the electric power mix. Many variables will affect the actual 2020 emission factor, including the 3.5 Water and Wastewater availability of large hydro and nuclear electricity sources,and the GHG reduction potential calculated here assumes conditions will be similar to 2005. Measure 3.5.C1: Reduce Water Use in Community by 15% Per capita water use per day, FY 05/06 139 gallons Water use in year 2005 446,468,000 gallons Projected water use in year 2020 466,762,000 gallons Indoor, hot water use 93,819,162 gallons 15% reduction in hot water use 14,072,874 gallons Reduction in natural gas use 79,990 therms Reduction in electricity use 1,123,015 kWh Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 679 metric tons °. 10 f rm of `ibur-on :':mate Ac!o•: Pl„-n Measure 3.6.C2:AB 1493 Pavley Standards Measure 3.6.G3: Low Carbon Fuel Standard California transportation emissions,year 2020 225.4 MMTCO2e California transportation emissions,year 2020 225.4 MMTCO2e Expected reduction in emissions under phase one 16.4 MMTCOze Expected reduction in emissions 15 MMTCOZe reduction i7.28% % reduction 6.65% Community transportation emissions, projected year 2020 26,351 metric tons Local government transportation emissions,year 2020 238.2 metric tons GHG emissions reduced by other measures 1,284 metric tons GHG emissions reduced by other measures 32.2 metric tons Remaining GHG emissions 25,067 metric tons Remaining GHG emissions 206.0 metric tons Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 1,824 metric tons Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 13.7 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions:California Air Resources Board, "Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change,"December 2008, p. 13.California Air Resources Board, "Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions for the United States and Canada under U.S.CAFE standards and California Air Resources Board Greenhouse Gas Regulations,"Feb.25, 2008, p. 13, http://www. energy.ca.gov/2008publications/ARB-1000-2008-012/ARB-1000-2008-012.PDF, Measure 3.6.C3: Low Carbon Fuel Standard California transportation emissions,year 2020 225.4 MMTCOZe' Expected reduction in emissions _ 15 MMTCO e % reduction 6.65% Community transportation GHG emissions, projected year 2020 26,351 metric tons GHG emissions reduced by other measures 1,284 metric tons Remaining GHG emissions 25,067 metric tons Estimated GHG emissions reduction 1,668 metric tons Data Source Notes and Assumptions:California Air Resources Board, "Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change,"December 2008,pp. 13 and 17. Measure 3.6.G2:AB 1493 Pavley Standards California transportation emissions,year 2020 225.4 MMTCOZe Expected reduction in emissions under phase one 16.4 MMTCO,e % reduction 7.28% Local government transportation emissions,year 2020 I 238.2 metric tons GHG emissions reduced by other measures 32.2 metric tons Remaining GHG emissions 206.0 metric tons Estimated reduction in GHG emissions 15.0 metric tons A-'2 1o,,;ri cf'ibulo kr,%.te;AcNjn Plan APPENDIX B Summary of Recommended Actions Recommended Community Actions =MMEMMEMEMEMEMOM 3.2.C1 Encourage Transit-oriented Development and Workforce Housing 13 3.2.C2 Increase Walking and Biking for Local Trips 524 111...1........ .................. 3.2.C3 Increase Public Transit Use 535 3.2.C4 Increase Ridesharing 63 .._._.... 3.2.C5 Accelerate Adoption of Electric Vehicles 149 3.3.C1 Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Residential Buildings 901 3.3.C2 Improve Energy Efficiency in 20%of Existing Commercial Buildings 201 3.3.C3 Reduce Energy Use in New Residential Construction 82 3.3.C4 Reduce Energy Use in New Commercial Construction 119 3.3.C5 Install Solar Energy Systems in 20%of Existing Residential Buildings 1,273 3.3.C6 Install Solar Energy Systems in 15%of Existing Commercial Buildings 395 3.3.C7 10%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Deep Green Electricity 815 3.3.C8 70%of Ratepayers Purchase Marin Clean Energy Light Green Electricity 5,133 3.3.C9 Offset Emissions for 5%of Natural Gas Use 751 3.4.C1 Divert All Food Waste from Landfill 413 3.4.C2 Reduce All Other Solid Waste Disposal to Landfills by 25% 456 _. ......... ....... .......... ............1111. 3.5.C1 Reduce Water Use in Community by 15% 679 ". 1ntr;n c;:` .lbr;n .