City Council - Regular Meeting

speech and values diversity of opinion. And the full text is on the front of the agenda. I'm not going to read the whole thing right now. Town Manager Johnson has the agenda been posted?

Yes, Mayor.

Any changes to the agenda?

No.

Number three, disclosure of ex parte communications on items where the Town Council acts in an adjudicatory or quasi judicial capacity. Anything to disclose? Hearing none, we will go to number four, open time for public expression. This is limited to three minutes per speaker on items that are not on our agenda. Anybody in the chamber for public comment? Anyone online, Donna, for public comment?

No one's online, Mayor.

Thank you. The next item is the proclamation celebrating National Fair Housing Month. April 2026. Whereas the principle of fair housing is not only state and national law and policy, but a fundamental human concept and entitlement for all citizens. And whereas discrimination based on race, national origin, gender, disability, familial status, exclusion of minor children, religion, marital status and sexual orientation is illegal in California. And whereas as a community, we welcome all good neighbors recognizing the contributions and richness tendered by a wide variety of young and old, male and female, people of all colors and ethnic backgrounds, religious traditions, et cetera. And whereas interested parties from both the private and public sectors will participate in a city, state, and national effort to promote fair housing. Now, therefore, on behalf of the Town Council and the Town of Ross, I do hereby proclaim the month of April, 2026, to be Fair Housing Month. the town of ross and urge all residents of our community to personally adopt the spirit of equal housing opportunity and in here adhere to the letter and character of the fair housing laws number six is the mayor's report that's me again sorry um chief potta's retirement and celebration coffee april 30th The town of Ross has been so fortunate that Ralph Pata joined us as police chief in March 2021. Chief Pata has demonstrated a deep commitment to serve and interact with the Ross community. Chief Pata began his career as a city fire dispatcher at age 17, becoming a police officer in 1985 at age 20. After 35 years, he retired from San Rafael in 2018 and then worked for the Northern California Computer Crimes Task Force, assisting and training investigators. In Ross, Chief Pata has been known for his open-door policy, broad smile, and warm laugh. He has seamlessly led his department of eight police officers. Chief Pata engages with residents and genuinely cares about our community. He has been an excellent partner with students and staff at Ross School and Branson. He was instrumental in educating Ross e-bike riders and leading the county's efforts to regulate e-bikes to enhance safety for the riders and our community. He has attended nearly every Ross Town Council meeting, providing a voice of reason and collaboration. After five years of dedicated service, Chief Pata will retire on April 30th. While we are sad to see him go, we are deeply grateful for his exceptional work with the Ross community and excited for him to begin his next chapter. The town will host a morning coffee for Chief Pata on Thursday, April 30th. Details will be coming soon, but please plan to join us to thank Chief Pata and wish him well. Please support downtown Ross businesses. Many of you are already aware that beloved Crown and Crumpet has closed. We are very sorry to see them go. Each month, the Ross Review has been featuring a Ross business. Please patronize these fine businesses in our charming downtown. They need our continued support to thrive. At the March RPOA meeting, Ross resident Kevin Erdman shared ideas about how to enhance the downtown Ross business environment. Working with RPOA, Kevin will be implementing some of these steps soon. We thank Kevin and RPOA for their efforts. Finally, Citizens Advisory Committee recommendations. Wednesday, April 29th. The Citizens Advisory Committee has been hard at work since mid-February and will give its recommendations about the town facilities and fire station at the April 29th council meeting. Please note that the May council meeting has been moved up to April 29th due to scheduling conflicts. This meeting, like all council meetings, will also be available on Zoom. Next, seven, council committee and liaison reports. Terry, yeah.

Yes. After conferring with our town manager and public works director, I voted no on the agenda item. The reason I voted no is because we currently receive a very modest amount each year, amount of money each year from TAM that supports our local roads in Ross. The amendment would reduce our funding along with other cities and towns to support a new category called Reimagine Roadways. This new category will support and improve regional traffic congestion through advanced planning efforts. Ross will not directly benefit from these funds, nor will Ross be eligible to apply for these funds. The vote on the Measure AA amendment was passed by most of the TAM commissioners. next week krista rich and i will meet with the tam executive director and the planning director to discuss this issue and hopefully identify opportunities for additional funding opportunities for us to maintain our local roads and transportation infrastructure especially for small towns like ross and belvedere in june the town of ross will also be asked to vote yes or no on measure a a amendments if 50 of cities and towns in marin vote yes the measure a a amendment will pass thank you go i have a report on mce clean energy which has been in the news uh

off and on this year. At this particular meeting, there was some, well, first of all, some progress made on issues that we've talked about for quite a while. One is a governance that the board has requested and authorized a governance study. You may recall there's been concern that the governance structure is unwieldy. The directors are all representatives of towns in four counties and the counties themselves. And so we have a board of 34 members and an executive committee trying to oversee in a very complex business with a budget of about $700 million a year. So I was pleased to see that there was agreement on a proposal, a request for services, and I hope that will come together soon. The finance committee that the board authorized previously and requested has been created and is now meeting periodically. A couple of controversial things. a proposal in connection with the budget to cap the budget for staff expenses without specifying how that would be done. And the CEO said, well, then we'll have to lay some people off. And so that did not pass, that effort to cap the budget. I think there's concern on the board about the staff expense. There's concern about how much MCE is charging for electricity. It's now more than PG&E for various reasons. And there is some concern about trying to keep electricity rates reasonable while still serving MCE's mission, which is to promote renewable energy. And then there's also a controversy about creating an interim committee because of some concern about the contract approval process. And the disagreement was whether this should all be something before the full board or some other Brown Act committee or whether an interim committee, which is a sort of an ad hoc committee, would be appropriate. My view was we should undertake this evaluation quickly. And we should get started. It'll all be public soon enough when we get the recommendations from the interim committee. So that measure passed. So stay tuned. I'm sure we'll have much more in the future as MCE and its board attempt to sort of restructure things and get things on track.

Thank you. Elizabeth, do you have anything? Next is staff and community reports. Ross Property Owners Association. Is there anyone online for Ross Property Owners Association? Okay. Town Manager Johnson.

Sorry, they're not on there.

Thank you. Thank you, Mayor and Council. And our POA, their meeting was not scheduled this week, I think due to spring break and other holidays. Our esteemed town clerk Cindy Martell retired last Monday and I'm grateful that our part-time office assistant Donna Redstone has agreed to fill in as our interim town clerk until the position of town clerk is filled. Donna has been with the town for over 10 years and we're fortunate to have her extra assistance. Fingers crossed that we will have a new town clerk on board soon. Until then, we ask the council and the community for your patience as we are short staffed in the administrative office. The council's annual budget workshop will take place on Thursday, April 23rd, starting at 9 a.m. in the council chambers. Later on tonight's agenda, the council will consider moving your May meeting up to Wednesday, April 29th. So we have a busy month ahead. the first section of the bolinas storm drain phase two improvements was completed in march and the contractor has cleaned up the site and demobilized the final section of storm drain which includes the new outfall into the creek will be completed in july after the sir francis drake paving project is completed Speaking of, the Sir Francis Drake paving project, which will be between Bolinas Avenue and El Camino Bueno, is scheduled to start after Ross School gets out for the summer and will require one-lane traffic control for approximately two weeks. So please mark your calendars, plan accordingly, and get out of town if you can. And that's it. Thank you for the opportunity to report.

Thank you. Number nine, the consent agenda. Does any member of the council wish to pull an item from the consent agenda? Does any member of the public wish to pull an item from the consent agenda? OK. Could we have a motion to approve the consent agenda?

I move we approve the consent agenda. I'll second.

Mayor McMillan?

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Robbins? Yes. Council Member Kirchherr?

Yes.

And Council Member Dally? Yes. Thank you.

Measure passes. Now we are moving to public hearing on planning projects. Part 1A is 5 Allen Avenue Design Review Variance and Town Council Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Number 2615. approving the project subject to conditions.

Good evening, mayor and council members. Tonight, the applicant at 5 Allen Lane is requesting a town council consideration for design review and a variance. The project is proposing to renovate the southern portion of their yard, which acts as their rear yard, to include construction of a new pool, spa, outdoor kitchen, an arbor, and patio. At the ADR meeting on March 17, the ADR Board voted 3-0 in support of the project, citing that the site's topography, irregular lot shape, and the existing privacy on the lot. I also want to point out in the construction management plan, the applicant has indicated that three vehicles will be parked on site with no street parking, and all materials will be stored on site. Staff requires that the town council consider adopting Resolution 2615, approving design review and a variance. Thank you.

Thank you. That's great about the on-site parking too. Thank you. Questions from council members? No. Does the applicant wish to make a statement? It's not necessary. You can if you want. OK. Any public comment on this item? Anybody online, Donna?

