Agenda packet — San Anselmo City Council, September 24, 2024

Tuesday, September 24, 2024 6:40 PM
In the Council Chambers at 525 San Anselmo Avenue, San Anselmo, CA 94960 Town Council
Agenda
Meeting held In-Person and via Zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87603227248
Or Telephone: +1 669 900 6833 | Webinar ID: 876 0322 7248 How to Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public are encouraged to submit email correspondence to [email protected] before the meeting begins.

How to Participate During the Meeting: Members of the public will have the option to speak during the meeting through the Zoom application by using their phone or an electronic device.

For PC, Mac, or smart phone, Use Raise hand function when public comment for an item is requested. It is a button that is located at the top or bottom of your screen, based on your electronic device.

For landline phones, raise hand to be recognized with *9 Please be advised those participating in the meeting remotely via Zoom do so at their own risk. The Town Council regular meeting will not be cancelled if any technical problems occur during the meeting.

I. Interviews for the Library Tax Oversight Committee - 6:40 PM Two (2) Interviews by Time, Attachment #, and Applicant Name (10 Minutes Each) Staff Report (DOC)
6:40 PM Attachment 1- Margaret Ohanlon (PDF)
6:50 PM Attachment 2- Judy Baldarassi (PDF)
Call to Order. Optional Pledge of Allegiance: The Mayor or a designated Council member will recite the Pledge of Allegiance for members of the Council and the public who wish to join in the recitation - 7:00 PM
Town Council Agenda September 24, 2024
1 1. Consent Agenda:

1.1 Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Regular Meeting of Tuesday, September 10, 2024

1.2 Receive the Tax Equity Rebate Program Overview and 2024 Rebate Summary

1.3 Receive the Revenue and Expenditure Reports, August 2024

1.4 Receive the Recreation Fund Finance Report for the month of August 2024

1.5 Adopt United Against Hate Week Town of San Anselmo Resolution

1.6 Consider the Reappointment of Richard Berkson to the Town of San Anselmo Tax Equity Board
Open time for public expression.

The public is welcome to address the Council at this time on matters not on the agenda that are within the jurisdiction of the Council. Please be advised that pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2, Council is not permitted to discuss or take action on any matter not on the agenda unless it determines that an emergency exists, or that there is a need to take immediate action which arose following posting of the agenda. Comments may be no longer than three minutes and should be respectful to the community.

Council requests for future agenda items.

Council committee liaison reports, questions and comments to staff; staff miscellaneous items.

Special Presentation.

Adopt a Proclamation Recognizing Public Health Officer Matt Willis for his Many Years of Public Service.

The opportunity for public comment on consent agenda items will occur prior to Council discussion of the consent agenda. The Council may approve the entire consent agenda with one action. In the alternative, items on the consent agenda may be removed by any Council or staff member, for separate discussion and vote.

Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1- Draft Minutes of the September 10, 2024 Regular Town Council Meeting (DOC)
Staff Report (DOCX)
Staff Report (DOCX)
Attachment 1 Budget Comparison Report by Subcategory, August 2024 (PDF) Attachment 2 Budget Comparison Report by Department, August 2024 (PDF) Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1 - Group Summary August 2024 (PDF)
Attachment 2 - Capital Outlay August 2024 (PDF)
Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1 - Resolution (DOC)
Attachment 2 - San Anselmo Stands United Against Hate Poster (PNG) Town Council Agenda September 24, 2024
2 1.7 Consideration of a Consultant Contract for the 2025 Street Resurfacing Project

1.8 Consideration of Special Event Application – 50
th Anniversary of Creek Park Celebration

2. Council Business Items:

2.1 Receive the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail Presentation and Provide Direction to Staff. Once the scope is defined, the Town and Marin County Parks will proceed with project design and ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through appropriate analysis.

Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1- Richard Berkson Application w/Resume (PDF) Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1 - Consultant Contract (PDF)
Attachment 2 - Map of Proposed Streets (PDF)
Staff Report (PDF)
Attachment 1 - Event Application (PDF)
In general, the following procedural order applies to items of business:
•Presentation
•Town Council questions
•PUBLIC COMMENT – limited to 3 minutes/person
•Town Council discussion/action
Staff Report (DOC)
Attachment 1- Sorich Park History (DOC)
Attachment 2- Sorich Park Trail Proposal from Sandor Lengyel (PDF) Attachment 3 - Sorich Park Multiuse Trail Alignment Alternatives (PDF) Attachment 4- SRSAFRZ Project Update July 2024 (PDF)
Attachment 7 - Alternative Hiker Trail Option E (PDF)
Attachment 8 Public Comment (PDF)
Public Comment- Cutter (PDF)
Public Comment- Howard (PDF)
Public Comment- Dal Bello (PDF)
Public Comment- McDanagh (PDF)
Public Comment- Putnam (PDF)
Public Comment- Bennett (PDF)
Public Comment- Briggson (PDF)
Public Comment - Craver (PDF)
Public Comment - Mittelstaedt (PDF)
Public Comment - O'Sullivan (PDF)
Public Comment - Pappas (PDF)
Public Comment - Blanchard (PDF)
Public Comment - Clark (PDF)
Public Comment - Cowgill (PDF)
Public Comment-Adler (PDF)
Public Comment-Bruso (PDF)
Public Comment-Engelhardt (PDF)
Town Council Agenda September 24, 2024
3 Public Comment-Kim (PDF)
Public Comment- Barbarino (PDF)
Public Comment- Childress (PDF)
Adjourn
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Town Staff at email [email protected]. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the Town to make reasonable accommodation to help insure accessibility to this meeting.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Town Council regarding any item on this agenda after the distribution of the original packet will be made available for public inspection at the public counter at Town Hall located at 525 San Anselmo Avenue.