„ _mrae-'�c:r,i ,Flan Recommended Government Operations Actions 3.2.G1 Replace Town Vehicles with Hybrid or Electric Vehicles As replaced $2,200 6.0 3.2.G2 Encourage Town Employees to Commute by Alternative Means of Transportation Variable n/a 11.0 3.2.G3 Replace Police Patrol Cars with More Fuel-Efficient Vehicles As replaced $6,000 15.2 3.2.G4 Offset Emissions from Town Vehicles $1,200 per year n/a 92.1 3.3.G1 Install Energy Efficiency Upgrades in Town Buildings $51,200 $4,200 8.2 3.3.G2 Install Solar Energy System for Town Hall Completed $6,900 9.0 3.3.G3 Install Solar Energy System for Police Station $96,500 $3,200 4.2 3.3.G4 Upgrade Street Lighting to Energy-efficient Technologies(LED) $146,200 56,600 12.2 3.3.G5 Purchase energy-efficient Appliances $1,950 $200 0.3 3.3.G6 Purchase Marin Clean Energy Deep Green Electricity for Government Facilities $2,800 per year n/a 61.7 3.3.G7 Offset Emissions for Natural Gas Use $150 per year n/a 12.6 3.4.G1 Reduce Solid Waste Disposal to Landfill by 25% n/a n/a 9.6 •-14 1Gtem of'ibulonz:.mate c m Flan ELECTRIC Group, Inc. May 4,2017 Town of Tiburon Department of Public Works Attn: Dmitriy Lashkevich 1505 Tiburon Blvd Tiburon,CA 94920 Job Name: Furnish and Install(1) EV Bollard Style Charging Station Job Location: Lyford Park Parking Lot,Tiburon,CA Dear Mr.Lashkevich, We offer to perform the following work based on our standard terms and conditions: Trench from existing PG&E power approximately 30'to the new EV charging station (EVCS) location.Install PVC conduit in trench,pull conductors and then backfill trench.Form and pour new foundation for a Type3AF metered service pedestal adjacent to existing PG&E splice box.Furnish and install (1)new 100Amp Type 3AF dedicated metered service pedestal on foundation.Form and pour new small concrete foundation at new EVCS location.Furnish and install(1)new ChargePoint bollard style EV charging station(CT4025-GW1) on the new concrete foundation,connect and energize.The new EV Charging station will be equipped with two 23'charging cables.Proposal price excludes station activation and configuration service on the ChargePoint network and the 1- year pre-paid commercial network service plan.Proposal price includes$3K for PG&E fees to pull conductors from existing PG&E power box and terminate at metered service pedestal and installing a new meter in the new metered socket.Any PG&E costs above this will be billed at cost plus 10%. Lead time on the electrical equipment is 4-6 weeks from date of order.Striping and stick down truncated domes are included as per depicted on graphic provided by Town of Tiburon. Proposal price valid for 90 days-permit and inspection fees are not included. Labor,Equipment,and Material(EVCS)...$26,822.00 Labor,Equipment,and Material(Striping) ...$3,625.00 TOWN OF TIBURTON DC ELECTRIC GROUP,INC. By: Randy A Vignola Jr. Title: Project Manager (707) 992-01.4.1 Fax (888) 525-8419 9 8023 Gravenstein Hwy, CoLat:i, CA License it 949934 EXHIBIT NO. .. ,� 3�T Nis ME mo— tt.I wit � � V fa y nw' 9 {: ry oWN,1j f � Oil r�KN' v s 111 I a p� x a `rd{� t' r �,xifF 4 � `mow Photovoltaic Energy Analysis for Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station 1155 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon, California 94920 Cooperative Service ID: 8960102334 Community Prepared September 27, 2017 by Marius Winger Energy A 46.5kW photovoltaic system will supply 72% of your energy and reduce your electric bill by $18,512 (91%) per year. Recommended System System Peak Power: 46.5 AC kilowatts (51.6 DC kilowatts) PV Module: LG Electronics LG335N1C-A5 Number of Modules: 154 Inverter: SolarEdge SE14AKUS Array Facing: South-Southwest Array Tilt: 50 Electric Rate- Switch to A-6 Commercial Time-of-Use Estimated Energy Production Site Evaluation Summer Average: 7,954.1 kW-hr/month Summer Sunlight: 84% Winter Average: 4,272.9 kW-hr/month Winter Sunlight- 86% Annual: 73,361.9 kW-hr/year Ideal Orientation & Tilt: 94% The amount of power generated will vary throughout the day and year depending upon the amount of sunlight available and factors such as cloud cover,sun angle,intensity of the sun and temperature. The Co-op makes no warranty of energy measured in kilowatt hours produced by the Member's PV System. Energy Use & Generation Electricity Expense Average Summer Average Winter Average Summer Average Winter Month Month Month Month 10,000 $2,500 %000 ------ - _.._...---- –... $2,022 �� .. 2,000 --.._ _..----- ------------._... 8,000 7,000 4 4 $1,500 1.,37 6,000 ,< _ _...__ $1,000 _$746 -- ... 5,000 ' z' r: '�v.` u y 500 4,000 — ------ W 3,000 m .