No one's online with a hand raised, Mayor.

Thank you. We'll bring it back for any discussion or a motion.

I move we approve resolution 2615. Is there a second? I'll second.

Mayor McMillan?

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Robbins?

Yes.

Council Member Kirchherr?

Yes.

And Council Member Dally?

Yes.

The motion passes.

Thank you. Next is 10B3 Allen Lane, Design Review Variance and Town Council Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Number 2614, approving the project subject to conditions. Alex.

Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. The neighbor of 5 Allen, 3 Allen Avenue, LA, is requesting Town Council consideration for designer view and a variance. They also are renovating their rear yard to construct a new pool and patio. And at the ADR meeting March 17th, the ADR board voted 3 to 0 in support of the project with modifications. The primary concern was the pool's proximity to the side and rear yard property line. and the ADR recommended increasing the setbacks. In response, the applicant did revise the plans by reducing the length of the pool and patio, resulting in increased setbacks along the side and rear yard setback. And also in the construction management plan for this one, the applicant indicated that they will provide three parkings on site and no street parking. Staff request that the town council consider adopting resolution 22614, approving designer view and a variance. Thank you.

Thank you. That's wonderful news about the parking also. Questions from council members? The applicant can make a statement, but it's probably not necessary. Okay. Any public comment on this item?

No one online, Mayor.

and nobody in the chambers. We'll bring it back for discussion or a motion.

I move we approve Resolution 2614.

And I will second.

Mayor McMillan? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Robbins?

Yes.

Council Member Kircher?

Yes.

Council Member Dowling? Yes. The motion passes.

You're welcome. Thank you. Okay, that is the end of public hearing on planning project one. We're moving to the administrative agenda. Item number 11, town council to consider adopting resolution number 2618, approving the police chief employment agreement between the town of Ross and Raul Ernesto Aguilar for the period April 27, 2026 through June 30, 2029 and amending the salary schedule. Town manager Johnson.

Thank you, Mayor. Current Police Chief Pata is retiring after serving as the Town's Police Chief since March of 2021. The Town conducted a thorough process for selecting a new Police Chief and Raul Ernesto Aguilar was the top candidate for the position. Chief Aguilar brings more than 25 years of law enforcement experience in Marin County to the Town of Ross. He previously served with the San Rafael Police Department in a range of specialized assignments and later held leadership roles overseeing traffic, street crimes, and community engagement teams. Most recently, he served as Chief of Police and Director of Safety at the College of Marin. Deeply committed to community partnership, Chief Aguilar prioritizes building trust through transparency, accessibility, and compassionate service. He believes that strong relationships between residents and public safety professionals are foundational to a thriving community. Chief Aguilar meets all the state requirements for the position and in addition holds a master's degree from the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC Berkeley. I negotiated an employment agreement with Chief Aguilar structured similar to the existing employment agreement with the current police chief. The agreement is for three years and two months through June 30, 2029, and expresses the terms of the agreement between the town and police chief, including salary and benefits. The town's pension system, called CalPERS, requires the town council to adopt a salary schedule by resolution. Each time salaries change, the town must adopt a new resolution amending the salary schedule to reflect the changes. in summary it's recommended that the council adopt resolution number 2618 approving the police chief employment agreement and amending the town salary schedule thank you thank you questions council members a public comment on this item anybody online no one's online mayor thank you donna

We'll bring it back then for discussion and a motion.

Well, I would recommend we adopt resolution number 2618, approving the police chief employment agreement between the town of Ross and Raul Ernesto Aguilar for the period of April 27 to 2026 through June 30, 2029, and amending the town's salary schedule. Second.

I make the motion. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Mayor McMillan? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Robbins? Yes. Council Member Kirchherr?

Yes.

Council Member Dowling? Yes. The motion passes.

Thank you, Town Council. And now that you've taken action, I would like to take a moment to introduce Chief Aguilar. And he is here this evening. And if you would be so kind, Chief, as to come up to the podium. And this is our new chief. Yay.

Thank you very much for the warm welcome, and thank you very much to Mayor McMillan, members of the council, and Ms. Johnson. I want to thank you for the opportunity.

Oh, he needs the mic on. Sorry, we have to turn your microphone on.

I want to thank you for the opportunity, and I am committed to leading the department with integrity, accountability, and transparency, and a deep commitment to our shared goals. So I look forward to working with all of you, and once again, thank you for the opportunity.

We will be, the chief starts on April 27th, and at your meeting, assuming the, well, the council just made the decision to move your meeting to April 29th. We'll plan on having a swearing in and some other opportunities to celebrate our outgoing chief and to welcome our new chief. So thank you so much.

Thank you. Good work. Number 12, town council to consider adopting resolution number 2611, amending the town fee schedule and receive a presentation from staff and MBS of the fee study report. I don't think we're doing that again, are we? We are again, okay. And receive a presentation from staff and MBS of the fee study report, including evaluation of fees for services for administration and finance, planning, building, public works, Police and General Plan Updates. Roberta.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Our presentation is only five minutes, so it'll just hit the key points on the fee study. So this item is for the Council to consider the adoption of Resolution No. 2611, which is an amendment to the Town's... schedule based on the fee study report. The council did receive a presentation during the February meeting regarding the purpose the analysis from the fee study, which evaluated finance and administration planning and building police and public work fees to accurately reflect the actual cost of providing those services. Since then, staff did add a false alarm fee, which would apply after three occurrences per calendar year. State law allows the town to recover but not exceed the reasonable cost of staff time and resources required to process applications. conduct inspections, and provide services that require fees to be supported by a cost of service analysis, as outlined in the fee study report. The recommended fees are consistent with Prop 26. Since the last update in 2016, staffing costs, workloads, and regulatory requirements have changed. So the study updates the fees based on current service levels and documented time spent with the goal of fair cost recovery. So the action before the council tonight is to adopt the resolution approving the updated town fee schedule as presented in the staff report and resolution and will be effective July 1st. So now let me turn it over to Nicole Kissam with NBS to provide a five-minute highlight of a few of the key points from the fee study. And then after that, Nicole and I are happy to answer any questions.

So good evening, everybody. Nicole Kissam here with NBS. I'm not sure if you can see me. Can you see me? And Roberta, I don't have sharing capabilities, so I don't know if you're putting the presentation up. Sure.

Nicole, can you accept the prompt?

Okay, there we go. Good evening, everyone. So, Roberta, would you like me to share the presentation from my screen, or do you have it up? Could you say that again? I didn't quite hear you. Oh, yes, please. Okay, no problem. Good memory. Yes, we were, okay, so I do not have screen sharing capabilities, so the clerk would need to grant me that. Okay, looks like we're moving now. Can everybody see the presentation?

Yes.

Great. Thank you. And I heard when you introduced this item, are we doing this again? You're correct. We were here in February. And we made a much more extensive presentation about the fee study and its results and what all goes into it. This is a very truncated version just to refresh your memory and you know, provide a refresh for any community members that maybe weren't there in February that might be interested. So I'm just going to review very briefly what the goals of the study are, how we approached it, what the results are, and of course, leave time for questions. So the goal of any fee study, we're calculating fees for services. And in California, fees cannot exceed the cost of providing services. The majority of our work with the town is to establish what the full cost of service is for each individual fee. And step two is where we're at tonight, where the council hopefully is taking action to set fees according to local policies. So these types of fees are cost recovery opportunities. They can be adopted by town council. They don't require any voter or voter protest. These are fees, not taxes. And we also did not analyze anything that is not a fee for service. So where you see that no bubble, we did not look at any taxes, fines, penalties, impact fees, et cetera. So these are the fee programs that the town has that we studied. We've got some miscellaneous administrative fees, quite a few. I think your core fee programs are really your planning and building departments and public works. Police has some miscellaneous administrative and processing fees. And as Roberta mentioned in her intro, the last time we really did this big of a deep dive was almost 10 years ago in 2016. So the way we approach any fee study is really we collect certain types of data, mostly budget information, staffing information, current fee schedule information, workload information, We review the fee structures in each fee program to make sure that fees are structured fairly, equitably and do target cost recovery. We also sometimes need to bring things up to date or remove fees that are not used anymore. And then from there, we perform the cost analysis, which is what makes the fees defensible. And we look at that in three ways, annually, hourly and per unit, which per unit just means per fee. So where you guys are at tonight is adopting the outcomes of the study and setting each individual fee according to the 100% maximum or less, depending on a local policy. So this is the annual summary of results here, just to recap this also in the staff report. So what we found is that on average or dirt for the time period of the study, the town is collecting about 1.3 million in these different fee programs. We didn't have any information to get that for a handful of fees for admin and finance. But when we compare that to the full cost recovery levels for each fee program, the town could recover 1.6 million in costs. So you can see here in this table where it says existing cost recovery percentage, building is recovering closest to 100% cost and then every other fee program is somewhere around 60, 70%, and police very low because police has very few fees. So by industry standard, this is a pretty good outcome for an overall 84% recovery rate. And the recommendations that staff have provided to set all fees at 100% or lower are just bringing that up a little bit from where the current revenues stand. Um, so there are some fees that are recommended at below a hundred percent. Those are listed in a staff report. We're just repeating them here. So in planning and building, there are a handful of fees, um, that the town would like to keep low, uh, ADU permits, small design review permits, use permits, uh, solar, which is capped by the state law and resale inspections. And then with police, you know, a lot of these processing fees are very difficult to charge at a hundred percent. They depend on ability to pay. And sometimes people are just trying to get these reports, you know, for insurance purposes and so forth. So with police, it's really to make the service available and encourage compliance while getting just a little bit of incremental recovery. That's it. We truncated this down to five minutes. So if you have any questions or anywhere where I can elaborate for you, let me know.

