TOWN COUNCIL

CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Slavitz called the regular meeting of the Tiburon Town Council to order at 7:30 p.m.

on Wednesday, April 2, 2003 , in Town Council Chambers, 1505 Tiburon Boulevard, Tiburon, California.

ROLL CALL

PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Berger, Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Thompson

PRESENT: EX OFFICIO: Town Manager McIntyre, Town Attorney Danforth, Director of Community Development Anderson, Director of Public Works/Town Engineer Echols, Chief of Police Odetto, Director of Administrative Services McVeigh, Administrative & Financial Analyst Stott, Town Clerk Crane Iacopi

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL– EXISTING LITIGATION

(Section 54956.9(a))

Howard Zack, Diane Zack v. MERA and Town of Tiburon

Citizens for Open Process in Antenna Siting (COPAS) v. MERA and Town of Tiburon

1) Approval of Town Council Minutes – March 19, 2003

Changes to minutes by Berger & Fredericks, page 3.

2) Recommendation by Town Manager – Authorize Town Manager to Approve Contract for Audit Services

3) Recommendation by Director of Community Development – Application for Well Permit at 24 Old Landing Road

a) Owner/Applicant – Kessler

b) AP No. 038-171-64

MOTION: To approve Consent Calendar items 1-3 above, as amended.

Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Thompson

Vote: AYES: Unanimous

ANNOUNCEMENT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION, IF ANY

Mayor Slavitz said that no action was taken in closed session.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS

Rocky Birdsey, Marin Center for Independent Living, asked Council to withdraw its amicus support of the City of Sacramento (Barden v. City of Sacramento). He said that Tiburon, Novato and Ross were the only cities left in Marin County that had not yet withdrawn, and he passed out some newspaper articles and a staff report from the City of San Rafael endorsing the withdrawal.

Council asked Staff to report on the implications and status of the case before deciding to agendize the issue for further consideration.

REGULAR AGENDA

4) Recommendation by Chief of Police – Special Event Permit to stage Classic Car Show on Paradise Drive on Saturday, April 26, 2003

Chief Odetto presented the Staff report and recommendation. He said that the event organizer, Mr. Tom O’Neill, anticipated 300-500 people and had requested the closure of Paradise Drive in the vicinity of Shoreline Park between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. He said that Council had approved a previous permit for the classic car show last year which had taken place on Main Street. However, Odetto said that complaints had been received from some merchants regarding the use of that venue.

The Chief said that Mr. O’Neill had met with both the Tiburon Police and Fire Departments to work out a logistical plan and said he had promised to have enough "event people" to redirect traffic resulting from the street closure. Chief Odetto said that both the Chamber of Commerce and the Landmarks Society had expressed their approval of the event in the proposed location.

Chief Odetto said that he had also requested that Mr. O’Neill meet with the Pt. Tiburon Board of Directors to seek their approval of the event. He said that O’Neill had done so on March 26, and had subsequently responded to some of the concerns raised at the meeting. He also informed Council that there would be no amplified music permitted at the event, as initially requested.

In summary, Chief Odetto said that the event would be a benefit to the community by bringing business to the downtown merchants and he recommended Council approval.

Councilmember Thompson asked what the problem was with staging the event on with Main Street last year. He noted that the RCP Tiburon mile had requested closure of Paradise Drive but had been told by the Council that this would never happen. He wondered if the Town should have a more formal policy regarding street closure in the area.

Chief Odetto said that the Chamber and some of the businesses had not received notice of last year’s event and that the [classic] cars parked on Main Street had created problems for some businesses. He said that the difference between the Classic Car Show and the RCP Mile was that the latter would have set up tents and vendor slips in the roadway [Paradise Drive] and that their set-up would begin at 5:00 p.m. the day before. Odetto said that a street closure of just six hours on a Saturday was much more manageable.

Chief Odetto also said that the cars would be parked in the eastbound lane only and that emergency vehicles would have access.

Councilmember Thompson asked the Chief to confirm that there would be no amplified music and also asked what the concessions were that were listed on the event application.