Notice is hereby given that Council may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda.

If any of these matters above are challenged in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at any public hearing described on this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, this Council meeting. Judicial review of an administrative decision of the Town Council must be filed with the Court not later than the 90th day following the date of the Council’s decision (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6) Any item not under discussion before 10:00 p.m. may be continued to the next regular meeting. Next regular meeting is October 8, 2024.

Administration Department
Town Hall, main floor
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
(415) 258-4691
Town Council
Eileen Burke, Mayor
Tarrell Kullaway, Vice Mayor
Brian Colbert, Councilmember
Alexis Fineman, Councilmember
Steve Burdo, Councilmember
Staff
David Donery, Town Manager
Linda Kenton, Assistant Town Manager / Town Librarian
Jeff Zuba, Finance and Admin Services Director
Megan Holt Acevedo, Town Attorney
Serge Avila, Town Clerk
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director
Sean Condry, Public Works Director
Dannielle Mauk, Community Services Director
Mike Norton, Chief of Police
Dan Mahoney, Interim Fire Chief

DECLARATION OF POSTING
This Notice is posted in accordance with Government Code §54954.2(a) or §54956. Members of the public can view electronic agendas and staff reports by accessing the Town of San Anselmo website. Under penalty of perjury, this Agenda was posted to the public at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Town Council Agenda September 24, 2024
4 T
ownCouncil AgendaSeptember24,2024
5 Item #: Interviews

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: Interviews
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Conducting Interviews for the Library Tax Oversight Committee
FROM: Administration, Serge Avila, Town Clerk

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Town Council conducts (2) interviews for the Library Tax Oversight Committee.

Below is a list of two (2) applicants scheduled to be interviewed by the Town Council.

Interview
Time Name Board, Committee or Commission
6:40 PM Margaret Ohanlon Library Tax Oversight Committee 6:50 PM
Judy Baldarassi
(incumbent) Library Tax Oversight Committee
The Council will have the opportunity to interview one more applicant and make appointments to the Library Tax Oversight Committee at its December 2024 meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
Conducting interviews is not defined as a project under CEQA (Section 15378 CEQA Guidelines).
6 Item #: Interviews

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1- Margaret Ohanlon w/Resume
Attachment 2- Judy Baldarassi no Resume
7 Submit Date: Jul 27, 2024
First Name Middle
Initial
Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Town of San Anselmo, CA
Application for Appointment to a San Anselmo Board/Commission/Committee Profile
Occupation
Retired business owner
Employer's Address
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Library Parcel Tax Oversight Committee: Submitted
Number of years as resident of San Anselmo?
30 Number of years as a resident in Marin?
30 Name and phone numbers of three San Anselmo residents who can be contacted for referral information about me:

Barry Armour 4155054929 Lori Goldin 4156520287 Guy Egger 4156995792 Education Level Achieved *
Master's Degree
Interests & Experiences
Margaret Ohanlon
Margaret Ohanlon
8 Upload a Resume
I would be able to regularly attend the meetings of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I would be available to attend additional meetings when they are necessary.

Yes No
I am familiar with the responsibilities and functions of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I have attended meetings of the Board/Commission/Committee as a member of the public.

Yes No
List briefly, previous experience serving the public office, and/or civic commissions, boards, or committees:

I have been a volunteer for the Canal Alliance, JCC of Marin, Bridge the Gap and Vivalon. I have been a mentor for over 15 years for a rising young women who was a student at Bridge the Gap.

Reasons for this appointment:

I have loved libraries and literature all of my life. I love San Anselmo and it's beautiful library, which is the heart of the community. I have an honors degree in English literature and have been a professional writer throughout my career. I worked with nonprofits and Fortune 500 companies for over 20 years to help them achieve their mission through change and creativity, and I believe I can be a particularly helpful resource for this committee.

What are your qualifications for this appointment?
I have led organizations through organizational (and thus community) change, as the members of the Parcel Tax Oversight are charged to do. I have deep experience leading, advising and participating in decision-making groups, as well as communicating their decisions to their stakeholders.

Briefly, what do you consider to be the most important, one or two current issues facing this Board/Commission/Committee?
Translating community interests into actionable initiatives, expanding the role of the library in the San Anselmo community, allocating the Parcel Tax funds thoughtfully and responsibly.

LinkedIn Profile
https://www.linkedin.com/in/margaret-o-hanlon-ccp-a559644/ Margaret-O_Hanlonresume.SanAnselmo.7272024.doc
Margaret Ohanlon
9 You may attach other documentation which you
believe would be helpful to the Council in its
selection process.

Please Agree with the Following Statement
I understand that I and all other applicants will be personally interviewed by the Town Council (or the entity overseeing the Steering and Short Term Committees) as part of the selection process for this appointment. I also understand that my application material will be a public document and available on the Town's website. Sensitive materials that you don't wish to be posted on the website should not be included with the application.

I Agree
E-Signature:

Margaret OHanlon
Thank you for your interest in serving the Town of San Anselmo and its citizens. For further information, please contact the Town Clerk, [email protected] or 415-258- 4660.