Thank you very much. That was very concise and we appreciate it. Questions from council? Public comment? Anybody online?

No one's online.

Okay, we'll bring it back for discussion or a motion.

I just want to say, I really, I mean, it's a dense report, but I really appreciated all the work that went into this. It's also the staff's work that went into this, too, to determine the cost. So it's nice to know that we've got something that's so well done and well organized. So thank you.

I move we approve Resolution 2611.

I'll second.

Mayor McMillan?

Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Robbins? Yes. Council Member Kircher?

Yes.

Council Member Dowling?

Yes.

The motion passes.

Thank you for all your great work on this, Roberta. Thank you. Nicole. Yeah. Thanks so much. Thank you. Have a good evening. We'll see you in 10 years. Yeah. Yes. Thank you so much, you guys. Bye. Thank you. Bye-bye. Item 13, Ross Recreation Update. Maureen.

Please give me a brief minute while I load our presentation. Certainly.

Hmm.

Roberta is making herself indispensable. She's going to have to be here to the end of every meeting.

We are getting there. Thank you for your patience. okay good evening mayor and members of town council um i'm maureen borthwick your recreation manager um and sitting next to me is wyatt manor recreation coordinator um and thank you for the opportunity to present an update of the ross recreation department To start off, we pretty much do this every presentation. We just want to remind the community and town council of Ross Recreation's mission, which is to provide a program of instruction to the public on subjects beneficial to the Ross community in which an individual may improve or develop him or herself physically, mentally, and or socially. Our team has changed a little bit over the past year. We've added some wonderful new staff members and team members. So I wanted to reintroduce you to them if you have not. Ross Rec is now fully staffed with an experienced and engaged team. Serving in the admin office is Mallory Barron, Recreation Clerk, Wyatt Mann, Recreation Coordinator, and myself, Maureen Berthwick, Recreation Manager. Kiera Ortiz and Kelly Nunez lead the After School Kids Club program. Lorenzo Cowell, also known as Coach C, is our Ross school after school sports lead and kids club support. And Sophia Vasquez is our Happy Hive after school lead. And Coach John Mark Schaefer, who is not pictured above, is our sports program lead at Basage Elementary. The department is focusing on team and individual strengths to increase motivation, morale, and overall performance. And the results have been significant. The team has produced a broad list of new initiatives for fiscal year ending 26, including those you see listed and more. Programs span from new game clubs, like Dungeons and Dragons and the Wheel Kids Bike Club, to driftwood painting and wine workshops for adults. The department also worked with local community sports clubs, such as Ross Valley Lacrosse, also known as the Grizzlies, on after school lacrosse at Ross School and at Visage. In addition to new program initiatives, REC staff are proud to share the following accomplishments thus far this year. New to this year was our MOU agreement and partnership with MAGIC, Marin Art and Garden Center. helping to kick off a successful program held on Magic Campus, such as Happy Hive Afterschool for preschool students. The team further expanded flexible afterschool child care options, such as Gap Care for kids club families, for families needing care to fill the one-hour gap between kindergarten dismissal and dismissal for older siblings or when later programs begin. The team saw growth of the Ross Rec Basketball League, increasing to 312 players for this 2026 season, which was approximately 50 more players than last year. The department has offered over 150 programs to the Ross community from September to today. This does not include summer camps or events, mind you. Lastly, staff was excited to support the reestablishment of the organic farm stand on Ross Common. And due to the approval of the consent calendar, the day will be coming back again. All right, so focus on kids club after school. So an accomplishment in its own right. Kids Club After School has been flourishing with between 16 and 31 students now served daily. Staff have listened to families who have requested support for the gap between kinder dismissal at 2 p.m. when their older children are released at 2.45 p.m. We have been successfully offering these families this one-hour care option at a reduced rate to cover this gap. still majority of families utilize the program from the full program from dismissal to 5 pm additionally new to the fiscal year ending 26 season was the six week short session for kindergarten families this was a separate kids club program registration that covered the six weeks where kindergartners transition to the school schedule The program was offered to kindergarten families from 1230 p.m. to 5 p.m. for the duration of the first six weeks of school. Our total year-to-date income for Kids Club is currently $124,000, and that's in comparison to the $99,000 from last year. Yeah, so we are very excited of just the growth and support from the community to see this program grow and flourish. All right, on to Happy Hive. So created with Kids Club in mind, Happy Hive after school program began this past fall with the launch of the MOU agreement. Similar to Kids Club, Happy Hive runs daily and is offered to garden school preschool families from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. with a 4 p.m. extended care option. The program began with five students per day and now serves nine to 11 students per day, which is our max capacity. Our total year-to-date revenue for this program is $51,000. So 12% of that actually comes from, if you look at our chart, so 12% of that comes from our, we created a flexible drop-in pack. So 12% of that income comes from that. We also are offering no school day camps for when the garden school is not offering school. So 12% comes from that, and then 34% comes from our fall enrollment, and now 42% from current winter enrollment, which is January through June. All right, so looking more broadly across the department, fiscal year ending 26 estimated revenue is expected to reach close to $1 million in comparison to our budget of $907,000. Significant call-outs include growth in the kids' classes account due to an increase in daily enrollment and the addition of the six-week kinder short session. Also successful happy hive after school and an increase in the basketball league program enrollment. you Excuse me. The department did see a modest reduction in field rentals due to the loss of the Ross Valley Lacrosse Club. Staff are working on ways to promote field rentals to other sports groups and community partners. Two account categories, TOTS and contributions, are held at 0% for the year, as we did not receive income for either of these. And currently TOTS classes fall under kids class accounts, which will be split into its own account for next year. So we can see the breakdown a little bit better. Staff look to continue strengthening our positive momentum across the board in all program categories well into the summer and next fiscal year. Okay. Expenses year-to-date are higher than expected due to our class program growth and an increase in overall enrollment. Specific callouts include an increase in the contract instructor program line that is around $40,000 to $50,000 higher than budgeted due to an increase in contract-led classes. Additionally, staff are reporting an increase in wages and benefits due to the need for more staff. For example, Kids Club went from two staff members daily to three in order to accommodate the growing program and meet ratio safety and fund standards. Rec staff have placed a greater emphasis on community involvement this year. Ross Rec has been an active partner in RPOA, Ross Auxiliary, Age-Friendly Ross, and Ross School events, most recently activating a live-action Candyland at the March 28th Spring Fling event. Staff are also hard at work preparing for the 2026 Fourth of July Parade and Celebration, which is scheduled to kick off on Saturday, July 4th, from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. Shifting gears slightly for this year, staff is excited to organize the American Pie Baking Contest for all baking enthusiasts and bring back the popular mechanical bowl. Don't worry, our patriotic pooches will be highlighted in our parade in the Dogs on Parade group. Staff have also set a date for the 2026 Ross Town Dinner, which will be held on Friday, September 4th. After a successful 2025 event, the Ross Town Dinner will once again be held at Magic Campus. It will just be moved to the Great Landing Gazebo while construction is happening. Lastly, staff have begun initial planning for the 2026 Ross Turkey Trot, which will be held on Sunday, November 15th. Next steps for the department includes a focus on summer camp enrollment and promoting our incredible lineup of summer programs, running the Happy Hive Spring Break Camp for two to five-year-olds next week, firming up plans for the 2026 Fourth of July Parade and Celebration, coordinating the fall 2026 program guidebook, and continuing to nurture important partnerships and collaborations across Ross and throughout Marin County. Thank you, Mayor and members of Town Council. If you have any questions, we are here to answer them.