The Chief replied that there would be no amplified music and that the only "concession" was an information booth manned by the Jt. Recreation Department, the beneficiary of any proceeds of the event.

Vice Mayor Fredericks remarked that the idea of concessions seemed odd if the stated purpose of the event was to bring business to the downtown merchants. She also asked about the "lighted sign" on the application. Chief Odetto said that it was a sign redirecting traffic to Mar West Street.

Councilmember Gram said that had had sent an e-mail to the Director of Public Works asking whether it would be feasible to park the cars on grass of Shoreline Park. Director of Public Works Echols said that he had concerns that the cars would tear up turf and that the irrigation system was vulnerable because sprinkler heads might be broken. He said that the indentation from tires would heal but that people would trample grass badly and that his experience showed that the recovery time was long. He said that he would not recommend this idea.

Mayor Slavitz suggested that the traffic detour sign be set up at the Belvedere-Tiburon Library so that people would not have to go all the way downtown before finding out that the street was closed. He also asked whether the street would be open to bicyclists and was told that it would be.

The Mayor asked whether other locales had been investigated for staging the event, such as the Main Street parking lot. He also asked whether Paradise Drive had been closed before and was told that it had been closed on one occasion for the Tiburon Chili Festival.

Mayor Slavitz opened the public hearing.

Tom O’Neill distributed handouts. He said that he had gotten the idea for the classic car show from the impromptu car show that had taken place at the re-opening of Main Street, and he said that the cars had contributed to the overwhelming enjoyment of whole event. He acknowledged

that there was too little preparation and advance promotion of last year’s event but said that is was successful and that there were 33 cars exhibited on Main Street.

Mr. O’Neill said that the event was "aimed at" the residents of the Town who had "hidden treasures" locked away in their garages. He said that there was no promotion outside of town and that he was not inviting "out of towners" to show their cars.

In describing the logistics of traffic control, Mr. O’Neill referred to his map and said that plastic stanchions and yellow caution tape would be placed on the Pt. Tiburon side to keep people off the private property. He reiterated that the only concession was the Jt. Recreation table and that there would be no sound system. He said that all of the proceeds in excess of expenses would go to the Jt. Recreation Student Council program for 6^th to 8^th graders to coordinate their own activities. O’Neill also said that the questions posed by the Pt. Tiburon Board had been answered.

Councilmember Thompson asked whether Pt. Tiburon was notified of the Council hearing. Staff responded affirmatively.

Mayor Slavitz asked Mr. O’Neill had considered staging the event in the Main Street parking lot. O’Neill responded that he had but noted that Paradise Drive was their preference. He said that the event would coincide with Opening Day on the Bay which would take place on Sunday and would not interfere with it.

Mr. O’Neill said that admission to the event was free and the only fee was the one charged to car owners, as was customary to these kinds of events.

Councilmember Thompson asked whether there were any net proceeds. Mr. O’Neill said that there were none last year but that this year, due to the fact that there were significantly more cars, and a possible big sponsor, that he would anticipate some.

W.C. Grayson, speaking on behalf of the Pt. Tiburon Board, said that the residents of Pt. Tiburon did not like the proposed venue.

Mr. Grayson said that the Pt. Tiburon Board had asked that there be a local beneficiary but noted that they had asked to see the budget for event and had been turned down. He said that the Board did not like being "against anything" but said that the Board felt it had a responsibility as "stewards" of the Shoreline Park to preserve it for the residents of Pt. Tiburon and the Town. He said that any event proposed for that location must "stand the test of reasonableness and appropriateness." He asked whether an event such as the classic car show would benefit the residents and whether the "interruption of the tranquility of the location" was a benefit. He concluded that it would not be.

Mr. Grayson asked whether other homeowner’s associations had been notified. He pointed out that the day before Opening Day was already a busy day which might pose problems. He said that the presence of posters at Sears Point and Sam’s seemed presumptuous; he expressed concerns about the post "9/11" environment and suggested that other venues, such as Blackie’s Pasture, the Reed School area, Mar West Street or the Bank of America parking lot might be better in order to keep Paradise Drive open. He suggested a minimum of $500 be guaranteed to Jt. Recreation if the event was approved.