Margaret Ohanlon
10 11
development implementations , working with executives, managers and employees on listening, collaboration and leadership.
o Equipped global auto manufacturer to encourage innovation at all levels of company through practices that reward competency development.
o Developed and communicated job family program to facilitate merger between financial services competitors.
o Supervised departmental and cross-functional teams (including virtual teams operating nationally).

Early Career Experience
CIGNA Corporation
Organizational change and training consultant for newly merged financial services company that included hospital management and property/casualty divisions.

Indiana University School of Medicine
Faculty coach for second-year clinical-rotation physician instructors at the Indiana University School of Medicine, which is the largest in the country and also the center of a statewide healthcare system.

Education
Ed.S. Instructional Technology . Indiana University . Bloomington M.S. Instructional Technology . Indiana University . Bloomington A.B. with honors English . Indiana University . Bloomington New York University . New York
CCP Certified Compensation Professional
Software skills include Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Adobe Pro and Google Docs.

Professional Affiliations
Board member, Bay Area Compensation Association (BACA).

Faculty member, Cornell University’s Institute for Compensation Studies.

Regular speaker and trainer , Silicon Valley Compensation Association (SVCA), Northern California Human Resources Association (NCHRA), WorldatWork, Kenexa and HR.com.

Published HR sourcebook: Everything You Do In Compensation Is Communications, Why Not Do Everything Better?
12 Submit Date: Jul 31, 2024
First Name Middle
Initial
Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Town of San Anselmo, CA
Application for Appointment to a San Anselmo Board/Commission/Committee Profile
Occupation
retired PH Nurse
Employer's Address
retired
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Library Parcel Tax Oversight Committee: Submitted
Number of years as resident of San Anselmo?
45 yrs
Number of years as a resident in Marin?
55 yrs
Name and phone numbers of three San Anselmo residents who can be contacted for referral information about me:

Jane Gibson phone # 404-630-0031 Judy Anderson 415-342-6877 Judith Jaslow 415-272-6166 Education Level Achieved *
College/University Degree
Interests & Experiences
Judith Baldassari
Judith Baldassari
13 Upload a Resume
You may attach other documentation which you
believe would be helpful to the Council in its
selection process.

I would be able to regularly attend the meetings of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I would be available to attend additional meetings when they are necessary.

Yes No
I am familiar with the responsibilities and functions of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I have attended meetings of the Board/Commission/Committee as a member of the public.

Yes No
List briefly, previous experience serving the public office, and/or civic commissions, boards, or committees:

Public Health Nurse County immunization coordinator League of Women Voters Town books volunteer for 9 yrs.

Reasons for this appointment:
to support the librarian in her duty to successfully comply with the San Anselmo property tax oversight committee.

What are your qualifications for this appointment?
see above
Briefly, what do you consider to be the most important, one or two current issues facing this Board/Commission/Committee?
continue to support all the activities for children and adults that the library provides for the community
LinkedIn Profile
Judith Baldassari
14 Please Agree with the Following Statement
I understand that I and all other applicants will be personally interviewed by the Town Council (or the entity overseeing the Steering and Short Term Committees) as part of the selection process for this appointment. I also understand that my application material will be a public document and available on the Town's website. Sensitive materials that you don't wish to be posted on the website should not be included with the application.

I Agree
E-Signature:

Judith Baldassari
Thank you for your interest in serving the Town of San Anselmo and its citizens. For further information, please contact the Town Clerk, [email protected] or 415-258- 4660.

Judith Baldassari
15 Item #: 1.1

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.1
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Approval of the Draft Minutes of the Regular Town Council Meeting of the September 10, 2024
FROM: Serge Avila, Town Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: For Council to consider the approval of the Draft Minutes of the Regular Town Council meeting of September 10, 2024
ATTACHMENT:

Attachment 1- September 10, 2024 Draft Minutes
16 1
San Anselmo Draft Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
Town Council Chambers and via Zoom
Tuesday, September 10, 2024
Call to Order: Optional Pledge of Allegiance
COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT: Steve Burdo
Eileen Burke, Mayor
Brian Colbert
Alexis Fineman
Tarrell Kullaway
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Dave Donery, Town Manager
Lindan Kenton, Assistant Town Manager
Serge Avila, Town Clerk
Emily Longfellow, Town Attorney
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director
Sean Condry, Public Works Director (via Zoom)
Open Time for Public Expression
Mr. Guy Meyer stated the 50th Anniversary of Creek Park is October 12th.

Council requests for future agenda items; Committee liaison reports; questions and comments to staff; miscellaneous items
Councilmember Burdo reported on attendance to Sorich Park meeting great attendance and community engagement; the September 11th meeting Fire Board Meeting has been cancelled.

Councilmember Colbert reported he attended the Economic Development Committee (EDC) meeting; the Larkspur “Wine Stroll”; the “Ember Stomp” event; the 20th Anniversary of the Fairfax Open Space Committee celebration; the “Safe Routes to Schools” Volunteer celebration; two Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) meetings; the Marin Transit meeting; TAM will be sponsoring a Clean Tech event on Wednesday.

Councilmember Fineman reported she had no updates.

Vice Mayor Kullaway reported there will be a meeting about the Active Transportation report in the Council Chambers; thanked Councilmember Colbert for his seven years of service on the EDC.