< ' z $ 2,000 1,000 i -$500 - -- — -- $430 -$1,000 F 0 F­o­uiw-----i Generation is 90% Generation is 52%of allo Solar,A-1 OS Rate aGeneration of Historic Use Historic Use oWith Solar,A-6 Rite EXHIBIT NO. Copyright 2015 by CCEnergy 534 Fourth Street,Suite C,San Rafael,CA. 94901 (877)228-8700 CCEnergy-Confidential Document Cashflow Analysis for 9128/17 Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station A Commercial PV system with LG NEON Solar Cooperative modules, SolarEdge inverters and Carport racking Community to be installed at 1155 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon, California 94920 Energy This project generates $1,097,345 profit over 30 years of operation. Doing nothing will cost $1,103,802 in additional energy bills over 30 years. Renewable Energy...... $0.104 per kW-hr Installed Cost: $228,975 Average Utility Energy $0.437 per kW-hr Federal Tax Credit: $0 (Projected to cost $0.782/kW-hr in 30 years.) Net Cost: $228,975 Pay $228,975 out of pocket. After-tax Internal Rate of Return is 14%. Project breaks even in Year 11. all calculations are adjusted for inflation,and reported in 2017 dollars Cumulative Cost of Utility Energy Year 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 $0 -$200,000 -$400,000 -$600,000 -$800,000 -$1,000,000 -$1,200,000 Cumulative Savings with Project Year 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 -$200,000 -$400,000 Cash flow projections are based on assumptions about system performance and economic circumstances. Actual results may vary. CCEnergy gives no express or implied warranty of specific performance or savings. CCEnergy-Confidential Document Ae Cashflow Details 9/28/17 Member Name: Patrick Barnes Cooperative Address: 1155 Tiburon Blvd P Tiburon, California 94920 Community Energy all calculations are adjusted for inflation,and reported in 2017 dollars Year 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Energy Savings/Cost $18,512 $19,281 $20,087 $20,933 $21,820 $22,751 $__23,726 $24,748 $25,820 $26,943 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _$0 $0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 soL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax effect: Income or Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Short-Term Capital -$228,975 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Principal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $ Total Savings,this year -$210,462F$19,2811 $20,087, $20,9331 $21,8201 $22,7511 $23,7261$24,74 $25 820 $26,943 ___C_umulatiyeSayingS -$210462 -$191,181 -$171,094 -$150,1611-$128,3401-$105,5901-$81,864_L-$57,1161-$31,296] -$,43621 Cumulative Ener Cost -$18 512 -$37 793 -$57 881 -$78 814 -$100,634 -$123,385 -$147111 -$171,859 -$197,679 $224,62 Year 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18r$39,798 20 Energy Savings/Cost $28,121 $29,354 $30,646 $32,000 $33,419 $34,905 $36,461 $38,091 $41,585 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0_ $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _$0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 -$6,457 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax effect: Income or Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Short-Term Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Principal $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Savings,this year $28,1211 $29,3541 $30,646 $32,0001 $26,9621 $34,9051$36,4611 $38,0911 $39,7981$41,585 _Cumulative Savings $23,768 $53,122 $83,769 $115_769 $142,731 $17_7,636 $214,0971$252,1871$291,985A$333,571_ Cumulative Ener COSI $252,743 $282,097 -$312,744 4344.744r-$37i.163174 -$449,528 -$487,619 -$527,41717579 0 Year 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Energy Savings/Cost $43,457 $45,418 $47,470 $49,619 $51,869 $54,225 $56,691 $59,272 $61,975 $64,804 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $o $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax effect: Income or Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _ $0 $0 $0 Short-Term Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Principal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 - sol $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 0 so 0 sor sol0 $01 to Total Savings,this yearl$43,4571$45,4181 $47,470 $49,6191 $51,869 $54,225 $56,691 $59,2721 $61,9751 $64,804 ___C_um_ulative Savings $377_028 $422,4461$469,916 $519_535 $571,404 $625,6281$682,3191$741,5911$803,5661$868,3701 Cumulative Ener COSt $612,460 $657,878 -$705,348 -$754,967 -$806,836 -$861,060 -$917,751 -$977,023 -$1,03s,998 -$1,103,802 Cash flow projections are based on assumptions about system performance and economic circumstances. Actual results may vary. CCEnergy gives no express or implied warranty of specific performance or savings. d r', Ev Cooperative Community Energy Preliminary Quote Date: 9/28/2017 Name: Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station Address: 1155 Tiburon Blvd Tiburon, California 94920 Telephone: 415-435-7388 Email: pbarnes@townoftiburon.org Commercial PV system with LG NEON Solar modules, SolarEdge Description: inverters and Carport racking Rated Output: 46472 AC Watts (51590 DC watts) Quantity Part Description 3 SolarEdge 14.4 KW 3-phase 154 LG NeON2 335 watt PV module with black frame Balance of System