Councilmember Berger asked Mr. Grayson to be more specific in stating the objections of the residents of Pt. Tiburon other than the inconvenience resulting from the closure of Paradise Drive. Mr. Grayson replied that specifically the residents of Pt. Tiburon had a right to monitor the permitted use of the Shoreline Park under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement.

Councilmember Gram interrupted the commentary, stating that he had read the documents Mr. Grayson was referring to and that he totally disagreed with his interpretation. He said that he would like to see a letter from the Pt. Tiburon Board attorney stating how he came to the conclusion that the Pt. Tiburon residents had a "right" to limit events in that location [Shoreline Park].

Councilmember Berger said that he would defer to Councilmember Gram on that subject. He commented, however, that street closure might result in more peace and quiet to the residents of Pt. Tiburon.

Mr. Grayson said that such an event would change the "complexion" of Shoreline Park. He said it would be a "different crowd," not families with blankets. Grayson said that all the Pt. Tiburon Board wanted to do was to preserve the pristine shoreline and acknowledged that people were really not bothering "our side of street". However, he recommended that there be at least six months’ notice in order to ensure an adequate planning and notification process.

In response to some of the questions posed, Mr. O’Neill said that the entry fee was $30 per car. He also said that he was unaware of the posters being distributed but said that perhaps Bruce Ross (also an organizer of the event) may have talked to people or handed them out at a Sears Point race he had attended over the weekend.

Mr. O’Neill said he objected to sharing the budget with anyone who had neither authority nor was a party to the activity. Regarding the planning process, he said that the first show took place last year, and that Pt. Tiburon had only been involved very recently because the Chief of Police had insisted that he make contact with the Board which he had done. He said that based on his word of honor, all funds in excess of expenses would go to charity.

Finally, Mr. O’Neill said that he could hardly think of a more appropriate or more family-oriented event, than a classic car show.

Delli Woodwring, also representing Pt. Tiburon, said that she had previously worked with the Chief of Police and Bob Placak on the Tiburon Mile swim event. She said simply that the residents of Pt. Tiburon did not want to see 52 weeks of activities staged at Shoreline Park.

Ms. Woodwring stated that events, including the proposed event, impacted the residents of Pt. Tiburon and that she worried about a precedent being set for activities taking place there more than one or two weekends a year.

She commented that if an event is advertised as a fundraiser, there should be a minimum guarantee. Last year, she said, the Fire Department was listed as a beneficiary but there were no proceeds to give to them.

Mayor Slavitz closed the public hearing.

Councilmember Gram said that he agreed with Pt. Tiburon on some of the stated points. He said that there needed to be more lead time, a month or two, and that all the affected neighborhoods, such as Lyford’s Cove/Old Tiburon, needed to be notified.

However, Gram said that precedent was even a more valid issue and asked, "How often are we going to give up the park?" He said that the Tiburon Mile had been staged there, and now this event, and that it was a big sacrifice for Pt. Tiburon and "everyone up the hill." He concluded that the Town should have a policy concerning the use of Shoreline Park.

Councilmember Gram noted, however, that the car show was a great event that would bring people downtown and help revitalize business after a long winter.

Gram asked O’Neill what he thought the event would generate in terms of revenue. O’Neill said that it would probably generate $2,000 but that expenses would be up too. Gram asked whether at least $100 could be committed to Jt. Recreation.

Vice Mayor Fredericks said that some kind of policy was needed not only concerning the number of events in that location but what would actually trigger the need for a road closure. She said that she appreciated that fact that money was to be donated to deserving organizations but suggested that that fact should not be advertised it if people felt misled; such a promise seemed to be raising more ill will than goodwill.

Councilmember Thompson recommended not spending a lot of time developing a policy and said that the Council had always been diligent in preserving the park and had a continuing interest in keeping the bay front open.

Thompson said that he would prefer to see this event staged on Main St and continuing down Ark Row to give those shops and businesses more exposure, but noted that the event itself event was pretty benign. Thompson said that the road closure would undoubtedly cause complaints but noted that it was only two days out of year (the other being the RCP mile).