Mayor Burke reported she attended the unveiling of the first Town mural at 1608 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and noted it is beautiful; sat at the volunteer table at the recent “Live on the Avenue” event; San Anselmo Clean Up Day is scheduled for October 12th; the celebration of the 50th Anniversary of Creek Park will be held on September 20th; the Parade is scheduled for next Saturday- it is back!
Councilmember Fineman had questions about the application process for a mural. 17 2
Town Manager Donery reported the Downtown Active Transportation and Circulation Study Community Workshop will be held on Thursday at 6:30 p.m. There is a zoom link. This month’s Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers (MCCMC) meeting will be held at Cedars on September 25th.

Special Presentation
There are no Special Presentations.

1. Consent Agenda

1.1 Approved the Draft Minutes of the Town Council Meeting- August 27, 2024

1.2 Adopted Resolution No. 2024-4558 updating the Town of San Anselmo Biennial Conflict of Interest Code

1.3 Approved Resolution No. 2024-4559 Establishing the 2024/2025 Appropriations Limits

1.4 Receive the Report of Checks Issues for the month of August 2024

1.5 Adopt a Proclamation Recognizing and Ratifying Youth Commissioners for 2024/25 Mayor Burke opened the meeting to public comments
There were no comments.

Mayor Burke closed the meeting to public comments.

Mayor Burke stated she would like to pull item #1.5

1.5 Adopt a Proclamation Recognizing and Ratifying Youth Commissioners for 2024/25 Mayor Burke read the Proclamation and thanked the following Youth Commissioners: 1) Julia Wise and Hannah Jansen, Arts Commission; 2) Dylan Donner and Keilen Brod-Naeve, BPAC; 3) Ezra Thaler and Piper Kelly, Climate Action Commission; 4) Landon Sanchez, Historical Commission; 5) Alexander Hamlet, Clair Palmer, and Samuel Kaplan (alternate), Open Space Committee; 6) Carolyn Morris and Arlo Maury, Parks and Recreation Commission; 7) Stuart Pratt and Phoebe Morf, Racial Equity Committee
The Council gave a “Shout Out” to all the Youth Commissioners! M/s, Colbert/Burdo, Motion to approve the Consent Calendar.

AYES: Burdo, Colbert, Fineman, Vice Mayor Kullaway, Mayor Burke

2. Council Business

2.1 Discussion Related to Proposed Amendments to Title 4, Chapter 13, Private Trees Public Works Director Condry presented a staff report and Planning Director Scoble presented a PowerPoint presentation. Staff answered questions from the Council regarding how to determine the diameter of a tree (including a multi-trunked tree); if the Town has Wildlife Habitat Corridor Maps; the breeding and nesting seasons requirements; how environmental issues play into the Zoning and Housing requirements; how trees that are a fire hazard are handled; Tree Permit Approval Criteria for Protected Trees, Subsection (E); personal benefits to homeowners; 18 3
the maximum fine; if nuisance birds are covered; if defensible space areas are covered; the number of applications submitted during the birding and nesting season; if violations and enforcement has to occur in real time and the statute of limitations; if a more comprehensive enforcement approach is possible; how to educate and inform tree contractors; if there is a problem with the current ordinance; if the Town is losing a huge number of trees; if the homeowner is responsibility for obtaining the permit; if a contractor can be held liable for violations; if there are different ways to impose penalties including a valuation process; retroactive permits.

Mayor Burke opened the meeting to public comments
Mr. Renee Voss supported the amendments. He discussed the issue regarding protected birds.

Mayor Burke closed the meeting to public comments.

Mayor Burke stated the ordinance attempts to balance private property rights against community character and needs. The maximum fine amount was excessive along with the liens and forfeitures.

Vice Mayor Kullaway stated a fine of $100,000 is not too much if someone is cutting down a 100-year old tree. Education will be an important component.

Councilmember Burdo stated he does not dispute anything in the policy. He is concerned about enforcement.

Councilmember Fineman stated the thresholds contained in the ordinance should be familiar to any company doing tree work in Marin County. This ordinance brings San Anselmo in line with neighboring jurisdictions.

Councilmember Colbert thanked Councilmember Fineman for her work on this ordinance.

Planning Director Scoble stated staff would fine-tune the following issues and return to the Council: 1) Breeding and nesting seasons; 2) Penalties; 3) Review authority; 4) Definition of diameter including an example; 5) The “all trees” clause; 6) Tree replacement fees and fund.

M/s, Burdo/Colbert, Motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:13 p.m.

AYES: Burdo, Colbert, Fineman, Vice Mayor Kullaway, Mayor Burke Respectfully submitted,
Toni DeFrancis,
Recording Secretary
19 Item #: 1.2

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #:1.2
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Tax Equity Rebate Program Overview and 2024 Rebate Summary
FROM: Jeff Zuba, Finance & Administrative Services Director RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the 2024 report on the Tax Equity Rebate Program, which provides rebates for Municipal Services Tax, Pension Override Tax, and Library Parcel Tax to eligible San Anselmo property owners.

BACKGROUND
The Tax Equity Rebate Program was established by the Town Council in August 1983 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 845 and Resolution No. 3164. The purpose of the program is to provide financial relief to property owners in San Anselmo who may be unable to pay the Town's Municipal Services Tax, Pension Override Tax, and Library Parcel Tax due to economic hardship.

In September 2020, the Town Council updated the procedures and eligibility criteria of the program through Resolution No. 4360. The Tax Equity Board is responsible for reviewing applications submitted by property owners seeking rebates and determining their eligibility based on established criteria.