Thank you, Maureen. That was a great report. Questions, Council Members? I just had a question. I recall several years ago, we were on the verge of canceling the Kids Club. Is that correct? That is correct. And now it's thriving, surging. Yes. That's great. OK, great. Public comment on this item? Anybody online, Donna?

No one's online, Mayor.

Thank you. Then we'll bring it back for any further discussion. Elizabeth.

I wanted to mention Kids Club also. You know, we were the only town that didn't have any after-school care for quite a long time, and Kids Club was really on its last legs. Elizabeth Brekus gets a lot of credit for pushing hard to keep it going, but you've really run with it and made it something that a lot of families want to participate in. I think that's really wonderful. You've done a great job with Kids Club.

Thank you. I definitely want to recognize the whole Ross Rec team for that effort. It is definitely not just me. It is their staff. They are wonderful. They listen to families. And we created a flexible option that families want. And that is clearly shown here.

Great. Thank you, Maureen. Thank you, Wyatt. Wonderful. 14, Town Council to receive a presentation from Fieldman Rolop, the town's municipal advisor, regarding the town's financial condition, budget outlook, and capacity to support debt service associated with implementation of the facility's master plan and potential capital and operating costs related to the Friends of the Ross Firehouse Fourth Initiative. Town Manager Johnson.

Thank you. We have a space constraint. David, would you like to do the introduction just from the podium? Is that all right? Oh, OK. OK. Just a moment. I'm just waiting. Are you guys happy? Are you ready to go? Okay. Okay. I'll just give it just a short presentation. So good evening, Mayor and council members. This evening, this item before you tonight is not an action item. It's a presentation. And I worked with our project manager, David Kelly, to bring this forward to the council because your facility master plan to be implemented could very well require some kind of financing plan. And so I think that I'd like to start off with having an education for the council as well as staff, as well as our residents and members of the Citizens Committee that has gotten together these past couple of months, I thought this would be a good opportunity to have us all learn about the different kinds of financing that is available and have some professionals take a look at our budget to be able to, in our five-year financial forecast, just to confirm with some of the things that I and the staff team have been saying about the status of our financial well-being. So we have a David Kelly prepared with me the staff report that's in your agenda attached to it. We have a memorandum that was prepared by our consultants with field men and roll up. And they are here this evening. I'm going to let them introduce themselves and take off with our presentation. what should we um are we going to see if the council wants to ask questions as we go through the slides is that okay we didn't discuss that earlier but is that our right mayor if you probably makes more sense Yeah, some of the slides have a good, robust amount of information. So I think it would be good for the council to be able to ask questions as you go along. And David Kelly did put out a request for proposals to have this work done. The scope of work was specific to review our materials, our budget documents, and other financial information, and prepare this presentation for the council. and we did receive three proposals and our treasurer Jeff Kuhn was able to take a review of the proposals along with David Kelly and myself and we chose the firm of Fieldman Rollup to do this work for the town. We entered into an agreement with them to prepare for this. And we gave them about a week or 10 days to prepare this. So really appreciate that they've stepped up to the plate and helped us put together this information from the council. So thank you. I'm going to let you guys introduce yourselves, if that's OK.

good evening um mary mcmillan and council members my name is andrew reardon and i'm from fieldman roll up and associates and i'm here with my colleague hi good evening i'm dan shaw i'm also a fieldman yeah and just before we get started just a quick overview of our firm we're based out of california in irvine we have offices in the bay area we've been in the industry for over 60 years and our sole practice is advising public sector agencies, city school districts, special districts throughout the state. We're a regulated industry. We're licensed by the SEC. We both have our licenses and it's very important understanding our role. We act as a fiduciary to our clients. We provide advice that's in the best interest of our clients only. With that, we can turn to the next page. This is just an overview of what we plan to review tonight. Just discussing the town's capital plans and needs, your financial capacity in terms of your general fund. and discussing your budget trends and discussing the funding gaps of the capital facilities that you're currently reviewing and potential revenue options. And before we get into the town's funding needs, we wanted to review the town's revenue profile. As you know, the town's revenue profile is largely based on property tax base revenues, 85% of those coming currently from property taxes. 13 percent coming from your measure e parcel tax and the the remaining two percent are from other sources like sales tax business license tax and property transfer taxes so you have the majority of your revenues coming from property tax revenues which are a very stable revenue source there isn't a lot of variation there and And in terms of your projections, the projections are largely fixed and really are heavily dependent on your assessed valuation growth. So what is the town trying to fund? We have three buckets of CIP plans here. The first one is the town's facilities master plan ranging in cost of $26 million to $30 million. The Friends of Ross Firehouse, or fourth initiative, which include a capital cost of about $22 million to $28 million, as well as ongoing operation needs of about $3.4 million to $5 million a year. And the third bucket covers the town's ongoing capital improvement funding needs that are supported currently by the town's general fund and those range from about those total about $3 million a year and that includes $1 million for your Ross common project funds for facilities and equipment projects as well as your underground project. So this slide provides numbers setting out the town's financial capacity. So what can you realistically afford based on what your current revenues produce? And that's approximately about $11.2 million based on your adopted fiscal year 26 budget. We applied Standard & Poor's, or S&P. They're a leading credit rating agency in our industry. And their general rule of thumb is that for a well-managed municipality that their general fund shouldn't carry more than six to eight percent of their general revenues so for Ross that means a maximum of about six hundred seventy thousand dollars to eight hundred ninety thousand dollars those are your outer limits of of debt service that can be carried each year. And so just to bring that into context, we ran certain hypothetical bonding scenarios. And what we've shown in this graph here is the estimated debt service needed to produce a $10 million bond issuance that is about roughly $650,000 a year in annual debt service. So while that is just slightly below the S&P guidelines of 6%, you know, there isn't a lot of room there. When we look at the $20 million bond issue, it jumps up to an annual debt service of approximately $1.3 million, and that far exceeds what you can afford at this time. And then, again, looking at a bond issuance of $30 million, that's approximately $1.9 million in annual debt service.

So go ahead. I have a question on this. Is this assuming that the town is using its facilities to service or mortgage the debt? Or is this assuming that there's some kind of an election and all the homeowners are being assessed?

So this is just looking at your current picture. If the town were to move forward, you would need to approve some sort of new tax revenue. to do that. And then Dan will get into the different types of debt options available to you. There is a lease revenue option that the town will have to encumber to move forward with that type of financing. We'll talk about a geo bond financing, which does not require that. I don't know if that answers your question.

so may i may i just add um mayor that this is if the town were to take out debt itself this is not this is not before going to property owners this is just if we wanted to take out a loan and i'm sure we'd have to secure it in some way right but if we wanted to take out a loan do we have the capacity to do this to pay for it ourselves without going to the voters That's what the voters are going to want to know. Are you sure you guys can't afford to pay for it out of your existing budget? And that's what this is demonstrating that According to the S&P guideline, we might be able to come up with some money. However, I just wanted to note that if you look at the green line, when it says that 10 million, we could come up with, maybe we could come up with $600,000 a year. Right now, for example, for the past several years, The council has been putting away paying optional payments to CalPERS to address unfunded pension liability at a minimum of $200,000 a year. So you make that choice with that. You've also been putting funding aside in your capital projects funds. So those are the things that when they talk about there wouldn't be a buffer. you wouldn't be able to do. You would be very difficult for, you would take away a lot of your discretionary decision making. Am I speaking out of turn or is that right? Okay.

Thank you.

So this slide assumes that the town would be funding the debt based on the town's revenues and budget and facilities that could be mortgaged or secured for the debt. I think it's important to understand that

that's what this slide is yes okay great the takeaway that is that the town can only afford a very little amount each year to pay towards debt it needs to go to the voters for approval of additional taxes or bond bond repayment okay thank you

So this slide illustrates something that isn't obvious by looking at a balanced budget. The town's revenue grows by 4%. It's largely based on your property tax revenues, growing 4% in each year. expenses are a different story those are growing according to the town by a higher number each year of anywhere from six to ten percent per year and those cover various expenses like personal expenses fire insurance and pensions costs and those are growing faster than your your revenues of four percent each year so there's a gap. And what the town has been doing is that you've been reducing transfers to the general fund. Excuse me, you've been reducing transfers to the capital fund to help balance the budget. And so over time, The gap between the revenues and expenditures will just grow. So your cushion will decline as well. And so it will be much more difficult for the town to balance this budget by reducing transfers to the capital fund. So we wanted to explain that. So if you're taking on debt without approving any new tax revenue measures, there will be little to no additional revenues to pay debt service. Yeah.

The question on the expenditure growth is 6% to 10%. Is that based on this year? I'll defer to you. David, we received that from the town. My question really is, how much faster is that expenditure trajectory going to go?