Thompson recommended approval of the permit and to evaluate the outcome of the event.

Councilmember Berger said that he would abstain from the vote due to the fact that both his wife and father-in-law were participants in the event.

Mayor Slavitz said that he agreed with the above comments; and that it was an excellent event but that not enough notice had been provided to the affected neighborhoods. He said that Opening Day weekend would be a busy day in the vicinity of Paradise Drive and that it seemed to him that there could be better venues. He said that a written policy would be a good idea.

MOTION: To approve the special event permit for a classic car show on Paradise Drive while noting other possible venues and without setting a precedent for future approvals in that location.

Moved: Thompson, seconded by Fredericks

Vote: AYES: Fredericks, Gram, Slavitz, Thompson

ABSTAIN: Berger

5) Recommendation by Director of Public Works/Town Engineer– Request by Golden Gate Transit for Town Maintenance of Relocated Bus Shelter at Stewart Drive and Tiburon Boulevard

Director of Public Works/ Town Engineer said that that the previous location presented to the Council had been revised by the Bridge District due to sight and distance issues. Echols told the Council that the previous hearings had not included discussions regarding maintenance, but that it had always been the Town’s understanding that CAL/TRANS would maintain any improvements located in its right-of-way.

Mr. Echols said that the Bridge District’s application for a CAL/TRANS encroachment permit had prompted CAL/TRANS to raise the question of who would maintain the improvements. Echols said that Bridge District policy stated that any improvements would be maintained by the local jurisdiction. However, he pointed out that the improvements to the new bus shelter near Jefferson Drive (concrete slab, etc) were being maintained by CAL/TRANS. He recommended that the Town recommend consistent in this process.

For instance, Mr. Echols said that a [9-foot] retaining wall in the vicinity of Stewart Drive would be constructed to support the installation of the new bus shelter, and he provided the Council and the public with examples of the proposed color and texture of the wall.

The Director of Public Works/Town Engineer recommended that Council endorse the Bridge District plans as presented and that Council direct staff to request that CAL/TRANS maintain the improvements.

Council unanimously agreed with the recommendation and directed the Town Engineer to formalize the understanding regarding maintenance in a letter to CAL/TRANS.

Council further noted that the Town had no history of maintaining such improvements to bus shelters nor would it agree to maintain a structure located in another agency’s right-of-way.

6) Recommendation by Director of Public Works/Town Engineer - Draft Guidelines for Formation of Undergrounding of Utilities Assessment Districts

Mayor Slavitz introduced members of the Los Altos Hills City Council, City Manager, and a member of the city’s Undergrounding Committee, who were in the audience to hear the discussion.

Town Manager McIntyre said that undergrounding matters had been "brewing" for a number of years and that it was time to have a written policy statement, approved by the Council, concerning the process. He said that Staff had met with bond counsel Stephen Cassalegio and bond underwriter Mark Pressman who had provided additional information which was incorporated into a new draft set of policy guidelines for review by Council.

Director of Public Works/Town Engineer reiterated that the policy was before Council for consideration and input rather than immediate adoption. He said that Council had a stated goal that undergrounding was a priority of the Town. However, he said that the experience derived from the recently completed Stewart Drive undergrounding project, as well as changes in policy formulated by the utility companies, had led Staff to the conclusion that a core document was needed in order to answer questions and give guidance to the public regarding the process. Echols said that this was especially important due to the "epidemic of undergrounding projects" at the current time within the Town.

Echols highlighted the four primary steps out of the 20 stated in the draft policy.

Council provided feedback and opened the matter to the public.

Councilmember Gram suggested putting in a "range" of assessments based on historical data from past districts; also, to give examples of annual payments with a proviso about inflation and interest rates.

While understanding the variables inherent in any district, Vice Mayor Fredericks said that she agreed that people want to know "up front" what they will spend. She also suggested that the timeline be clarified, such as when the walkthrough of the proposed boundaries took place.

Fredericks asked for clarification of the difference between the 60% approval needed of the affected parcels at the time of the petition and the (50%+) majority ballot at the time of the assessment district formation.