Eligibility Criteria
Property owners who may qualify for a rebate include the following categories:

1. Households eligible for public assistance and/or food stamps through Marin County’s Health and Human Services Department.

2. Households where the principal wage earner(s) have been unemployed for at least 90 days prior to the application.

3. Households whose total income falls within the "very low income" limits as defined by the Federal Housing and Urban Development Income Limits for Marin County.

Process
Eligible applicants must submit their applications to the Town for review by the Tax Equity Board. The Board reviews applications annually, and upon approval, the Town issues checks directly to the property owners for the approved rebate amounts. 20 Item #: 1.2
Applicants are advised to pay their property taxes in full to the County Tax Collector, as the County is not involved in this rebate process.
2024 Application Review
At its June 2024 meeting, the Tax Equity Board reviewed 45 applications and approved tax rebates totaling $19,694.04. The breakdown of the approved rebates is as follows:
 Municipal Services Tax: $3,588.00
 Library Parcel Tax: $2,927.28
 Pension Override Tax: $13,178.76
The rebates provide much-needed financial relief to households facing economic difficulties.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the Council receiving and filing this report. During the 2023-2024 fiscal year, in accordance with the criteria and procedures established by the Town Council, the Tax Equity Board approved tax rebates totaling $19,694.04 for qualifying residents.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Not applicable

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The Council’s discussion and approval of this report is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act, because it does not involve an activity which has the potential to cause a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21065).
21 Item #: 1.2

TIMELINES, GUIDELINES AND FORMATTING RULES
TIMELINES:
 Your report must be complete with all peers, supervisors, department heads, Town Attorney, and Town Manager review and approval completed and all attachments MUST be submitted through the Peak system, with all attachments, by 10 AM on the Thursday prior to the Town Council meeting.
 If the item requires review by the Finance and Administrative Services Director, the Town Attorney, and/or the Town Manager, it MUST be submitted to them through Peak no later than the Tuesday prior to the deadline to the Town Clerk. The only exception to this will be with prior Town Manager approval.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES/PROTOCOLS TO REMEMBER:

Town Council Workflow Guidelines
 Most Council staff reports will require your direct supervisor to be the first step in the workflow process. Your peers may also be required to review and approve staff reports, in addition to other Department Heads. Check with your supervisor.  The Finance and Administrative Services Director and Town Attorney are concurrently required to be the next step in the workflow. The Finance and Administrative Services Director is required to approve reports if there is a past, current or future financial component/ impact. The Town Attorney is required to review reports if there is a legal component (including but not limited to: contracts, leases, resolutions, ordinances, MOUs, etc.).
 The Town Manager is the last step in the workflow process.

Document File Naming Protocol for Council Packets
Use the following protocol when naming (saving) your document file:

Item name. (descriptive name of your item)
Type of item. (either “Staff Report” or “Attachment 1-[Description of Attachment]”) Version. (Begins from the drafter with V1, continues with reviewers in order: V2, V3, V4, etc) Date (day.month.year) of drafting/revisions. (09.12.18) Your initials. (sa)
Examples (from Drafter):
 Stormwater Permit Update. Staff Report. V1. 9.12.18.sa  Stormwater Permit Update. Attachment 1-Flow Chart. V1. 9.12.18.sa Examples (from Reviewer):
 Stormwater Permit Update. Staff Report. V2. 9.13.18.ss  Stormwater Permit Update. Attachment 3- Town Map. V5. 9.15.18.jd 22 Item #: 1.2
Document Storage Protocol for Council Packets
For version control, store all drafts of your staff reports and Attachments for Council packets on the S Drive here: S:\PEAK AGENDA WORKING FILES  Open the correct year (e.g., 2023)
 Open the correct meeting body (e.g., Council)
 Open the correct meeting date (e.g., 2/24/23)
 Create a new folder with a short title of your item
 All drafts of staff reports and attachments should be stored in this location.  The latest version of the document should be uploaded to Peak.  The final document in Peak will be the one uploaded to the packet.  The Clerk will delete all documents in the shared drive after the agenda is published; the final version of the documents will be stored in the Peak system.

Naming Protocol for Attachments in Peak
Use the following protocol when renaming the attachments in Peak, after you’ve uploaded them to the system. This is important, as this is the name that will display on the agenda when the agenda is published. Please use the rule of “last person in the system changes it”- meaning that if you replace a document please ensure that you retitle the attachment!!!
 Staff Report: “Staff Report”
 Attachments: “Attachment 1 – [short descriptive name]”, “Attachment 2 – [short descriptive name]”
 Powerpoint slides: “Presentation Slides”
 Powerpoint slides, revised: “Presentation Slides – Revised [Date]” For example:

Staff Report
Attachment 1 – Draft Ordinance
Attachment 2 – Map of Area
Attachment 3 – Letter from County
Presentation Slides
FORMATTING:
 Margins: Top, Bottom, Left, Right: 1 inch
 Body Text Font: 12-point Arial
 Right and left justified
 Headings are all-caps, bold 14-point Arial

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
 Section titles are 12-point Arial, bold, capitalized, underlined, with no colon, hard return but no space between section title and body text
State Requirements
 Subtitles are 12-point Arial italicized, sentence case with a colon and then the body text  Numbering format is as follows:

1. Example
a. Example
i. Example
23 Item #: 1.2
1) Example
 Bullet format is as follows:
 Example
o Example
 Example
24 Item #: 1.2

FORMATTING EXAMPLE FOR A HEADING, SECTION TITLE AND SUBTITLE

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
On September 10 and September 24, Town Council interviewed five applicants for the two resident position categories. On October 6, Town Council interviewed three applicants for the Planning Commission category.