That's a great question, Mayor McMillan. And the team was provided a copy of the five-year forecast, and we're in the process of fully validating the forecast and looking at both the revenue growth and the expense growth. The growth in expenditures of 6% to 10% per year is not so much reflective of this year's budget, but future year's budget. And so kind of the point of it is that as you see those the expenditures grow, you're going to have less flexibility within the budget to have the general fund fund any debt service, even though it's already limited in terms of the amount that could contribute to debt service. it's likely to be constrained going forward. So it's really kind of looking ahead, which is very prudent to do, is to look at the forecast and see, you know, what is the trend going forward? And that's what the five-year forecast really predicts and tells us is that there's going to be, you know, greater expenditures, greater expenditure growth than revenue growth.

So the 6% to 10% is based on a five-year projection going out?

That's correct.

OK, thank you.

Thank you, David. And I'd just like to add, Mayor and Council, that your budget work session is in just a few weeks. And one of the items we always bring forward is an update of the five-year financial forecast. So we're scrambling right now to put all that together in order to get it out to the Council. But this analysis was based on the one in the current budget.

So the next couple of slides put some numbers around the different buckets of CIP plans that the town is reviewing. This first one reviews the facilities master plan and what the town can carry as far as debt service. Again, the facilities master plan cost is between $26 million to $30 million. Annual debt service related to those are approximately $1.7 million on the low end and approximately $1.9 million on the high end. And when you add the existing annual costs of the town's CIP needs, which are a range of $1 million to $1.5 million, you get a total annual burden of about $2.7 million to $3.4 million. And that represents approximately 24 to 30% of your general fund revenues. each year, which is quite a big amount. And one that you couldn't really feasibly enter in at this stage based on your current condition of your, or based on your current levels of your general fund revenues. Okay. The next slide looks at the fourth financial burden, and it's a bigger number because of the annual operating costs required to run the fourth initiative projects. We took a look at the fourth bond debt service related to the cost for that initiative, and that is $17.6 million. The annual debt service related to that is about $1.1 million. When you add the estimated annual operations cost of $3.4 million and $5 million, as well as the city, or excuse me, the town's ongoing capital needs of one to one and a half million dollars we get a total annual burden of 5.5 million dollars to 7.6 million dollars in the ratio to the town's annual revenues is is much greater between 49% to 68%. And that just isn't financially feasible to do that. So one note I did want to make is that the fourth preliminary cost estimates doesn't include all of the needed facility master plan elements. I just wanted to provide that clarification.

If I might just clarify. So what she's saying is that that is based on FORF's presentation that they made to council on January 8. So that $17.6 million number is the number that FORF came up with and presented to the council. It does not include all the elements that the council adopted facility master plan. For example, it doesn't include our public works and our storage yard for the secure yard for the police cars, et cetera. And so we just wanted to make sure that that's where that $17 million number is coming from. Thank you.

And for illustrative purposes, we wanted to combine both plans, the facilities master plans, as well as the fourth initiative. And the total annual costs of those plans, including the town's existing capital needs, ranges between $7.2 million to $9.5 million. And that represents approximately 64% to 85% of the town's revenues. And so in all of these scenarios, taking on these obligations without raising new revenues? Is it financially feasible for the town?

I was just going to check. So the fourth is the annual operations, which would include staffing. But if the cost of staffing would go up between 6% and 10% every year, ongoing. So that number will get higher and higher over time. Right. Okay.

I just have a question do any other towns or cities have this kind of burden at 64 to 85 percent no no you you wouldn't be able to go out into the market with that type of burden okay thanks and and just to clarify so the SMB guideline

says that towns and cities should not spend more than 6% to 8% of their annual revenue on debt service, correct? Right. So this, when the low is not 6% to 8%, it's 64%. And the red one is not 6% to 8%, it's 85%. Is that correct? Yeah.

So it's 10 times the S&P guideline. Right.

And we need the revenue to cover all of your expenses to provide services to the community, such as law enforcement, such as the fire department, such as planning and building and public works.

Could I ask a question? Look at the same slide. The first line item, FMP bond debt service, that's the existing facilities master plan concept B that we're talking about. And then the next line, fourth bond debt service, that would be their competing proposal. But we wouldn't do both of these, right? We'd do one or the other. Aren't we double counting? That's my concern.

Go ahead, David.

Thank you, Councilmember Kercher, for your question. And I think we wanted to note that, that this is really for illustrative comparison purposes. The difficulty is, as was stated earlier in the presentation, that the fourth initiative does not cover all of the facilities, all the elements of the facilities master plan. So there's There's definitely some overlap, but that would ultimately need to do some additional scenario planning to pull out what items are in the facility master plan, which aren't in the fourth initiative. And as the town manager opined earlier, some of those items include, of course, public works, the new admin facility, the police storage yard the public works storage yard so uh you know again this is just to illustrate if council desired to fund all of those elements uh what that would look like in terms of a burden to your general fund so there so really the the if you want to say um double counting would be uh the the there's a fire facility and there's uh potential opportunity to house the paramedics in that fire facility, that the cost of the paramedics is also included in the facility master plan. But other than that, there's really not a whole lot of overlap currently.

I just think this is on the high side because of that. I think you could take the fourth cost, their projection, and add something to it. for the public service, I mean the public works yard, for example, or secured parking, or anything that they haven't covered. Remember, they had a fairly specific proposal for rehabbing, rebuilding the existing public safety building. And then they had, and they came up with, I've forgotten, $11 million or something like that. And then they had just a kind of a catch-all saying, well, perhaps another $7 million for the administrative buildings. And then during our discussion, it turned out they had not really taken into account things like the public works yard and so forth. So obviously that's a very general number and would have to be threshed out. But just the same, I'm a little concerned about these bottom line numbers of $7 million to $9.5 million. I do think there's enough of an overlap that it would not really be $7.5 million.

Through the Mayor, I'd just like to direct remind the council that staff did prepare a memo in the end of February. I think we published it on February 26th, 27th, where we evaluated the fourth proposal and compared it to the facilities master plan. and came up with some things that, because it's not just that it doesn't include elements that the facility master plan does. Our staff team, which includes our consultant team, also had concerns that were identified and findings that were identified in that memorandum that also talked about the forest proposal and how well or how really rather how it doesn't it doesn't take care of any flooding take care of the flooding issues as much as it needs to. So there are other deficiencies in that plan from staff and consultants perspective that it does make it difficult to to come up with something you can't it's not we can't really compare apples to apples but I just think that the takeaway of this initial part of the presentation is just that we don't have funding in the budget to be able to take on very much debt ourselves. You need to go to the voters. And I don't think that's a surprise to everyone. But I wanted to make sure that our professional consultants

took a look at that and confirmed what staff has been reporting out to the council on that matter thank you i have a question aren't we doing this like a month or two early because we're talking about the fourth plan but we have a committee that's working right now to try to reconcile plan b and the fourth plan so why are we looking at this after April 29 when we hear what that plan is and if the council approves it it seems premature to be going through I understand that the debt burden that's important but comparing fourth to plan B to me that seems premature because it there may be changes next month or late at the end of this month and I think that's what we really want to be focusing on Thank You mayor Pro Tem Robbins

You know I was charged with implementing concept be and moving this forward the item before you tonight is not an action item it's simply it's a presentation it's to start to make sure that the Council has a foundation on. on financing options. And we haven't gotten to the primer part of this presentation. But it's to start this conversation. And one of the reasons I really wanted to bring forward this initial step so that the council could receive some education would have an opportunity to ask questions like you're doing tonight, would have the opportunity for us for more information, so that we are prepared to come back to you to provide the information that you're looking for. Because I don't know what's going on with the committee. I don't know what recommendations they're going to give. However, if this has anything to do with putting something on the ballot this November, the council is going to be under an extremely tight timeline. So I wanted the council and the community, and frankly staff, we all need to be learning about this. I wanted us to all have an opportunity to start asking questions, to start receiving the information. And I wanted you to have that information before the committee comes forward because they, I don't know for sure, but they might have recommendations about different kinds of debt financing. And I wanted the council to be able to already be informed. So that simply is. Nothing nefarious. It's nothing. It's just simply I want to give the council good information before you start. So we'll definitely, you know, if the council wants to move forward with this conversation, we'll be coming back and providing more information tailored to what the town, what the council wants.

I was gonna say, I think Elizabeth too, this may be very useful information for that citizens committee as they're working to understand these costs.