She asked what the difference was between an "engineer of work" versus an engineer, and suggested that a benefit analysis be provided more than just stating that such a project would benefit global safety or opening of views.

Town Attorney Danforth added that there was no need for the petition process if an assessment district was not being formed, nor was the policy before the Council intended to address those kinds of undergrounding projects.

Vice Mayor Fredericks said that a list of commonly asked questions and answers might be helpful. Director Echols said that Staff had produced such a brochure for the leaf blower ordinance and could do the same with this data.

Town Manager McIntyre said that the Town held no funds for any of the districts until the petitions were presented. Vice Mayor Fredericks said that was important fact so that people would not feel uncomfortable with "who’s got the money."

Mayor Slavitz asked whether the subscription deposits were related to size and difficulty of district and asked whether the amount ($1700) being proposed by the Town shouldn’t vary by district. Councilmember Gram concurred, and stated that more seed money would be most likely be needed for smaller districts. Slavitz also asked about the idea of a "sliding scale" if some subscribers gave more.

Town Manager McIntyre stated that the Town’s past policy was to invest $0 up front and that the districts had to be fully self-sustaining. He asked whether the Council wanted to consider a change to the policy, noting that the Town would run the risk losing the money if the district did not reach formation. He also pointed out that it might have the appearance of the Town Council being less "impartial" in its decision whether or not to approve a district, if it advanced funds to a district.

Councilmember Gram said that he would not endorse a change in the current policy.

Town Attorney Danforth said that the subscription deposits did not cover internal costs of Staff time nor the advance of retaining bond counsel and bond underwriter. Generally, these deposits are used to cover hard outside costs and are an important initial show of support for the Town.

Councilmember Berger said that the document should include more description of the bid process, selection of contractors, and the like.

Mayor Slavitz opened the hearing to the public.

John Smissaert, 7 Felipa Court, asked at what stage residents would find out how much it would cost them to be part of an assessment district.

Director Echols replied that it was after "Step 8;" that the Engineer’s Report would have a cost estimate and cost spread. However, he acknowledged that the actual cost of doing the work would not be known until the district was approved and contractor bids were opened.

 Town Attorney Danforth said that the actual assessments would be stated in the Engineer’s Report, and that the bid costs were supposed to be conservative, in other words, not to exceed the engineer’s estimate.

Councilmember Gram asked whether the attorney’s fees and bond costs could be estimated, as well. Town Attorney Danforth said that they could be but noted that there are sometimes unforeseen contingencies.

Mr. Smissaert said that if there was no more than a 5% variable, it would be okay with him.

Director Echols said that bond counsel and the underwriters based their estimates on information contained in the Engineer’s report, as well.

Bond Underwriter Mark Pressman said that arriving at the actual assessment took a combined effort of Staff, the financial people, and the Town Council. Also, Pressman said that contained in the Engineer’s Report was a cost estimate for construction plus contingency plus incidentals--underwriting expenses, reserve fund--in a line by line format. Then, based on the benefit formula established by the engineer or work, the total cost could be spread to the property owners, which would be the gross amount of lien. That is what the property owners were "forewarned about," according to Pressman.

Mr. Pressman said that the Town of Tiburon and City of Belvedere even went one step further by looking at debt service over 15 or more years to show annual payments and/or payout amounts. Furthermore, he said that the bonds were always made available for sale to local residents first.

The next step, according to Pressman, was to call for construction bids during the 45-day notice [mail ballot] period, and thereafter the bids would be reviewed and hopefully come in under estimate. The engineer of work would then revise his preliminary report and submit the final Engineer’s Report to the Town Council, followed by acceptance of the construction bid, and only then would the "team" reapply the spread and provide updated debt schedules to property owners prior to actual election.

Finally, Pressman said that the Town Council had the ability to move assessments around if it felt that method of assessment was not being applied fairly and had the ability to make exceptions at its discretion. At the end of this 45-day notice period, the Council would conduct a public hearing, canvass the vote and tabulate the results in order to make its final decision on whether to approve the district formation.

Councilmember Berger said the above information should be added to the policy document as it was a good description of the process.

