City Council - Special Meeting

The special meeting of the Ross Town Council for Wednesday, September 23, 2026 to order. Has the agenda been posted?

Item number three is public comment for special meeting agenda items, but I think we will take the public comment. during each agenda item. So we will move on to number four, which is Town Council to receive and review applications for Town Council appointment, provide each applicant an opportunity to address and respond to questions from the council, and either one, move to appoint one of the applicants to fill the remainder of Councilmember Kershaw's term, or two, provide further direction on the process for filling the vacancy, including the option of calling a special election. Clerk?

Steve, you can sit at the table if you'd like. That might be more comfortable. I wanted to thank everyone for applying for the Town Council appointment. We have carefully reviewed your written applications, and thank you for taking so much time to complete them so thoroughly and thoughtfully. This afternoon, we will ask each of you three questions, which you received earlier this afternoon, and you will have up to two minutes to respond to each question. You don't have to take the whole amount of time. Then at the end, there will be a wrap-up question for you to add anything that you haven't a

Second question. What is the biggest issue facing the town of Ross today and over the next decade?

Please share your thoughts about the Citizens Advisory Committee's proposal.

Great. Thank you. This is the wrap up question. One minute. Is there anything else you'd like to share with us?

Wonderful. Thank you so much. Next is Jeff Kuhn.

So the first question is why do you want to be on the council and what unique skills will you bring?

Okay. Start two minutes. Okay, good. You're the second question. What is the biggest issue facing the town of Ross today and over the next decade?

Please share your thoughts about the Citizens Advisory Committee's proposal.

Okay, one minute wrap up. Is there anything else you'd like to share with us?

Well, why don't we do Megan, and then we will come back. Maybe you can work with Mr. Rosenbaum offline and keep time at the same time.

Great, thank you. First question, why do you wanna be on the town council and what unique skills would you bring?

Second question, what is the biggest issue facing the town of Ross today and for the next decade.

City Council Chambers, Just please share your thoughts about the citizens advisory committee's proposal.

The last question is the wrap up and you have one minute. Is there anything else you'd like to share with us?

Okay. I believe he is out of the country, and it's probably in the wee hours of the early morning, wherever he is. Okay. So we officially have three applicants then. and we will now take public comments on this agenda item. Is there anyone in the chamber who would like to make public comment on this agenda item? Anyone online, Zach, for public comment?

Okay, so we'll bring it back for discussion and hopefully an appointment. I just want to personally thank everyone who applied and for taking the time and for your care and passion about our town, which we all share. So, you know, I am thinking that Jeff would be an outstanding candidate given his unique ability to bring very polarized stakeholders together and develop a brilliant compromise to help us pivot and turn a corner to get the the town center developed. So that's my personal bias at this point.

Really, thank you so much for participating in this very short process. There wasn't a lot of time, so I appreciate all the thought that went into it and your presentations this evening. I also think that Jeff would be the best candidate because he could be up and running immediately. He's had a lot of experience with the town for the last year in his capacity, working with our funds, our money. I do want to say that I was really impressed with Stephen and Megan, and I hope that if they are not selected, City Council Chambers, That they do other things in this town there'll be other opportunit

City Council Chambers, Elizabeth Elizabeth.

Matt so I believe that the council should reflect the community 75 of the council is 65 years or older and I believe the community is better served when the council represents its residents I think many of the problems we've faced over the last two years have a lot to do with the the distance between who's on the council and who represents the residents. And I think we need to use this opportunity to rectify that. I think Steven or Megan will add diversity to the council and unique skill sets that are currently missing. Steven is an accomplished architect and has the requisite leadership exper

So as I said at the last meeting, I think that this resignation has put the council in a really bad position. When there's an open seat, especially when there are contentious issues, there should be an election to fill that seat. And this resignation came too late to put it on the November ballot. And the next election isn't until March, which means that someone who's elected in March doesn't get seated until April or May. I'm not comfortable appointing someone in times like these where there are contentious issues. And of the four of us, some of us won't be here in two months. But I think we

Right, yep. I would like to make a motion that Jeff Coon be appointed for the two years filling Bill Kirchner's position.