Town Resident Category
Out of the five applicants for the two available town resident positions, four of the applicants qualify for the position. The fifth applicant does not live in San Anselmo.

Applicant One. John Smith is a resident of San Anselmo.

List of qualifications:

1. Example

2. Example
a. Example
b. Example
i. Example
ii. Example
1) Example
2) Example

3. Example
Applicant Two. Jane Smith is a resident of San Anselmo.

Applicant Three. Jane Doe is a resident of San Anselmo.

Applicant Four. John Doe is a resident of San Anselmo.

Planning Commission Category
Out of the three applicants for the available Planning Commission position, all of the applicants qualify for the position.

Applicant One. John Smith is a resident of San Anselmo.

List of qualifications:
 Example
 Example
o Example
o Example
 Example
 Example
Applicant Two. Jane Smith is a resident of San Anselmo.

Applicant Three. Jane Doe is a resident of San Anselmo. 25 Item #: 1.3

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #:1.3
MEETING DATE: August 27, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Revenue and Expenditure Reports, August 2024 FROM: Jeff Zuba, Finance & Admin Services Director
RECOMMENDATION: That Town Council consider approving the monthly year-todate Revenue and Expenditure Reports and corresponding activity for the period ending through August 31, 2024.

SUMMARY
Every reporting period end, the Town of San Anselmo presents to the Town Council its operations as shown on the Revenue and Expenditure reports for discussion and approval.

BACKGROUND
The Revenue and Expenditure reports are year-to-date summaries of revenues and expenditures from the Town’s financial system (‘Tyler Incode’) for both the current as well as the prior corresponding fiscal year. These reports include the General Fund’s operations given most of the Town-level operational activities are processed through the General Fund either directly or indirectly. This approval is to be obtained once a month within the fiscal year.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The revenue and expenditure data through August 31, 2024, is a compilation of all operating activity that is year-to-date for the current and prior fiscal year. These reports are sourced directly from the Town’s financial system, of which a corresponding analysis has been performed identifying the key trends the Town Council should take note of.

Revenues
Overall, through the August 2024 reporting period end, the Town’s General Fund revenue has increased its base relative to the prior year by $0.094M. The figures for August 2024 are still preliminary year-end numbers as we close the books and prepare 26 Item #: 1.3
for the Town’s financial audit. A majority of the Town’s revenue is collected at specific times.

As shown above, the Town’s overall revenue base increased by $0.094M as its  The Town receives property tax disbursements from the County of Marin in December, April, and June.
 The Town receives disbursements monthly from the State for Sales Tax. The collections for the fiscal year 2024-25 will begin in September.  Revenue from Licenses & Permits increased by $0.099M compared to the previous period, due to construction activity in the Town and the timing of business license collections.
 Intergovernmental revenue decreased by $0.011 compared to the previous period due to the timing of collections for Prop 172's 0.5% sales tax.  Other fees increased by $0.020M compared to the previous period, due to activity related to Planning Fees and Resale inspections.

As far as the other revenue streams, these changes either decreased or remained flat year-over-year resulting in an immaterial change.

Expenditures
Overall, through the August 2024 reporting period end, the Town’s General Fund expenditures have increased by $0.313M compared to the prior year. This is primarily from increases in retirement, outside services, and debt service. All other activity is either flat year-over-year or nets correspondingly to an immaterial change—all of which are within management’s expectations.

Category AUG YTD FY25 AUG YTD FY24 $ Change % Change
Property Tax - 13,617.48 (13,617.48) -100.00%
Sales Tax - - - 0.00%
Property Transfer Tax - - - 0.00%
Franchise Taxes 40,913.40 40,251.00 662.40 1.65%
Licenses & Permits 254,352.82 155,215.70 99,137.12 63.87% Fines 657.53 10,173.72 (9,516.19) -93.54%
Cash & Investment Interest 18,375.85 9,305.01 9,070.84 0.00% Intergovernmental 2,361.70 13,823.74 (11,462.04) -82.92% Other Fees 79,465.28 59,162.66 20,302.62 34.32%
Transfers In - - - 0.00%
Total 396,126.58 301,549.31 94,577.27 31.36%
27 Item #: 1.3
As shown above, the Town’s expenditures base overall increased by $0.313M of which is driven by retirement, outside services, and debt service:
 Retirement increased by $0.093M compared to the prior period due to the Town’s CalPERS unfunded liability payment.
 Outside Services increased by $0.129M compared to the previous fiscal year due to payments for Public Safety JPA’s, Central Marin Police Authority, and Ross Valley Fire Department.
 Debt Service increased by $0.054M compared to the previous fiscal year due to the repayment of the 2021 Pension Obligation Bonds noted above. The bond payments are due in August and February.