Ted Gazulis, 106 Howard, expressed his frustration to the Council about the process of drawing district boundaries and the fact the opponents to the process could be forced into a district by a majority vote. He told Council that there needed to be more of a mechanism for feedback from the opponents during the process because the proponents seemed to have the upper hand in the beginning.

He also said that if he was forced into the [Del Mar Undergrounding] district, he would like to buy bonds rather than have indebtedness over time.

Councilmember Gram said that he could pay off the assessment up front at a discount, and wondered why he would want to buy the bonds and pay the underwriter’s fees. Mr. Gazulis replied that it would be nice to have an income stream.

Mayor Slavitz asked the speaker what kind of feedback mechanism he suggested. He replied that there should be an opportunity to opt out and failing that, the Council should step in.

Councilmember Thompson acknowledged that it was sometimes a frustrating process. However, he said that what he liked about it was that it was so "grassroots" and "democratic." He likened the process to communities levying additional taxes for their school districts. Thompson said that it was not a process initiated by the Council and that it should remain that way.

Mr. Gazulis disagreed, stating that the Council should be "dad." Thompson replied that the Council still retained the ability to turn down a district in the end.

Vice Mayor Fredericks said that conditions sometimes existed that would allow someone to be excluded, but stated that "you have to be part of the process and gather information and present your case to proponents."

Priscilla Tripp, 104 Howard Drive, said it would be a good idea to provide examples of a range of costs plus the cost of laterals hook-ups, as well as a range of costs of the pay-outs (total cost over time).

With regard to the process of benefit assessment, Ms. Tripp quoted a code section that said it should be derived "in proportion to the benefit expected from the improvement." In her proposed district [Del Mar], Ms. Tripp said that those property owners at the top of the hill would benefit more than those with no views. She suggested that a cost benefit be established with that in mind and noted that in the Hillhaven district those with the greater views paid four times the assessment.

Director of Public Works Echols said that views were not a major component of the engineer’s analysis, but acknowledged that some districts have taken a different route by somehow factoring that in.

Councilmember Berger wondered whether or not the visibility of the poles or lines was taken into account in the benefit analysis. Director Echols said that the weighting of it varied, but Town Attorney Danforth said that in discussions with bond counsel the previous day, the Town had been advised not to prescribe the method of assessing benefits. Rather, Danforth said, it was up to the civil engineer to determine the benefit assessment. Councilmember Berger maintained that it would be a "fatal flaw" not to at least talk about it in policy.

Liz Bird, 2205 Paradise Drive, proponent of the Paradise Drive/Solano Undergrounding District, said that it was indeed possible to buy the bonds for a district and gave an example of the Girtlers buying the bonds for the Linda Vista Undergrounding Assessment District.

Ms. Bird said that she was concerned about the amount of the subscription cost per household being proposed in the Town’s draft policy. She said that it was hard to get people to give even $1,000, even those in favor of the district, and that raising it would have the effect of "killing" future districts.

She also asked about Item No. 7 which stated that 5% of bond proceeds would go to the Town.

Town Manager McIntyre said that it was also in the "old" policy, as a result of problems the Town had in recovering its costs during the formation of these districts. McIntyre said that one of Town Council‘s previous mandates to Staff was cost recovery. He noted, however, that bond counsel now advised stating that "reasonable costs" to recover time, rather than a percentage, should be included in the policy.

John Tripp, 104 Howard, described the installation of above-ground utility boxes in some locations in the Stewart project. He wondered if there was anything in the policy to address trading a pole for a box.

Director Echols said that the determination of where these boxes were located was done by the utility company, not by the Town. However, he said that the project engineer worked with the utility companies in designing the district, and said that it had been the preference of the utilities to keep boxes above ground, on a property easement if there was not enough room in the right- of-way. He said that below ground boxes were dangerous because they could fill up with water, although there was some latitude, but that the cost would range from $5,000-7,000 to place them below ground.

Mr. Tripp asked whether that was part of the benefits assessment—if one house ended up with a utility box or not. Mr. Echols said that he did not know.