We ran a few stress tests on the town's property tax revenue because that is the biggest driver of the town's annual revenues. And as we discussed earlier, it's about 85% of the property tax revenues come or the revenues come from property tax revenues. And we ran three scenarios. The first we called the best case scenario that assumes a revenue growth of 4% in each year. The second scenario we ran assumed a revenue growth of 3% in each year. And the third scenario we called the downside case, we assumed property growth of 1% in each year. It's kind of hard to see in that top graph there, but the total expenditure is growing 6% to 10% over the next five years. And the gap between the three stress test scenarios, you can see that that gap slowly declines over time and under the 2%, the downside case scenario, you can see that there are no surplus revenues in that final year. And these 1% swings in assessed valuation growth are not big swings, but they do have a very big impact on the town's budget over the next five years and you know we all know it's all market dependent and it's really out of the town's control on how um this source of revenues are uh fair over the next five years. So we just wanted to illustrate that these assumptions over time will eat into your revenues. And if you take on debt without approving new tax revenues, that your ability to repay debt diminishes as well. Any questions on that? OK. With that, I'll turn it over to Dan.

Hi. Hi. So with our analysis showing that a two-issue new debt would likely need new revenue streams, I'd like to just go over what those are, just as an educational starting point for everybody. There are four main options for a town like Ross to generate additional sources of revenue. The first option is an ad valorem general obligation bond measure, which taxes property based on assessed value. This requires two-thirds voter approval and can only fund capital, not operations. Next, a parcel tax is a flat fee per parcel. You guys are familiar with this with Measure E. It also requires a two-thirds approval. It can fund operations, capital, or debt service. Our third option is a CFD or Melrose tax. And unlike a flat parcel tax, a CFD special tax can be structured by square footage or land use. It can fund both capital and ongoing services. And CFDs, they can be complex to administer, and they do require two-thirds voter approval as well. Our fourth revenue option is the real property transfer tax. It applies at the time of sale of a property. It only requires a simple majority, not that two-thirds that these other three options require, but it's very volatile depending on how many homes are sold that year. Another caveat is Ross would actually need to become a charter city temporarily in order to raise that tax rate above the default state rate.

Yeah. On the becoming a charter town. Is there something on the fall ballot that is going to preclude potentially towns converting into charter towns?

Potentially, yes. That could be. And our next slide will kind of show, because that real property transfer tax is so volatile, it's very hard to bond against, and it's probably the least suitable option.

I know Belvedere tried to do that. a few years ago and was unsuccessful even though it only required a 50%, 50.1% majority.

May I just, to clarify the item that is, I think it just qualified for the fall ballot, statewide ballot. It's for, it would preclude cities from becoming charter cities for that purpose, the purpose of increasing their real estate transfer, not preclude cities from just becoming charter cities.

It's just for that purpose.

But why would we want to be a charter city if it's not to and add this tax.

I defer to the town attorney for that.

There's a lot of reasons why some cities become charter cities, but I think that's beyond the breadth of what we're talking about tonight. I think they're presenting it as an option for this tax. And I just want to correct something. Once you become a charter city, you are a charter city. It's not for a limited time. The voters would have to take away the charter at some point in the future.

Just a question about the CFD. Flexible tax based on square foot of the piece of property or the building on the property?

There's a lot of flexibility there, but it's typically the property, the square footage of the building.

And the land use?

Land use, whether it's commercial, residential, developed, undeveloped.

An acreage would be about the same. It's like this square footage. OK, great. Thank you.

This table here summarizes the differences between these four options. I'll point out a few things. The GEO bonds are the only option that can't fund operations or pay-as-you-go capital. They are strictly for backing long-term debt. Every other option has a little bit more flexibility when it comes to how the money is used, how the revenues are used. Three out of the four options require two-thirds voter approval. The transfer tax is the only exception needing just that simple majority. But as we noted, it's extremely volatile and market dependent, which makes it a worse choice for the primary funding source for a long-term bond. Revenue stability matters a lot when you're pledging it to debt service. You need predictable cash flows to make bond payments. That favors parcel taxes, CFD taxes, and the GEO bond levy. All right, after going over those revenue sources, I want to give a little basic overview of municipal bonds. Municipal bonds are how local governments borrow money to fund public projects. You, the town, issue the bonds, and investors provide the cash up front, and then you repay principal plus interest over the next 20 to 30 years, or however long the term is of the bond issuance. The interest earned from municipal bonds is typically exempt from federal and state income taxes, which allows investors to accept a lower interest rate, which means cheaper borrowing for the town. How bonds are repaid depends on the type. General obligation bonds are repaid through that ad valorem property tax levy we discussed. Lease revenue bonds or certificates of participation are repaid from the town's general fund. When we started this presentation, those were lease-backed, either a COP or a lease revenue bond. So they're an obligation of the town's general fund. And then CFD, or special tax bonds, are also known as Melrose bonds. They are repaid through that special tax on properties within a specific district, within that CFD. Lastly, I just want to say municipal bonds often require voter approval, with most local bonds in California requiring two-thirds. The key exception is leaseback financings, which are lease revenue bonds and certificates of participation. They do not require voter approval, but those, like I said, do create an obligation of the town's general fund. So California's Constitution, specifically Article 16, Section 18, sets the framework for local government debt. The general rule is two-thirds voter approval for cities and towns before taking on the long-term debt, but there are the three recognized exceptions. The first one we've talked about, it's the lease financings that are backed by the general fund. That's the first exception. The next two exceptions are not very applicable to the town. The first one being enterprise revenue bonds, which are repaid from utility revenues, not the general fund. And then the third exception being court-ordered obligations. These are involuntary court-ordered obligations, such as pension obligation bonds. I just want to point out one nuance. Special districts like CFDs operate under different rules and have more flexibility than cities and counties under Article 16. you just explain again what is lease financing lease financing so lease financing there's two main bond types that fit under lease financing it's a lease revenue bond or certificate of participation they are structured a little bit legally but the way the debt is repaid is very they're very similar essentially with lease revenue bonds and COPs, the issuer has to put up collateral, real property as collateral, and then the repayments are paid from the town's general fund.

Those were the first few slides that you were covering.

Exactly. Yep. And what we've seen is that the debt service would be too high to be too much of a burden on the general fund of the town without an additional revenue source. One of the options, I'm going to go through general obligation bonds first. When we discuss lease revenue bond options for the town, we're assuming a parcel tax gets approved to repay the lease revenue bond. And we'll get to that. So the first option I wanted to show is general obligation bonds. They are the lowest cost borrowing tool available to the town. They're backed by an unlimited property tax pledge, so investors find them to be the highest level of security. They have the highest confidence with them, and that translates into the lowest interest rate and a lower borrowing cost for the town. The trade-off with general obligation bonds, you need two-thirds voter approval, and the proceeds can only go towards capital improvements, not operations. One thing worth noting on equity, because GO bonds, the taxes scale with assessed value, and with Prop 13, meaning similar homes can have completely different assessed values depending on when they were purchased, neighbors can end up paying very different amounts for the same bond measure. So our chart on the right here shows a few options with a GO bond issuance if the town were to issue a $10 million, $20 million, and $30 million GO bond. We've found that a $10 million GO bond issuance would require a tax rate of $20 per $100,000 of assessed value in order to cover the debt service on the bonds. Just for an example, we found that if a home was $2 million or had an assessed value of $2 million, that levy would be approximately $400 in year one. A $20 million bond would double that tax rate to $40 per $100,000 of assessed value, which would be a levy of $800 for a $2 million home. And then a $30 million bond sale would be a tax rate of $60 per 100K of assessed value, resulting in about $1,200 for a $2 million home. I'll pause here for any questions, because that was a lot of information.

I have a question on your 4.75 interest rate. Is that the current interest rate?

There's a little bit of room in there, a little bit of just protection in case the markets move.

I would say a 30-year GO bond now is about 4.5%. You would be a very highly rated town, and so about 4.5% would be the current levels. And what do you think it'll be in November?

The joke I always hear is, if we knew where rates would be, we wouldn't be working.

And if you can price before, then you should.

So this is just for capital improvements only, not ongoing?

Correct, yes.

And it would be for how many years?

Typically, the max term is 30 years.

Okay, so every year a property owner would have to pay, if it was a $10 million, it would be 402 for 30 years.

402, yes, if they had a $2 million home.

If they had a $2 million home.

Yes. There's one thing here. With these bonds, we have level debt service. And assuming assessed values go up each year, which they typically do, around 3% to 4%, the tax rate would actually drop down. It would get lower as time goes on because everyone's assessed value is higher. They need to tax each one less to cover the debt service.

Does that mean that the term Is reduced or does that mean that our tax, the amount on our tax?

The amount on the tax bill would go down.

Huh, that's interesting. I've never seen that happen.

A lot of the times with the school district GO bonds, they will escalate debt service to match the assumed growth and assessed values. So that's why you see that your tax bill for school bonds kind of stay constant.