Motion passes unanimously 40. Wonderful congratulations and thank you everyone for applying it's it's wonderful so next I think we would like to swear in Jeff Kuhn to be on the town council and then you can join us up here

Okay, now we are moving on to item number five. town council to receive a presentation from Gensler regarding the status of the facilities master plan amendment and the proposed methodology. For establishing a revised independent Ross fire station space program provide comments and direction regarding the proposed approach. City Council Chambers, Direct staff to return to the town Council with a proposed amendment number two to the cancer professional services agreement. City Council Chambers, Including the additional scope fee schedule and associated project budget appropriation prior to auth

I just have one. Thank you very much. Would it help to meet with the CAC earlier than is planned? Or is that about the right time to meet with them?

No, I just have a question about the scope of the potential fire station. It seems like we are assuming that the fire station would be part of a larger department like Ross Valley Fire. And so the spacing needs would be less than were we to establish an independent separate fire department. And I just want to make sure that everyone is good with that. City Council Chambers, I am fine with that going forward with that, but I just want to make sure that we're doing it with. City Council Chambers, full intention and aware that should something happen down the road and we would not be part of anot

Okay. What is the difference if we were in space or, you know, what we would build if we wanted, if we were building for either option?

But those numbers assume that we're not sharing the paramedic space, is that right, David?

Okay. I'd like to say something if I can.

Yeah, we're doing questions right now and then we'll do a comment. Go ahead.

I have questions. So the first is just regarding being part of the department or not. I think the goal obviously is to remain a part of a larger department. But I also wanted to state that prior to 2012, Ross was its own station and operated out of the building with this square footage. So adding 3,000 square feet to be its own department seems, again, I don't know why we keep referring to the Mary McGrath report. It's totally irrelevant. So there's ways of economizing. But again, I think our goal is to remain a part of the Ross Valley Fire Department. My question is I want to be part of the c

is the same or similar it is the same it's it's three three fires firemen so again and it's it's two two bays so we I don't know why we would say no to looking at other comps of stations that are being built right now like I just don't even understand that at all why we wouldn't be looking at every model available to build our station like why why would you turn away information

Yeah, so Gensler, I'm sorry, is there any issue with looking at another fire station that's basically in its development stage?

Yeah, so, Letha, just to be clear about why I'm saying this is we've been hearing that we need 7,000 square feet or 10,000 square feet. But, you know, these other comps that we're looking at are materially smaller. And so the idea is what is informing what is actually necessary for the programming of these stations? It's not to talk about the structural building it's to talk about what are the programming needs and we keep staff for some reason keeps referring to these reports by Mary McGrath that have these incredible amounts of square footage saying everything must be this way but we have ma

Yeah, I just want to ask if we add Tiburon, the station there that's under construction, is this going to cost us more money and will it take us more time? And I again, I worry. I mean, at the last meeting, we talked about making visits to the stations 20 and 21, and now we're adding another station. I hope that if we're adding this other station, we're not every single time we meet adding yet another station to visit.

I think it may have just been completed.

It's not under construction. It is just in designs. You can't really, you just have to look at the designs. There's nothing really to see. It hasn't been broken ground.

Okay, any other questions, Terry? I just wanted to ask.

We're working on that app with Letha and hopefully we'll be able to get a date out real soon close to October 8th yeah okay yeah thank you no more questions from council members so we will move to the chamber public comment on this item anybody in the chamber Anyone online? Oh, yes, go ahead. Can you please step over to the podium and introduce yourself? Thank you.

Okay, so we'll bring it back for discussion and directing staff to return to the town council with proposed amendment number two. Thoughts, direction?

I'm sorry, did we receive an amendment number two in the staff report? It said I wasn't ready.

That will be on October 8. But we're giving direction for what should be included in that amendment.

And specifically, what are we asked for tonight?

Krista, do you want to you want to tell us what you what you want from us?