Components: Racking, switchgear, monitoring, etc. Final Cost: $4.93 per AC Watt Equipment Total: $ 148,934.64 $4.44 per DC Watt 8.25% Sales Tax: $ 12,287.11 Design Fees: $ 350.00 Shipping: $ 7,413.48 Other Misc. Fees: $ 145.00 Equipment Total: $ 169,130.23 Federal Tax Credit: $0 * Estimated Installation: $ 59,844.40 Total Installed Cost: $ 228,974.63 *Cost of Building Permit is NOT included Less Federal Tax Credit: $ (0.00) Final Cost: 228,974.63 Cost of equipment does not include miscellaneous conduit,fasteners,breakers or other items supplied by Installer. CCEnergy-Confidential Document Prices are good for 15 days from date of estimate LG Electronics LG3351N1C-A5 FV Modules (64.6" x 39.4") Cooperative Community Energy Corp 5,4 Pourth6erctt,6wx C 6�a.��,�94901.1660 TO,(415)451-0215 FA]G(416)45TA216 15wa:cceaergy.com -Ef Ba ja Carport5m _ 2 prefabricated " ° ��) 4O � Steel Box Beams - .Q (1,05-55 and Canopy) 0 y >co .00 6_ L U = O CID 6_ z O a N 46 >O H L O Cc p to 11 a V- i° Carport Side Elevation 1�arking S ace Sidewalk Date 07/2G/2.O7 Permit Revisions Array 7 x 22 = 154 modules (23 ft x 118.4 ft) t ELEVATCARPORT ION VIEW SCAlE:i2".1° Scale 1,=r- Sheet '=YSheet PV1 o- Photovoltaic Energy Analysis for Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station 1155 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon, California 94920 Cooperative Service ID: 8960102334 Community Prepared September 27, 2017 by Marius Winger Energy A 46.5kW photovoltaic system will supply 72% of your energy and reduce your electric bill by $18,512 (91%) per year. Recommended System System Peak Power: 46.5 AC kilowatts (51.6 DC kilowatts) PV Module: LG Electronics LG335N1C-A5 Number of Modules: 154 Inverter: SolarEdge SE14AKUS Array Facing: South-Southwest Array Tilt- 5° Electric Rate: Switch to A-6 Commercial Time-of-Use Estimated Energy Production Site Evaluation Summer Average: 7,954.1 kW-hr/month Summer Sunlight: 84% Winter Average: 4,272.9 kW-hr/month Winter Sunlight: 86% Annual: 73,361.9 kW-hr/year Ideal Orientation & Tilt: 94% The amount of power generated will vary throughout the day and year depending upon the amount of sunlight available and factors such as cloud cover,sun angle,intensity of the sun and temperature. The Co-op makes no warranty of energy measured in kilowatt hours produced by the Member's PV System. Energy Use & Generation Electricity Expense Average Summer Average Winter Average Summer Average Winter Month Month Month Month 10,000 _ _,.._ w_. _. u __ . _ $2,500 9,000 ._........_._ _...--- ............_--. $2,022 z $2,000 ......... ----- — --....-- c > : 8.000 — z 4 � 7,000 �.> r — $1,500 ---- ------ .—$1-,378--... z � C 6,000 $1,000--- z r -...._ $745 y �Z ' 5,000 - $500 4,000 - ,7 — zE � r ` 3,000 � '' � --- $0 2,000 r - -$500 - --- --- -- -$430 1,000 - r -- o_ v , -$1,000 F-a­u­s,-----i Generation is 90% Generation is 52%of ®No Solar,A-1 OS Rate oGeneration of Historic Use Historic Use LDWith Solar,A-6 Rate EXHIBIT NO. ____ Copyright 2015 by CCEnergy 534 Fourth Street,Suite C,San Rafael,CA. 94901 (877)228-8700 CCEnergy-Confidential Document Cashflow Analysis for 9/29/17 ="TM PD Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station A Commercial PV system with LG NEON Solar Cooperative modules, SolarEdge inverters and Carport racking Community to be installed at 1155 Tiburon Blvd, Tiburon, California 94920 Energy This project generates $1,097,345 profit over 30 years of operation. Doing nothing will cost $1,103,802 in additional energy bills over 30 years. Renewable Energy...... $0.115 per kW-hr Installed Cost: $252,572 Average Utility Energy $0.437 per kW-hr Federal Tax Credit: $0 (Projected to cost $0.782/kW-hr in 30 years.) Net Cost: $252,572 Pay $252,572 out of pocket. After-tax Internal Rate of Return is 13%. Project breaks even in Year 11. all calculations are adjusted for inflation,and reported in 2017 dollars Cumulative Cost of Utility Energy Year 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 $0 -$200,000 -$400,000 -$600,000 i -$800,000 -$1,000,000 -$1,200000 Cumulative Savings with Project Year 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 -$200,000 -$400,000 w... ----- Cash . --Cash flow projections are based on assumptions about system performance and economic circumstances. Actual results may vary. CCEnergy gives no express or implied warranty of specific performance or savings. CCEnergy-Confidential Document � Cashflow Details 9`29'17 a . Member Name: Patrick Barnes Cooperative Address: 1155 Tiburon Blvd P Tiburon, California 94920 Community Energy all calculations are adjusted for inflation,and reported in 2017 dollars Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Energy Savings/Cost $18,512 $19,281 $20,087 $20,933 $21,820 $22,751 $23,726 $24,748 $25,820 $26,943 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 -so-so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0r'O" $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _ Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax effect: Income or Cost $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $o $o Short-Term Capital -$252,572 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Principal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 Total Savings,this ear -$234,059 $19,2811$20,0871 $20,933 $21,8201 $22 751 $23 726 $24,7481 $25,8201$26 943 ___C_umulatiye Sayin�s -$?34059 4$214,778 -$194,6_91 -$173,758 $151938 -$129,187 -$105,461 -$80713 -$54,893 -$27,949 Cumulative Ener COSI - 18 512 -$37 793 - 57 881 - 78 814 -$100,634 -$123,385 -$147111 $171,859 -$197,679 -$224,622 Year 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Energy Savings/Cost $28,121 $29,354 $30,646 $32,000 $33,419 $34,905 $36,461 $38,091 $39,798 $41,585 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 _$0 -$6,457 $0 $0 $0 $J$309,974 Tax effect: Income or Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ Short-Term Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ Loan Payment: Principal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Savings,this year $28,1211$29,3541 $30,6461 $32,000 $26,962 4,9051 $36,4611 $38,0911 $39,798 _Cumulative Savings _$171 $29,525 $6;0,172 $92i 72 $119,1341$154,039]$190,5001$228,590 $268,38 Cumulative Ener COSI -$252,743 -$282,097 $312,744 -$344 744 $378,163 -$413,068 -$449,528 -$487,619 $527,41 Year 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Energy Savings/Cost $43,457 $45,418 $47,470 $49,619 $51,869 $54,225 $56,691 $59,272 $61,975 $64,804 Non-taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Taxable Rebates&Incentives $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax on Rebates&Incentives $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Solar Tax Credit $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-Interest Deduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o Tax Savings-Fed Depreciation $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tax Savings-CA Depreciation $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Energy Expense Deduction $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Change in Income/Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $01 0 $0 $0 $0 Tax effect: Income or Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 _$0 $0 $0 Short-Term Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Principal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Loan Payment: Interest 0 0 0 0 0 $0 0 0 0 0 Total Savings,this ear $43,4571$45,4181 $47,470 $49,6191 $51,8691 $54,225 $56,6911$59,2721 $61,9751$64 804 ___C_um_ulative Savings $353,4311$398,8491$446,319 $495,938J$547,807]$602,031 $658,722 $717_994 $779,969 $8 X773 Cumulative Ener COst -$612,460 -$657,878 -$705,348 -$754 967 -$806,836 $861,060 -$917,751 $977,023 -$1,038,998 -$1,103,802 Cash flow projections are based on assumptions about system performance and economic circumstances. Actual results may vary. CCEnergy gives no express or implied warranty of specific performance or savings. Cooperative Community Energy Preliminary Quote Date: 9/29/2017 Name: Patrick Barnes of Tiburon Police Station Address: 1155 Tiburon Blvd Tiburon, California 94920 Telephone: 415-435-7388 Email: pbarnes@townoftiburon.org Description: Commercial PV system with LG NEON Solar modules, SolarEdge inverters and Carport racking Rated Output: 46472 AC Watts (51590 DC watts) Quantity Part Description 3 SolarEdge 14.4 KW 3-phase 154 LG NeON2 335 watt PV module with black frame Balance of System Components: Racking, switchgear, monitoring, etc. Final Cost: $5.43 per AC Watt Equipment Total: $ 170,733.27 $4.90 per DC Watt 8.25% Sales Tax: $ 14,085.49 Design Fees: $ 350.00 Shipping: $ 7,413.48 Other Misc. Fees: $ 145.00 Equipment Total: $ 192,727.25 Federal Tax Credit: $0 Estimated Installation: $ 59,844.40 Total Installed Cost: $ 252,571.65 *Cost of Building Permit is NOT included Less Federal Tax Credit: $ (0.00) Final Cost:$252,571.65 Cost of equipment does not include miscellaneous conduit,fasteners,breakers or other items supplied by Installer. CCEnergy-Confidential Document Prices are good for 15 days from date of estimate I TIBURON POLICE STATION for I COOPERATIVE COMMUNITY ENERGY i i •• .. ................. i ( i E 10' MIN 8' MIN I i i FOUNDATION TO BE DETERMINED j i I _;117- 713_� LAR i CARPORTS DIR1= C l I I i I 4 i ��n rr y,*�'`� m,�f�c✓���•=' �fir"���, ��l� ,4 r �.. .,�,.S'm� .� �Gy.@�t ,her � .x�..� �.. .�f7 '� F:; .. J �:...:r,r r. ��:? ,.. ,� ah)S;,,,. 4 �a.�, i1✓ ,' �3y�w�`��.rY,=v'�1�ti. .r ,��,� a, ..