Hank Broderick, 20 Rowley Circle, proponent of the Del Mar Undergrounding Project, said that he agreed that determining the actual costs was a moving target. He said that his group had collected checks for $1,000 and would not be able to get $700 more (as proposed in the new policy). He recommended against any kind of "sliding scale" subscription and advised Council to establish a system in which an adequate estimate could given to people to come up with. He concurred with Ms. Bird that $1700 would have killed the enthusiasm for the Del Mar District.

Mark Pressman said that the answer to the question of how opponents of a district got taken care of was addressed in the policy: 1) bond counsel would be available to opponents to assist them;

and 2) regarding the purchase of bonds, that ads were placed in the Ark stating that members of the community had right of first refusal to buy them.

Mayor Slavitz closed the public hearing.

Vice Mayor Fredericks said that it was important to clarify that some costs (such as the amount of the subscription deposit in the beginning) were determined by the utility rather than by Town.

Mayor Slavitz said it was important to provide people with a bottom line of actual costs.

Councilmember Berger said that it seemed odd not to talk about the "wide range of issues and ideas" contained in the benefit analysis.

Councilmember Thompson said that the policy was meant to provide a general overview, but that clearly, the process was a big undertaking that must be done by the residents themselves and that there would be a lot of work that the Town could not do in order to form them.

Thompson said he regretted that that something so good for community was so hard to achieve. He blamed this on both a failure of government and utilities, and said that he had worked hard on rewriting Rule 20A and B regulations. Before its bankruptcy, Thompson said, PG&E would donated their services to potential districts rather than charging a fee up front. Because of these circumstances, Thompson said, it was sad that only wealthy communities could afford these districts.

Thompson advised not to further undermine the efforts of undergrounding districts by raising "up front" fees. He said that while the Town should not be placed at risk, there had to be a way to find some flexibility or put up seed money up front, in order to continue the Town’s stated goal of supporting the undergrounding of utilities.

Mayor Slavitz said that the policy should make clearer that there was a legal fund for opponents of a district.

Council directed Staff to return with a revised draft policy concerning undergrounding.

Councilmember Gram excused himself from the meeting at the conclusion of Item No. 6.

7) Report by Town Manager – State Budget Update

Town Manager McIntyre said that he had nothing new to report.

8) Recommendation by Director of Community Development and Town Attorney – Rescind Emergency Ordinance and Resolution Pertaining to 145 Sugarloaf Drive

2^nd Reading and Adoption of Ordinance (Read by Title Only)

a) An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon

Repealing Ordinance No. 469 N.S. that Established

Streamlined Permit Review Procedures for a

Wireless Communication Facility Located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive

(Assessor Parcel No. 058-351-31)

Council waived the Staff report.

Mayor Slavitz opened the public hearing. There was no public comment and the public hearing was closed.

MOTION: To read ordinance by title only.

Moved: Fredericks, seconded by Thompson

Vote: AYES: Unanimous

Mayor Slavitz read, "An Ordinance of the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon repealing Ordinance No. 469 N.S. that established streamlined permit review procedures for a wireless communication facility located at 145 Sugarloaf Drive, Assessor Parcel No. 058-351-31."

MOTION: To adopt above ordinance.

Moved: Thompson, seconded by Fredericks

Vote: AYES: Berger, Fredericks, Slavitz, Thompson

ABSENT: Gram

COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION REPORTS

Mayor Slavitz said that a peace pole was being installed at Bel Aire School on Thursday, April 10 from 1:00 – 1:50 p.m.

Vice Mayor Fredericks said that the Congestion Management agency was moving the transportation measure to the March ballot and that Town meetings would be held.

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS

Town Council Weekly Digest – March 21, 2003

Town Council Weekly Digest – March 28, 2003

Town Manager McIntyre noted the invitation to the 25^th Anniversary celebration at Servino’s Ristorante on Thursday, April 3, 2003.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before the Town Council of the Town of Tiburon, Mayor Slavitz adjourned the meeting in memory of Councilmember Thompson’s stepfather, Bill Watkins, at 10:25 p.m., sine die.

S/

JEFF SLAVITZ, MAYOR

ATTEST:

DIANE CRANE IACOPI, TOWN CLERK