As far as the other expenditure streams, these changes either slightly changed or remained flat year-over-year resulting in an immaterial change. All other changes are taken together overall immaterial for further discussion and are expected given the Town’s operations.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
Not applicable

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment #1: Budget Comparison Report by Subcategory, August 2024 Attachment #2: Budget Comparison Report by Department, August 2024 Category AUG YTD FY25 AUG YTD FY24 $ Change % Change
Compensation 728,349.19 701,580.96 26,768.23 3.82%
Retirement 146,325.50 50,873.39 95,452.11 187.63%
Training 993.12 1,934.76 (941.64) -48.67%
Outside Services 2,692,619.25 2,563,086.52 129,532.73 5.05% Maintenance 28,495.16 24,241.28 4,253.88 17.55%
Utilities 3,388.89 238.44 3,150.45 1321.28%
Supplies 24,019.04 38,791.35 (14,772.31) -38.08%
Debt Service 552,599.61 498,268.81 54,330.80 10.90%
Other Expenditure 879,433.88 864,150.15 15,283.73 1.77% Transfers Out - - - 0.00%
Total 5,056,223.64 4,743,165.66 313,057.98 6.60%
28 Town of San Anselmo
2024-2025 Rev & Exp Report
as of 08/31/2024
2023-2024
Revised
Budget
2023-2024
Audited
Actuals
2023-2024
YTD Actuals
% of
Audited
Actuals
2024-2025
Adopted
Budget
2024-2025
Revised
Budget
2024-2025
YTD Actuals
% of
Actual /
Budget
Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND
Revenue
400 - PROPERTY TAX GENERAL 9,609,527.00 9,714,058.35 1,752.46 0.02 % 10,030,351.00 10,030,351.00 820.92 0.01% 401 - PENSION 2,756,290.00 2,917,118.86 38.25 0.00 % 3,020,000.00 3,020,000.00 0.00 0.00% 402 - PROPERTY TAX OTHER 4,097,971.00 3,837,567.08 11,826.77 0.31 % 3,998,058.00 3,998,058.00 0.00 0.00% 410 - OTHER TAXES 1,503,000.00 1,262,897.64 0.00 0.00 % 1,559,106.00 1,559,106.00 0.00 0.00% 411 - FRANCHISE TAXES 848,000.00 881,713.35 40,251.00 4.57 % 936,500.00 936,500.00 40,913.40 4.37% 420 - BUSINESS LICENSE 290,000.00 277,534.46 5,413.84 1.95 % 290,000.00 290,000.00 12,900.10 4.45 % 421 - PARKING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 422 - CONSTRUCTION 1,141,000.00 1,034,013.52 149,801.86 14.49 % 983,500.00 983,500.00 241,452.72 24.55 % 430 - VEHICLE CODE 10,000.00 4,354.86 302.00 6.93 % 15,000.00 15,000.00 531.23 3.54 % 431 - LIBRARY 1,250.00 2,512.30 267.30 10.64 % 1,500.00 1,500.00 126.30 8.42 % 432 - PARKING 115,000.00 100,837.72 9,604.42 9.52 % 117,990.00 117,990.00 0.00 0.00 % 440 - USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY 100,000.00 115,898.21 9,305.01 8.03 % 100,000.00 100,000.00 18,375.85 18.38% 450 - STATE REVENUE 297,500.00 303,359.13 13,823.74 4.56 % 170,500.00 170,500.00 2,361.70 1.39% 460 - FEDERAL REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 470 - LOCAL AGENCY REVENUE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 178,250.00 186,017.66 30,379.30 16.33 % 231,000.00 231,000.00 50,297.44 21.77 % 490 - MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE 102,772.00 183,646.36 28,783.36 15.67 % 115,555.00 115,555.00 29,167.84 25.24 % 519 - TRANSFERS IN 384,030.00 386,731.87 0.00 0.00 % 403,318.00 403,318.00 0.00 0.00 % 520 - SOURCE OF PROCEEDS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % Total Revenue: 21,434,590.00 21,208,261.37 301,549.31 1.42 % 21,972,378.00 21,972,378.00 396,947.50 1.81% Expense
600 - SALARIES AND WAGES 3,336,127.00 3,286,881.51 530,043.69 16.13 % 3,552,174.00 3,552,174.00 578,147.20 16.28 % 601 - RETIREMENT 561,590.00 293,531.19 50,873.39 17.33 % 428,706.00 428,706.00 146,325.50 34.13 % 602 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 890,116.00 737,406.43 156,271.72 21.19 % 872,566.00 872,566.00 135,839.56 15.57 % 604 - RETIREE BENEFITS 164,779.00 164,779.00 15,265.55 9.26 % 180,796.00 180,796.00 14,362.43 7.94 % 610 - TRAINING 55,750.00 38,490.19 1,934.76 5.03 % 68,750.00 68,750.00 993.12 1.44 % 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 13,506,864.00 13,106,106.04 2,563,086.52 19.56 % 13,633,637.00 13,633,637.00 2,692,619.25 19.75% 613 - PUBLICATION / DUES 25,272.00 17,472.68 2,237.00 12.80 % 27,522.00 27,522.00 1,240.07 4.51 % 614 - MAINTENANCE 119,135.00 102,103.92 16,837.20 16.49 % 123,485.00 123,485.00 9,101.93 