�.�. ,:s. K ,� � � �.- `�; r 4 2t t �,��},fir � �,€ �'� ^b�r ;� a °�s ,.•^, =r� P2 :fi� � �,�) .,h y r. ya F r g. .r r� ff f r i W v k v v j 90 5 4.. W==v 1 f v E 4 } i' F J f L EXHIBIT NO. Tiburon LED SL Retrofit(Cobra Fixtures)-129 EA _..... .__. Open Space Preserve S* S' lire :o 0 School J1,ej ary V''w C �r. o,R"I a o,�•-^0 4 � � 9 ' Q I P w9V Y! Ei Campo Strawberry D: i t TLE REED HcIG`rITS P11"15a P 21, n Point or Q 0 Del Mar `Chauncey Intermediate School Paradise Beach McKegney County Park P ,��.,�•.Dr _ .Aramburu Field Island tl;laryD Hippie Tree C= Q„�,•.,:�,r� Tiburon o �G✓ _ Uplands ^ 20 e Preserve Silva Island `a C c ">u, Old St.Hilary's Open Space p Preserve iDr a C o u ": � ���� �� Bluff Point f�7 �o' 'off Olds rp .,hapel ",� ' <F TISURO " UOS� yr �� o� � � f `U'��.'Sc � Q['•1�,V 90 pelveoeFe O• �'"t �J "Qtl �i ,u our o cx^»sr� �y Go gle a in Ci!y :} Map tlata Pd201�Goo8�e 200m= T--fu. Reportamap error YLED 26W LED 76W I.FD 33W Tiburon LED SLR�trlfll(Cobra fi�tu—)-1,29 FA 26W LED 116 EA33W LED 10EA7C)WI.f.D,3EA EXHIBITNO. CP ELECTRIC Group,Inc. September 28,2017 Town of Tiburon Attn: Patrick Barnes Department of Public Works 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA 94920 EXHIBIT 1—SCOPE OF WORK Job Description: LED Streetlight Retrofit(Cobra Fixtures) Job Location: 129 Locations,Tiburon,CA SCOPE OF WORK: 1.) Replace 70W HPS Cobra Fixture with 26W LED Cobra Fixture(116 EA) • CREE RSWS-A HT-2ME-3L-40K7-UL-GY-N, 26 WATT, 4K 2.) Replace 100W HPS Cobra Fixture with 33W LED Cobra Fixture(10 EA) • CREE RSWS-A HT-2ME-6L-30K7-UL-GY-N, 53 WATTS, 4K 3.) Replace 20OW HPS Cobra Fixture with 76W LED Cobra Fixture(3 EA) • CREE RSWM-A HT-2ME-9L-40K7-UL-GY-N, 76 WATTS,4K) -Fixture quantities,although very accurate,are approximate only and are subject to increase or decrease upon official field investigation. -"Like for Like"LED wattage used per existing HPS wattages; any adjustments to the scope of work(new LED fixture wattages)shall be made by Town of Tiburon prior to releasing material order. -Shielding to be installed as directed at additional cost per Exhibit 2, Proposed Costs. -Estimated lead-time on material is 4-6 weeks from receipt of approved material submittals. -Estimated time for installation is 1-2 weeks from receipt of material. -Payment to DC Electric Group, Inc.shall come directly from Town of Tiburon upon. -Town receives"per fixture rebates"directly from PG&E. -Additional labor required for non-standard retrofits(i.e.not accessible via bucket truck),or any required tree- trimming for access,will be performed on a Time and Materials(T&M)basis as an additional cost on this project or as otherwise directed by Town of Tiburon. -Each fixture replacement takes approximately 10 minutes;temporary short duration traffic control method per MUTCD shall be used. This offer is hereby accepted on this day of , 2017. Town of Tiburon DC Electric Group,Inc. By: Tim Carter Title: Project Manager/Estimator Page 1 of 1 DC Electric Group,Inc. 8023 Gravenstein Hwy S.,Cotati,CA 94931 t:(707)992-0141 f: (888)525-8419 Lic.#949934 D111#1000003395 SBE#1748848 1 EXHIBIT NO. �" P0 ELECTRIC Group,Inc. September 28,2017 Town of Tiburon Attn: Patrick Barnes Department of Public Works 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon,CA 94920 EXHIBIT 2—PROPOSED COSTS Job Description: LED Streetlight Retrofit(Cobra Fixtures) Job Location: Various Locations,Tiburon,CA Installation Cost(Includes Labor,Material,and Equipment) a 70 Watt HPS Cobra to 26W LED Cobra Fixture... 116 EA x$220.00 EA= $ 25,520.00 a 100 Watt HPS Cobra to 33W LED Cobra Fixture... 10 EA x$220.00 EA= $ 2,200.00 a 200 Watt HPS Cobra to 76W LED Cobra Fixture... 3 EA x$350.00 EA= $ 1,050.00 Total(Labor,Material,&Equipment)... $ 28,770.00 PG&E Rebates a $40 rebate per fixture for the 70W HPS to 26W LED... 116 EA x($40.00 EA)_ ($ 4,640.00) • $40 rebate per fixture for the 100W HPS to 33W LED... 10 EA x($40.00 EA)_ ($ 400.00) a $60 rebate per fixture for the 20OW HPS to 76W LED...3 EA x($60.00 EA)_ ($ 180.00) Total PG&E Rebate... ($ 5,220.00) Total Project Cost(Including PG&E Rebates )... $23,550.00 Contingency of 5%recommended for shielding*requests... $ 1,177.50 Total Project Cost(Including 5%Contingency)... $24,727.50 *Shielding installed at the time of retrofit= $75.00 EA. **Shielding installed after retrofit is complete (return trip) _ $200.00 EA. This price is valid for 30 days. Price excludes bonds or any potential costs for Caltrans and/or Town permits/fees or any additional traffic control requirements(refer to Exhibit 1, Scope of Work). This offer is hereby accepted on this day of ,2017. Town of Tiburon DC Electric Group,Inc. By. Tim Carter Title: Project Manager/Estimator Page 1 of 1 DC Electric Group,Inc. 8023 Gravenstein Hwy S.,Cotati,CA 94931 t:(707)992-0141 f:(888)525-8419 Lic.