So I think clearly we want Gensler to move forward with its scope. All the election code reports are totally irrelevant right now. And what we need to do is allow them to look at these fire station comps, meet with the fire chief and the paramedic chief as well, with Chief Weber, I assume. To come up with the the right sizing for this for this project and you know we want to get it right we want to do it right and these reports that have been issued in the past are were based on assumptions that don't exist today and so I would encourage that amendment to be drawn up and signed as soon as we c

So I agree. I mean, I think, I mean, I trust Gensler to get this done as efficiently as possible. I think that, you know, they're working on the project now. I think it's odd. It's not quite practical to bring in reports from, you know, close to a year ago. I think we want to start with where Gensler is now and have them keep working. So I agree with Matt.

Move on let's get going yeah I agree is this a motion by the way or just a giving staff direction okay good yeah I agree too and as soon as possible the faster the better because we we all want to meet that 2027 general obligation bond election hopefully by may may 4th 2027 Yeah. Okay. Good. Any other final thoughts or direction?

You know what? Just one, Mayor McMillan. Just the issue of the paramedic facility from the last meeting, we gave direction to staff, but Gensler wasn't at that meeting. So I just want to make sure Letha is very clear that the direction of the council, which was unanimous, was to look at ways that we can combine functions between the fire and paramedics and police for that matter. So for great example, the gym, we don't need to build four gyms. So any way that we can look at overlapping functions like a kitchen or a living area, we want to do that. And that was the direction last time. And unfo

Yeah and I think we're going to have a closed session item in October to talk about the paramedic lease no the topic of closed sessions is confidential

Yeah, I mean, just referring in public session, what we gave direction to staff. And like I said, Letha, unfortunately, your team wasn't on that meeting. So I don't know if it got relayed to you, but we unanimously decided that, yes, we want to combine functions wherever possible to create an economical plan that works for everyone. So I just, oh, I'm sorry if you were going to respond. I just want to make sure you knew that.

thank you I just the reason I'm bringing up is it wasn't on your scoping and your plan and you're meeting chief Mahoney I would probably suggest you meet with chief Weber or just understand the paramedic needs as well just so we're making sure that the programming is going to work for everybody in in mayor through through the town manager I just want to confirm with council

the paramedics before we start discussing with chief Weber Krista and Ben what do you you know I'm not supposed to say anything about what the topic would be but well for that closed session item actually it will be noticed under the property real property lease negotiations

I'm just worried about putting the cart before the horse. But if you don't think that's a problem, then we should do it.

Would that programming change if it's, you know, if the paramedic facility is integrated into the fires, into the whole building, is that why it could be helpful to talk with him now?

Thank you. So I just want to reiterate that the lease was based on a standalone separate structure for the paramedics. And the new CAC plan we've all said we're for is now bringing all those functions together. And so we need to discuss with the paramedics this change in the building. It's not what the lease was based on. It's a totally new concept. and this idea of sharing space. So I want that in the scope. I just don't I think we need to write that in and make sure it's like you're going to work with Chief Weber and the paramedics to make sure their programing needs are met in whatever we d

OK, I think we have agreement on that. So do you have what you need, Krista?

Great. Thank you, everyone. We're moving on to item number six town council to discuss Ross. To discuss Ross municipal code section 1841 one five and removal of temporary signs in the public right of way.

Krista, we received an email from Bob Herbst identifying four properties where he's claiming that the signs were posted on private property instead of in the right-of-way. Did you or the public works, the temporary public works director get a chance to look into those addresses?

So there will be a response later to those specific addresses. Okay. Thank you. Other questions?

So the right-of-way is a legal definition based on maps that are between the property owner and the town is that correct it may be maps it could also be other other legal documents and or easements yeah but those are recorded on maps that are recorded with basically the county showing where the property owner's line lies and where the right-of-way or an easement lies.

So Ben, I'm asking a really specific question. The right-of-way is a legal concept. that is actually defined by a map that shows the boundaries.

Okay, so did the town look at any maps prior to removing signs from people's homes?

Okay, so there was no due diligence done to verify.

I'd appreciate it if you don't interrupt me.

So to finish my question, there was no due diligence done looking at the maps, the surveyed maps, the GIS set maps, the recorded maps with the county of where the property line lies and where the public right of way lies for any property that the town removed signs. Is that correct?

Would you like me to answer this question? Yes, please.