City Council Chambers, And the town would not have the same tax rate constraints, like the local school district does the school district is falls under prop proposition 55 where they are limited by their tax rate and. City Council Chambers, I think the school district is limited to 25 or $30 per $100,000 of AV but, but the town would have greater flexibility.

All right, we'll move into the lease-backed financings, which are lease revenue bonds or certificates of participation. They are general fund-backed obligations that don't require voter approval. What happens is the town pledges an essential facility as security that can be existing or one that's a new building. And then a JPA or nonprofit issues the bonds on the town's behalf. The town makes annual lease payments to pay the debt service on the bonds. The advantages are speed and simplicity, basically with there being no ballot measure. So sometimes the financing can take only three to four months. The structure is widely used and well understood by the market. It's very common. The limitation with this option is that it creates a general fund obligation. And from our previous presentation, that is an issue for the town. So for, yeah. So while the lease revenue bonds would still be a general fund obligation, okay, sorry, I lost myself. So for our modeling for this option, we've assumed that the town adopts a parcel tax similar to Measure E, that that money flows and repays the debt service. So the parcel tax money would flow into the general fund to pay the debt service on the COPs or lease revenue bonds. So it's still a general fund obligation, there's just a new revenue stream that helps pay it. The table on the right shows the same $10 million, $20 million, and $30 million scenario for the structure. And what we've come up with is in order to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of a $10 million lease revenue bond, the town would need a parcel tax of about $777 per parcel. If we were to up that to a $20 million issuance, it would require a parcel tax of about $1,500 per parcel. And a $30 million issuance would require a parcel tax of about $2,300 per parcel. This table also kind of adds in what the parcel tax would be when combined with Measure E, with it being about just under $2,000 per parcel on the $10 million option and rising up to $3,500 on the $30 million option.

That would require voter approval.

Correct, correct. So these benefits of lease revenue bonds is that it's speedy and doesn't require voter approval. However, for the town to be able to do it, they would need voter approval on the parcel tax to repay it.

So a question. So a very small parcel would be paying, say for $10 million, 190, 90,000. and a very huge piece of property with tennis courts and swimming pool and everything else, they'd be paying the same amount.

Exactly. So there's an equity issue. There's an equity issue as well with the parcel tax. Yep. Any other questions?

And this is also for just capital? Or is this capital plus?

The parcel tax money can fund capital and operating. Yep. Mm-hmm.

I just also wanted to point out that a parcel tax is a general tax. You can't pledge that directly to the payment of your lease revenue bonds. What is pledged is the town's general fund. So all legally available funds of the general fund would repay the annual debt service payments.

All right, the last form of municipal bond that we will go over is a CFD. It's called a special tax bond, also known as a Melrose bond. They are the most flexible in terms of what you can fund. Unlike GO bonds, they can fund both capital facilities and ongoing services. The tax structure is customizable, a lot more so than a parcel tax. You can base it on square footage, land use, acreage, and other characteristics. It can be phased in over time. Some trade-offs with CFDs, they carry a lower quality rating than GO bonds, so the borrowing costs are often a bit higher, so higher interest rates when the bonds are sold. The setup is a bit more complex with the CFD formation, and then you also need that two-thirds voter approval from those within the CFD. Our table on the right here shows the Melrose tax for our three bond sizing options. For this preliminary analysis, we've assumed the Melrose tax is a flat fee per parcel. However, as we discussed, the town could really structure that any way that they please. And our analysis shows that a $10 million Melrose bond would cost roughly $751 per parcel in year one. A $20 million bond would result in a $1,400 levy per parcel. in year one, and a $30 million bond would result in a $2,100,000 levy per parcel in year one. Any questions on the Melrose tax? All right, so this table is a quick reference to compare the three financing vehicles that we just discussed. If your top priority is the lowest borrowing cost and you have the voter appetite for two-thirds approval, a GEO bond is a really strong candidate for funding a capital project. While lease revenue bonds don't require voter approval, they create a general fund obligation that the current budget can't easily absorb without a new revenue stream, which would require likely a parcel tax to be approved. And then lastly, if you need to fund both capital and ongoing operations from a single financing structure and you're willing to run a more complex administration process, a CFD is definitely worth exploring. So I will wrap this up with a few key takeaways. As we've discussed, the town has limited financial capacity to fund their desired projects. With $11.2 million in general fund revenue and expenditures already growing faster than revenues, there is no margin to take on meaningful new debt service from the existing budget. Issuing new debt would require a new revenue source. Whether that's a GO bond measure, a parcel tax, a CFD, or some combination, you would need voter approval for a new dedicated revenue source before a debt financing becomes viable. A general obligation bond would provide the lowest borrowing cost, but would not be able to fund operations. A CFD special tax bond gives the most flexibility on how the tax is levied, but can be complex to administer and comes with a higher borrowing cost. And lastly, a lease revenue bond would likely require a parcel tax be approved in order to provide revenue stream to repay that debt service. And with that, we are happy to take any questions.

More questions? So one could do a combination. City Council Chambers, A town could do a combination you could you've got a capital that needs to be built, so you could do the geo bond and then you've got ongoing costs for people staffing. City Council Chambers, equipment so that might be a different parcel tax or something else.

That's correct. Yep. You can do a mixture of these three of these four different revenue sources. Well, three that are good options for the town.

Right. But the homeowner is going to have to end up being paying for both.

That's correct.

There's no free lunch. Any other questions, council? Public comment on this item? Mr. Rosenbaum?

Just a quick question. If the consultants have considered the age of the people in the parcels, because there's the senior opt-out of parcel tax and also a, I believe, SSI, and also if, depending on your median income, you can opt out. So the amount of parcels in the Ross will go down. So I do get a free lunch, potentially.

Ah.

never know i'm just so but there is a there is that and just whether that's in your report or not or thought about that there really aren't 835 there may only be 800 to pay the numbers that dan presented were just hypothetical uh scenarios um to the extent that there are parcels that are exempt that would increase the amount per per parcel

And that would be something that the Council would decide if there was going to be some kind of senior exemption, something like that would carve that out into the language.

Okay.

Any other public comment? Anybody online?

No one's online there.

Okay, we'll bring it back for any further thoughts or discussion.

I think I need to spend some time looking at this, I think it was very helpful the differences, the options. So I appreciate this information it's really helpful and giving us more information, so we can make a wise decision about moving forward with the down yeah Thank you.

Number 15 town council to receive an update from staff regarding the status of the implementation of the town of Ross facilities master plan. Manager Johnson?

Thank you, Mayor and Councilmembers. This evening we brought forward your third report regarding the status of the implementation of the facilities master plan. We brought forward one in September and then our second in December. And David Kelly, our part-time project manager, will be giving the report. Ready? I'm going to do the handoff. Take it away, David.

