Outlook
Public Comment for 3/5/25 Town Council Meeting
From Teliha Draheim <[email protected]>
Date Wed 3/5/2025 9:21 AM
To Lisel Blash <[email protected]>; Stephanie Hellman <[email protected]>; Barbara Coler <[email protected]>
Cc Heather Abrams <[email protected]>; Frank Egger <[email protected]>; Michael Ghiringhelli <[email protected]>; Christine Foster <[email protected]> Fairfax Town Council: I am writing to request the following letter be added to the meeting record of public comments for Open Time for Public Expression at the Fairfax Town Council meeting scheduled for March 5, 2025.
Christine Foster: Can you please confirm receipt of this email and acknowledge that my letter containing public comments for Open Time for Public Expression will be included in the Agenda Package for the Fairfax Town Council prior to the meeting scheduled for March 5, 2025.
Thank you,
Teliha Draheim
To Mayor Blash and Council Members Hellman and Coler,
Your fractured vote during last month’s Town Council meeting to appoint a temporary town clerk and treasurer was yet another blatant act to destroy town unity. Clearly, you are not listening to your constituents. If so, you would have voted for the local candidates endorsed by the strong majority of public speakers and letters of recommendation received prior to the meeting. These primarily ceremonial elected positions represent important safeguards and symbols of independence for Fairfax residents. Temporary appointments should be reflective of the expressed future elected vote of the people.
Aligning your votes with residents who took the time to participate and express their choices, could have been such an easy act of unification and perception of fair play by the council. Instead, you chose to ignore the votes of your constituents, opting for a power-play of apparent self-aggrandizement, accompanied by condescending treatment and manipulation of our people. Your votes also revealed deceptive political maneuvering to silence newly elected town council members, Frank Egger and Mike Ghiringhelli, who voted in alignment with Fairfax citizenry.
This was the last straw for many voters in Fairfax. You have continued to shatter our trust by mismanaging town issues and ignoring the will of the people. Your questionable actions are being publicized far and wide. You will soon see the fall-out from your lack of representation. -- Teliha Draheim, Fairfax resident 29 years
https://www.marinij.com/2025/02/21/marin-ij-readers-forum-for-feb-22-2025/ Disappointing Fairfax town clerk, treasurer vote
At a recent meeting, a majority of Fairfax Town Council members appeared to act in opposition to the spirit of the recent election by appointing a town clerk and treasurer who were not the qualified applicants to receive the most letters of support (“Fairfax gets new town clerk and treasurer,” Feb. 15).
The dismissed candidates are community members who demonstrated years of loyalty to Fairfax.
At the meeting before the vote, an obvious majority of public speakers expressed support for the same dedicated local candidates mentioned in the letters. Newly elected council members Frank Egger and Mike Ghiringhelli voted in alignment with their constituents’ recommendations. But I could only watch in amazement as Barbara Coler, Stephanie Hellman and Lisel Blash disregarded the spoken will of the people and voted in lockstep for their own chosen appointee.
I felt deflated. In November, Fairfax rejected Measure H to secure an elected (not appointed) position for clerk and treasurer. Of course I understand that, since both positions have recently become vacant, the council had to name an appointee now before a full election next year. But I expected a majority of our elected representatives to vote in accordance with the wishes of their constituents.
I consider the elected position to be a safeguard and symbol of independence for Fairfax residents. The IJ article stated, “The roles are considered ceremonial with limited or no oversight authority, according to Heather Abrams, town manager.” But if that were true, why would the majority bloc refuse to honor the endorsement of voters?
From my perspective, I just saw the will of the voters being manipulated and discounted. I have lost faith in our town’s so-called democracy.
— Teliha Draheim, Fairfax
Outlook
Re: 61 Bolinas
From Kelsey Fernandez <[email protected]>
Date Tue 3/4/2025 10:30 AM
To Barbara Coler <[email protected]>; Lisel Blash <[email protected]>; Stephanie Hellman <[email protected]>; Michael Ghiringhelli <[email protected]>; Frank Egger <[email protected]>
Cc Christine Foster <[email protected]>
Please see my email below with the corrected address of 61 Bolinas Road.
I would like to request this is shared with the Planning Commission as well.
Thank you,
Kelsey Fernandez
On Tuesday, March 4, 2025 at 06:27:06 AM PST, Kelsey Fernandez <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Mayor Blash, Vice Mayor Hellman and Council Members Coler, Egger and Ghiringhelli, I'm writing about the new proposed site for Marin Alliance Medical Marijuana at 61 Bolinas Road. Out of a concern for the potential adverse impacts outlined in the town's cannabis ordinance (referenced below), I'm hoping the carefully considered town laws and regulations will be honored without exceptions.
Specifically:
Medical-use cannabis storefront retailers are not permitted: Within a 600-foot radius of a school, or youth center. (See Cal. Business and Professions Code § 26054.) Within a 300-foot radius of a daycare center or tutoring center. Town code 17.110.040.C.1.
A commercial cannabis business permit is valid only as to the permittee and approved site, and is therefore nontransferable to other persons or locations. Town code 5.56.120 No adult-use customers shall be permitted to access or remain in the business premises of a medical marijuana dispensary. Town code 17.110.050.A.3.
No adult-use cannabis retail sales shall be permitted to occur at the premises of a medical marijuana dispensary. Town code 17.110.050.A.4.
I understand and respect Ms. Shaw’s legacy. At the same time, the cannabis industry is worlds apart from what it was 10-20 years ago. Now more than ever, compliance with state and local regulations - as well as the town’s policy regarding the application process - is necessary to mitigate harms.
The Fairfax Ordinance #835 states that the “Town Council of the Town of Fairfax recognizes ongoing potential for adverse impacts on the health, safety, and welfare of its residents and business from secondary effects associated with commercial cannabis business activities, such as increased traffic and parking impacts, offensive odors, increased youth exposure and normalization, increased risk of theft or other crimes, negative impacts on nearby businesses, nuisance problems, and increased DUI incidents, and that there is a need to adopt local regulations to avoid and mitigate adverse impacts on the community which may arise from commercial cannabis businesses…”
And the “Town Council, Planning Commission and Town staff have conducted numerous meetings, community outreach, and analyses to determine what types of commercial cannabis businesses should be allowed in the Town, if any, and appropriate regulations, in light of the passage of the AUMA and MAUCRSA in the State of California…” Please do not bypass the important safeguard the town crafted to balance the changing cannabis market with the interest of public health.
Sincerely,
Kelsey Fernandez