Okay so it was based on experience it was not based on any maps or any looking at the actual legal recorded deeds and maps that show this boundary that's that's that's it that's that's that that has now been confirmed okay then the second question I have is where in the ordinance does it say that the town can remove signs without notice So there's two parts to the ordinance. The first part is what is acceptable and can't be done, which agreed you can't put it in the right of way, but the removal piece requires notice be given. Where does it say you do not need to provide notice? Where did you

Okay so there's nothing there it does say that the town later can remove summer some have a summary removal by the planning director within 10 days after an election so my question is why doesn't the ordinance say that for anything that is in the public domain why is that sentence not there if that's if that's the intention

Okay, so it doesn't say private property in either of these places, so you can interpret it that, but it does not say any such signs remaining in private property. And it doesn't say above any sign, not in accordance on private property. It's not saying that anywhere in this ordinance. So at a minimum, I would think we'd want to change these things and make it very clear. But I don't see any language in here that says it must be in private or public. It just says if it is not in accordance with the conditions, whether that's public or private, if it's not in accordance with conditions, it must

Okay so maybe Ben is a better question for you is maybe it wasn't so clear okay we're doing questions now so are there any other questions public comment on this on this item anybody in the chamber yeah just a second wayne

Thank you. Anyone else in the chamber for public comment? Anyone online, Zach?

on the phone. Your time is up. Thank you. Anybody else online, Zach?

All right. So we'll bring it back for, I don't know, are we having a discussion about what needs to happen?

Go ahead. Okay. I'm really sorry that this sign issue is so contentious. And that the rumors, so many of the rumors are not based on fact. I'm sorry that particularly the candidates whose many signs were removed didn't check in with Krista and the staff about what the rules were. I think that was a opportunity missed. I think if there's, I think one of the things we could do, there's a government committee. Elizabeth, you and I are on that one. Is that the name of the committee? The government committee? Krista? Could we just meet on this and take a look at the music code section and see if we

I have some comments. So, Christian, I know you said that, well, first, you mentioned that I had asked about a sign that I didn't think was legal, so that I'm complaining about signs. But I'm pretty sure that was the sign that was an advertisement for a preschool. at Natalie Coffin Green Park. I don't think it was a campaign sign. And then yes, indeed, I was on the council when we discussed the sign ordinance, and you're right, we spent quite a bit of time talking about the size there's a lot of like arithmetic errors figuring out what the square footage should be but adding the right-of-way w

City Council Chambers, I just want to respond that I did not order the removal of any sign Elizabeth I think you know that, and when we ordered all those signs in 2024 for major he. City Council Chambers, I recall us being very careful to ask residents, if we could post those signs on their property, I do not recall us running around posting signs in the towns right of way.

You're right, we absolutely asked all the residents before we placed the signs, but I think an awful lot of those signs were in the right of way. We just didn't realize that.

Well, and I think Krista made it pretty clear that signs, regardless of the content, election signs, advertising signs, whatever kind of signs, if they're in the right of way, they are removed by the public work staff because we value our rural look. We don't want a bunch of junky signs we don't want to be like nevado so I am I am more than happy to make the ordinance more clear like Ben suggested I thought it was a little unclear about the notification about signs that are in the right-of-way and City Council Chambers, You know the right of ways owned by the town, so how do we notify ourselve

I think that's mostly a waste of time. I think the problem with the ordinance is that we added wording that signs can't be in the right of way. I think we should change that wording that says that doesn't say anything about the right of way, but says that signs cannot block pedestrian or vehicle access so that if the signs are at the front of a fence, but they're not blocking pedestrians, then that would be fine. And so, you know, to add a couple of sentences to clarify it, I don't think that Terry and I and Ben need a bunch of meetings. I mean, it's a sentence to just like add what you're sug

So the first thing is on Measure E, I put signs in the right of way myself. I worked with Elizabeth Robbins. I took signs, and I put them almost everywhere around town in the right of ways, and they were never removed. So I just want to make that a clear fact. You know, freedom of speech is central to who we are as Americans. The town's heavy-handed enforcement of its sign ordinance has damaged our reputation and eroded residents' trust in the town. From the testimony tonight, the town did not do its homework to determine the public right-of-way on the lots where it removed signs, which has op

Did you want to say anything, Councilmember Kuhn? No? I think we need another person if we're even going to consider removing the right-of-way language from the ordinance that we City Councilmember Cecilia Taylor- drafted only five years ago with careful consideration with Council member culture and Patrick streeter and then go ahead, Ben.