#949934 DIR#1000003395 SBE#1748848 Date:2/8/17 To: Town of Tiburon MCEClean Energy From: JR Killigrew My community.My choice. Based on actualy usage of Tiburon accounts:(12 Months) �f Estimated Annual Cost of Deep Green for Municipal Accounts $3,245.59 Emissions Impact for Tiburon with Deep Green Emissions Saved with Current Cost(MTCO2) 49 Remaining emissions to meet Community 2020 Target* -1,626 Deep Green Contribution towards Community 2020 target -3% Baseline 2005 Municipal Emissions 389 Deep Green Reduction %from baseline 13% Cost per metric ton $ 66.60 Equivalent Climate Action Plan Measures #of Units Est. MTCO2 Reduced Purchase an Electric Car per year * 0.12 0.47 Purchase Solar Array for town or resident** 0.81 0.22 Cost Equivalent Climate Action Plan Measures to Deep Green #of Units Total Cost Cost per metric ton Electric Cars 12 $ 334,926 $ 6,873 .81 KW Solar Arrays 183 $ 731,518 $ 15,012 *figure estimated from 15%2020 Target below baseline compared to 2014 Community Inventory by MCEP * Cost of Nissan Leaf 5 MSNP of 30 C�£i0 without state:/federal incentives&est.of 4.7 MTs of Bassen er_car_and 1. MT of Cil *****Assuming$4000/kW installed EXHIBIT No. September 29, 2017 Tiburon Town Council 1505 Tiburon Blvd. Tiburon, CA.94920 RE: Reducing Municipal Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Tiburon Dear Mayor Fraser, Councilmembers Fredericks, O'Donnell, Kulik and Thier, and Town Manager Chanis: We are very pleased that the Town of Tiburon will be considering proposals to reduce municipal greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at its Town Council Meeting on October 4, 2017. We hope that you will consider all of these options with the State target to reduce GHG emissions by 40% by 2030 and the severe impacts of climate change in mind. One of the options that we understand you will be reviewing is opting up to 100% greenhouse gas free, 100% renewable electricity. As you know, we've been working, via an Environmental Forum of Marin project, for almost a year to encourage all jurisdictions in Marin to opt up. As of July 1, 2017, ten (10) of the municipalities in Marin, and the County of Marin, are purchasing 100% clean electricity via MCE's Deep Green product. The opt up decision taken by seven (7)jurisdictions in 2017 has resulted in an additional annual GHG reduction of 4,048 MTCO2, or 8,905,600 lbs. of CO2. We urge the Town of Tiburon to opt up to Deep Green to make the final annual GHG reduction 4,096 MTCO2, or 9,011,200 Ibs. of CO2. The chart below shows each jurisdiction's contribution to this reduction. Marin County Annual GHG Reduction - Deep Green July 2017 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 Corte Madera IN Larkspur Novato San Rafael RRoss Rll County of Marin 0 Mill Valley M Tiburon Note: Belvedere, Fairfax, San Anselmo and Sausalito were Deep Green customers prior to 2017 and are not included in the above chart. The percent of MCE accounts enrolled in the Deep Green program rose by 36.8% between March and August of 2017. We are thrilled that so many electricity customers are recognizing the importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. See graph below. We still have a long way to go to reach State targets for GHG reduction but your leadership will help to drive change in the Town of Tiburon. Percent MCE Customers Enrolled in Deep Green 9.00% 8.00% 7.00% 6.00% ,r 5.00% E r 4.00 7 . 3.00% t 2.00% 1.00% z 0.00% r \eJ �Lo 0 y5 a r`�J oye\ P� 3/27/2017 8/23/2017 Note: Data provided by MCE Kudos to you for looking at multiple ways to reduce emissions in Tiburon. We ask that you pursue all cost-effective methods of greenhouse gas reduction. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Sarah Loughran Helene Marsh 415-717-8581 415-300-7233 TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Public Financing Authority Tiburon Town Hall October 4, 2017 ��s 1 1505 Tiburon Boulevard. Town Council Chambers Tiburon, CA 94920 / 7:45 p.m. TIBURON PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA 7:45 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Tiburon Public Financing Authority on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time.Please note however,that the Tiburon Peninsula Financing Authority 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 Tiburon Public Financing Authority meeting agenda. Please limit your comments to three(3) minutes. ACTION ITEMS Al-1. Approve minutes of June 15,2016 meeting of the Tiburon Public Financing Authority ADJOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Town Clerk at (415) 435- 7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will. enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's website, www.townoftiburon.org. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address,phone number and brief description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in Nvritten correspondence delivered to the Town Council at, or prior to, the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. TOWN OF TIBURON Tiburon Public Financing Authority Tiburon Town Hall October 4,2017 1505 Tiburon Boulevard Town Council Chambers - Tiburon., CA 94920 7:45 p.m. TIBURON PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA 7:45 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Persons wishing to address the Tiburon Public Financing Authority on subjects not on the agenda may do so at this time.Please note however,that the Tiburon Peninsula Financing Authority 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 Tiburon Public Financing Authority meeting agenda.Please limit your comments to three(3) minutes. ACTION ITEMS AI-1. Approve minutes of June 15,2016 meeting of the Tiburon Public Financing Authority ADJOURNMENT GENERAL PUBLIC INFORMATION ASSISTANCE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Town Clerk at (415) 435- 7377. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION Copies of all agenda reports and supporting data are available for viewing and inspection at Town Hall and at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library located adjacent to Town Hall. Agendas and minutes are posted on the Town's website, www.townoftiburon.org. Upon request, the Town will provide written agenda materials in appropriate alternative formats, or disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to enable individuals with disabilities to participate in public meetings. Please send a written request, including your name, mailing address,phone number and brief description of the requested materials and preferred alternative format or auxiliary aid or service at least 5 days before the meeting. Requests should be sent to the Office of the Town Clerk at the above address. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings provide the general public and interested parties an opportunity to provide testimony on these items. If you challenge any proposed action(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing(s) described later in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the Town Council at,or prior to,the Public Hearing(s). TIMING OF ITEMS ON AGENDA While the Town Council attempts to hear all items in order as stated on the agenda, it reserves the right to take items out of order. No set times are assigned to items appearing on the Town Council agenda. X.i MINUTES TIBURON PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY JUNE 15, 2016, 7:40 PM ROLL CALL Chair Tollini noted that all board members were present. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. ACTION ITEMS 1. Commencement of Proceedings for the Issuance of Refunding Bonds—Adopt a resolution authorizing commencement of proceedings for the issuance of refunding revenue bonds, the purchase of reassessment bonds, and appointing the law firm of Quint& Thimmig LLP as bond and disclosure counsel, and designate Wulff, Hansen & Co. as the underwriter (Town Attorney Stock) Chair Tollini waived the staff report and there was no public comment. MOTION: To adopt the resolution as written. Moved: Boardmember Fredericks, seconded by Boardmember Doyle. Vote: AYES: Unanimous ADJOURNMENT - at 7:45 p.m. Tiburon Public Financing Authority 6115116 Page 1 of 1 From: Coletta,Shara L To: Lea Stefani Subject: RE:Design Review Board Date: Monday,October 02,2017 2:45:30 PM You [hill racy'rppli(.at:ionThank y()ti. Shara Coletta I Execaative Director I Cornrnunity Development Banking I Commercial Banking I Chase 1 560 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 1 T: 47.5 315 8490 1 F: 415 315 4946 1 shara.l.coletta0chase.com I chase.com/cclb Alternate contact. Linda Quernena I T: 27.:3 621 8395 1 F: 213 621 8401 1 Iinda.maria.auemena@chase.com C From: Lea Stefani [mai Ito:Istefani(cbtownoftiburon.org] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2017 2:44 PM To: Coletta, Shara L Subject: RE: Design Review Board I ii Sham, Thanks for your einail. Are yori withdrawing your applicatioi i for consider ation"? Or do you still intend to interview on Wednesday' I_ea From: Coletta, Shara L [mailto:shara.l.coletta(a)chase.com] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2017 2:37 PM To: Lea Stefani Subject: RE: Design Review Board Lea, Thank yo(.) for reaching;out. My [wsband and I were talking about the and I rather not get involved. Thank you for the heads r.iEa thor,igh -- I'na glad others are i.ip for the seat:.