Thank you, manager, town manager Johnson. Good evening, Mayor McMillan. Mayor Pro Tem Robbins, Council Members Dowling and Kirchherr, and our esteemed town attorney, Benjamin. I am David Kelly. I'm your project manager. I'm here for the third update on your facilities master plan and to talk about some of the progress that we've made on the council's behalf. So the agenda tonight is really to provide, again, an update and discuss progress. We will talk about the cost estimates that were updated to reflect the cost of implementing the facilities master plan as well as the completed section 9212 fiscal impact study. Give you an update on the two RFQs that council approved both for affordable housing and architectural and engineering services. Discuss real brief the selection of the Municipal Advisor, which you just heard tonight give a presentation from Feldman Rowlatt, as well as a minor update on CEQA and the current Citizens Advisory Committee evaluation. So again, as I've updated the council, we prepared a roadmap at the start of this process to really guide the implementation of the facilities master plan. It's a best practices tool in project management to guide the timing and delivery of a project. And ultimately, it's a tool for communicating implementation to the town council as well as the town manager. The Gantt chart that was prepared is intended to be flexible and adaptable as conditions change. And certainly, the timelines have been affected by the fourth initiative. So one of the key updates was updating the cost estimates that were included in your facility's master plan, particularly for concept B, but also the paramedic facility. Both of those cost estimates were completed in December. The cost estimates for the paramedic facility was updated to inform the lease agreement with the Ross Valley Paramedic Authority. And then the cost estimates for concept B were updated to reflect cost escalation through 2030. As many of you know, the facilities in the master plan, which could include modifications proposed or recommended by FORE, will be done over time, and cost isolation factors are a cost-driving factor that's really important to track. In particular, the cost update will help inform your budget and CIP as the town manager reported earlier that is in process and the updated cost estimates will help inform the next year's budget and budgets going forward. In terms of the election code 9192 report, again, that is a fiscal impact study. That was really a response to the fourth initiative. The report required contracting with a number of specialized firms, including RSG, who was the lead contractor, but also the master plan consultant, KPA, along with Mary McGrath Architects, who did an evaluation of the costs of a new Capitol Fire Facility and City Gate Associates, which prepared the staffing analysis for two scenarios. One, either contracting with Ross Valley Fire or a standalone fire station. The outcome of that is that it helps inform both the town council and the voters, again, recognizing that council approved the fourth initiative for placement on the November ballot. That's a key piece of information for both council and voters. Ultimately, it does help inform policy direction and financial feasibility associated with the fourth initiative. I want to note that the election code 9192 report is included on your website and is available for review by the community. At your February meeting, council gave direction to staff to move forward with two requests for qualifications. The first of which was for affordable housing. To prepare that RFQ, town staff coordinated with both planning staff and the town attorney's office to ensure that the RFQ reflected consistency with your housing element and your regional housing needs compliance objectives, in addition to consistency with both your zoning and your development standards. That RFQ, which was authorized by council on February 12 and subsequently released, requires statements of qualifications to be submitted to the town on April 3, which is tomorrow. Thus far, we have received one SOQ in advance of the due date, and we are hoping to receive additional SOQs In accordance with the due date. Next steps do include review of all received SOQs, interviews of the potential development partners, and the goal would be to bring that forward to council for consideration of an exclusive negotiating agreement with the preferred housing partner. As I mentioned earlier, Council also approved RFQ for architectural engineering services. Thus far, we've received, just by way of email, received the fourth SOQ today. We are expecting additional SOQs by the due date tomorrow. So I'm thinking we'll have at least five, if not more, SOQs. uh again the the uh council in their discussions and approval of that rfq did uh recommend including language to uh support potential evaluation of alternatives site configurations and development particularly in response to the fourth initiative which you're gonna uh as i understand it receive a presentation later this month So if we can get an architect on board, that will help with some critical evaluation of that proposal, assuming it comes forward. Again, next steps in that process will be to diligently review the SOQs that have been submitted, conduct interviews with the top two or three firms, and ultimately negotiate a scope of work that would be the basis of a professional services agreement with the selected or recommended firm which would require council approval so that would be placed back on your agenda for review and approval on that would be a professional service agreement with a detailed scope of work providing the architectural engineering services which would include of course design services landscape architecture along with what we call MEP for all of your air conditioning and electrical equipment and so forth. As council just saw, you received a presentation by Fieldman Rollap, Within the last month, we moved very quickly to issue a request for proposals document for municipal advisory services to three firms, as reported by the town manager. We received those three proposals and quickly We made a decision to retain field and roll up with very qualified firm to serve as municipal advisor for kind of this phase one effort to do an evaluation of the town's budget, but also to look at potential financing options for for the council's consideration. And as part of that, assess debt capacity and what the tax impacts are for the residents associated with a potential revenue measure. Of course, the presentation tonight was somewhat general. I mean, the budget stuff was very specific, but it may, it would ultimately need to be further clarified when we understand what costs the council may want to cover as part of either the fourth initiative or the master plan. Just briefly on CEQA environmental review, I just want to restate that staff conducted a kind of a mini environmental review to assess the environmental impacts of the facility master plan. One of the key study areas from a CEQA perspective uh is of course land use planning but uh maybe more significantly includes uh transportation issues transportation safety around your two major thoroughfares adjacent to the town hall along with biological issues and historic resource issues um the earlier uh gantt chart did identify that we'd be moving forward with environmental review uh town manager and town attorney and myself have discussed bringing an rfq forward uh but we we did a hold off that process was delayed to allow for the citizens advisory committee to provide a recommendation to town council because we know that was a concern of councils that there was We may be moving forward too fast. So that process has been delayed. But we do think one of the key next steps is to hire necessary sub consultants that would inform the environmental review process going forward. So that really concludes an update on the facilities master plan. Again, just to emphasize that the goal of the master plan was modernization of your town facilities in alignment with the community's desires, but also while protecting public safety and service.

Thank you, David. Questions? Elizabeth?

Thank you very much. Regarding the architectural and engineering services, you mentioned that there'd be a professional service agreement that would come to the council with details. When would that be coming to the council?

We don't have a specific date scheduled yet you know it's going to be based in part on arranging interview well first conducting a thorough review of proposals and. You know, negotiating a scope of work with the top firm and that that will kind of set the schedule for when we bring that when that scope of work comes back to Council.

i was i was thinking if if there are changes to the plan come later this month that would have to be something that would be part of this part of the the scope of work is that right i think that's that's that's fair to say mayor and we don't have a may meeting so it wouldn't at the earliest it would be june is that is that too late or is that okay uh i would probably defer to town town manager whether a special meeting would be necessary but otherwise

you know it's it's definitely we're not going to be ready for your next council meeting which is april 29th so that this item it will not be on april 29th and you are correct that there's no meeting in may so the first other opportunity would be june 11th um but honestly i we we need to talk more about um the evaluation and all that stuff. And I'm really interested in hearing from the Citizens Committee too. So we wanted to give, we wanted to get the word out to architectural and engineering firms. We're happy we have received and expect to receive a few more tomorrow. That's really exciting. And so we're not rushing this, Mayor Pro Tem.

So June would be the earliest. I was just wondering, it has to be held up a little bit for the Citizens Committee, and then will these firms be not happy if they aren't signed on until sometime in June or later?

I think that firms are very used to when they work with cities, especially on projects of this size, and they, as the Council directed us when we came to you to get your approval to release these documents, we did add language into these requests for qualifications that talked about the fourth initiative. So I'm sure they're expecting that there's going to be some ups and downs and some changes. So I don't think they're going to be surprised.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Any public comment on this item? Anybody online? Donna?

There's no one online there.

Okay. Any further discussion? I just wanted to thank you for getting these things, the municipal finance City Council Chambers, opinion consultation and the architect engineering and also the affordable housing getting those moving instead of waiting until after April 29. City Council Chambers, Because if we want to do something by the November election it's going to be a huge scramble so the more we can do in advance as Christy you wisely. City Council Chambers, set up the the better off will be so thank you for continuing to push forward on the items that we can push forward on.

Thank you.

All right. Item 16, town council to consider adopting resolution number 2617, approving and authorizing the mayor to execute a first amendment to the amended and restated employment agreement. between the town and town manager, Krista Johnson, to be effective April 2nd, 2026. Ben.

Good evening, mayor and council members. This is your town attorney, Benjamin. I liked that introduction. That was a nice. I'm going to be referred to that from now on.

He used the word esteemed too. Esteemed. Esteemed, yeah.

Town attorney Benjamin. I enjoyed that. Tonight before you is the proposed first amendment to the amended and restated town manager employment agreement. to increase the town manager's vacation leave cap from 300 to 400 hours. During the last five months, a heavy workload has prevented the town manager from taking vacation leave, resulting in the consistent loss of vacation leave due to the cap on the vacation leave balance stated in her current employment agreement. Most city managers in Marin have the ability to sell back a certain amount of vacation leave hours each year. The town manager does not have that benefit in her existing contract. prevent the loss of vacation leave, the town manager has requested that the council consider request to increase the cap from 300 to 400 hours. And there's a proposed amendment in your packet with a resolution accompanying that. And that concludes my report.

Thank you esteemed council person stock Benjamin, Benjamin, what's your middle initial? Any questions on this council members? public comment on this item?

No one's online there.

Okay, then we'll bring it back for any discussion or emotion.

I just want to say I, I worked for the city and county of San Francisco for many years. And so I went back and said, what do we have in San Francisco, as a ceiling for where you can't carry vacation over? It's 400. So it's pretty consistent with how it is other places.

And I think given how hard our town manager has been working and juggling so many things that we need to make sure that she is able to take a break and not be penalized for working hard, which is you're getting penalized right now for working hard by not being able to use your vacation time or carry it over. So I'm totally in favor of this.

So I'd like to make a motion, unless somebody else wants to speak, that we adopt resolution number 2617.

Second.

Mayor McMillan? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Robbins? Yes. Council Member Kircher?

Yes.

Council Member Dowling? Yes. Motion passes. Thank you, council and esteemed attorney.

take that vacation yes all right um the no action items council correspondence i just distributed a nice note from anna about us giving her a proclamation is there any other council correspondence future council items anybody have anything Council member participation at the communications table at our next meeting, which is April 29th. I am able to be there. If anyone else wants to join me.

I can join you.

OK. Great. 18 is our meeting evaluation. It's 8.07. That is good. Any constructive criticism or comments? Nope. All right. I think it went very smoothly.

I agree.

Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

All right. And I actually was glad to see so many people in the sitting area. Audience.

Yeah.

People. So that's great.

All right. With that, we are adjourned at 8.08. Thank you.

What?