So, I mean, to answer a question, the ordinance says. Regarding an election 10 day post election period, the town can remove signs Okay, so that is that's in the ordinance right now.

Yes, and I think that people have posted their graduation announcements, parties, signs to direct people in traffic to Branson. This is very commonly done, and it has never been a problem. So again, we're heavy-handed in this ordinance, but it's not even clear. So I absolutely agree it needs to be amended. I'm happy to refer it to the government committee if they want to work on it. But there's no doubt our citizens are upset. People are very, very upset. Upset about what's going on and the ordinance is flawed so either we decide to fix the ordinance or we're going to have a lot of upset citiz

So I understand the problem, you know, the risk of signs being up for 60 days if we remove the right of way provision. But I think that solves a problem that never existed. I mean, I would still be in favor of getting rid of the prohibition about signs in the right of way. And if in fact, you know, our streets are cluttered with signs, then we change it back and we make it really clear that that's why we changed it back. but for right now, it looks like the reason there's any enforcement is to prevent political signs, not to prevent ugly signs all over Sir Francis Drake or whatever that are le

Well, I don't want to be like Novato. I think those signs are hideous. And we are not precluding anyone from expressing their election preference. We are not shutting down anyone's First Amendment right. Anyone can post a sign on their private property. We are not being un-American or undemocratic. So we need to be careful with the words that we're using. People can post a sign on their private property. And we are not disallowing that. I am opposed to changing the right of way concept. I don't want a bunch of junkie signs in our town at any time. City Council Chambers, Regardless of the conte

I mean you know we get back to regardless of these rules and how we change things this was a really bad look and I'm really sorry that that the town just removed all these signs it didn't happen with measure e it didn't happen with previous council candidates and I you know I I am just disappointed that this happened because it hasn't happened before

I think with Ben, I think it would be helpful to have Ben there. Yeah, no, I'm assuming that he would be part of it. Yeah, exactly. Well, Elizabeth, let's give it a try. Let's meet once with Ben and see where we go.

Well, do we need Ben if we're talking? I mean, I don't want to use Ben's time.

I need Ben. I need to have a legal voice at that meeting.

I support that. I think that would be I think getting some more information about how other towns and cities deal with this issue would be helpful just for comps. There could be I think, Ben, you brought up a big point about, hey, you don't want non political signs up there forever. So why not work on the ordinance language and see if there's some sort of compromise where it could be very clear between public and private? I think the ordinance has to be amended because it isn't clear. And then also determining what is the right of way, because that is an issue that came up here where residents

I think we will try. I mean, we may end up disagreeing about the right-of-way. We can clarify the existing language, and then we can bring, if we don't agree on getting rid of the right-of-way language, which I would like to do, we'll bring that back to the council and talk about it at the council level.

Do we need anybody else there besides the two of us and Ben? Do we need somebody from the town? Do we need staff there?

So, Krista, are you saying you want to do a staff report on this issue before the committee gets together? Is that what you're saying?

OK, so I think it sounds like we have direction that you two are going to meet with Ben, and then we'll see how that goes. And with that I think we are moving to closed session so we need everybody to leave the Chambers and we will come back in open session and announce any reportable action that we take so let's make sure there's no public comment before we go into closed session is there any public comment on the closed session item before we move to closed session anybody online yes a Dennis Miller has their hand raised For the closed session item? Public comment for the closed session item

OK, let's just clarify that it needs to be on the closed session item, because we've already closed public comment for the item number six.

Do you want to take a five minute break?

Yeah, so we'll take a five minute break. Thank you. Before we take a break, yes? Elizabeth is recused from this item. Do you want to say why?

I will be stepping away from the meeting. I'm recused because I live within 500 feet of the property in question. Thank you.