7.37 % 615 - BUILDING MAINTENANCE 50,000.00 146,978.67 6,444.40 4.38 % 60,000.00 60,000.00 6,578.22 10.96 % 616 - VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 2,000.00 25,231.23 959.68 3.80 % 76,050.00 76,050.00 12,815.01 16.85 % 617 - UTILITIES 0.00 100,123.67 238.44 0.24 % 0.00 0.00 3,388.89 0.00 % 618 - HIRING 1,000.00 3,168.83 692.00 21.84 % 1,000.00 1,000.00 11,715.09 1,171.51 % 619 - MISCELLANEOUS 50,000.00 50,285.97 0.00 0.00 % 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 620 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 0.00 21,326.13 2,334.21 10.95 % 32,754.00 32,754.00 5,861.34 17.90 % 622 - DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 202,450.00 195,104.18 32,413.89 16.61 % 133,197.00 133,197.00 7,775.22 5.84 % 623 - BOOKS / MAGAZINES / VIDEOS 27,500.00 31,521.44 4,043.25 12.83 % 29,000.00 29,000.00 10,382.48 35.80 % 629 - MISCELLANEOUS 1,371,875.00 1,378,895.26 861,221.15 62.46 % 1,483,312.00 1,483,312.00 866,478.72 58.42 % 630 - EQUIPMENT 500.00 343.37 0.00 0.00 % 500.00 500.00 0.00 0.00 % 631 - CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 % 640 - PRINCIPAL 410,000.00 410,000.00 410,000.00 100.00 % 465,000.00 465,000.00 465,000.00 100.00 % 641 - INTEREST 176,067.00 175,985.33 88,268.81 50.16 % 173,929.00 173,929.00 87,599.61 50.37 % 670 - TRANSFERS OUT 774,500.00 789,895.72 0.00 0.00 % 605,000.00 605,000.00 0.00 0.00 % Total Expense: 21,725,525.00 21,075,630.76 4,743,165.66 22.51 % 21,972,378.00 21,972,378.00 5,056,223.64 23.01% Total Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND: -290,935.00 132,630.61 -4,441,616.35 0.00 0.00 -4,659,276.14 Report Total: -290,935.00 132,630.61 -4,441,616.35 0.00 0.00 -4,659,276.14 ITEM 1.3 - ATTACHMENT 1 ITEM 1.3 - ATTACHMENT 1
29 Town of San Anselmo
2024-2025 Rev & Exp Report
as of 08/31/2024
2023-2024
Revised
Budget
2023-2024
Audited
Actuals
2023-2024
YTD Actuals
% of
Audited
Actuals
2024-2025
Adopted
Budget
2024-2025
Revised
Budget
2024-2025
YTD Actuals
% of
Actual /
Budget
Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND
Expense
00 - UNDESIGNATED 774,500.00 789,895.72 0.00 0.00 % 605,000.00 605,000.00 0.00 0.00 % 11 - TOWN COUNCIL 63,255.00 54,954.93 4,124.66 7.51 % 71,446.00 71,446.00 4,518.73 6.32 % 12 - ADMINISTRATION 1,565,944.00 1,556,047.47 278,564.74 17.90 % 1,669,529.00 1,669,529.00 250,538.91 15.01 % 16 - LEGAL SERVICES 425,000.00 259,765.00 0.00 0.00 % 330,000.00 330,000.00 16,570.50 5.02 % 18 - PLANNING 1,050,401.00 1,005,737.96 84,934.83 8.45 % 1,169,800.00 1,169,800.00 112,360.97 9.61 % 21 - NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,120,808.00 1,775,454.55 905,449.63 51.00 % 1,488,431.00 1,488,431.00 1,006,825.18 67.64 % 30 - POLICE 5,184,636.00 5,204,393.04 1,301,098.26 25.00 % 5,474,469.00 5,474,469.00 1,368,617.25 25.00 % 32 - ROSS VALLEY FIRE SERVICE 5,088,722.00 5,090,465.78 840,398.00 16.51 % 5,559,703.00 5,559,703.00 922,728.91 16.60 % 40 - DEBT SERVICE 587,567.00 587,285.33 498,268.81 84.84 % 640,429.00 640,429.00 552,599.61 86.29 % 41 - ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION 1,809,804.00 1,654,497.28 249,472.79 15.08 % 1,699,695.00 1,699,695.00 263,176.06 15.48 % 42 - STREETS 1,185,909.00 1,220,177.31 195,852.93 16.05 % 1,278,642.00 1,278,642.00 176,215.06 13.78 % 71 - LIBRARY 847,839.00 858,461.50 215,751.79 25.13 % 899,716.00 899,716.00 225,498.79 25.06 % 81 - PARKS 694,458.00 721,450.02 119,398.88 16.55 % 768,688.00 768,688.00 100,639.76 13.09 % 82 - RECREATION/GENERAL FUND 326,682.00 297,044.87 49,850.34 16.78 % 316,830.00 316,830.00 55,933.91 17.65 % Total Expense: 21,725,525.00 21,075,630.76 4,743,165.66 22.51 % 21,972,378.00 21,972,378.00 5,056,223.64 23.01% Total Fund: 01 - GENERAL FUND: 21,725,525.00 21,075,630.76 4,743,165.66 22.51 % 21,972,378.00 21,972,378.00 5,056,223.64 23.01% Report Total: 21,725,525.00 21,075,630.76 4,743,165.66 22.51 % 21,972,378.00 21,972,378.00 5,056,223.64 23.01% ITEM 1.3 - ATTACHMENT 2 ITEM 1.3 - ATTACHMENT 2
30 Item #: 1.4

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.4
MEETING DATE: 9/24/24
AGENDA TITLE: Financial Report on Recreation Fund
FROM: Mattie O’Grady – Interim Director of Community
Services
RECOMMENDATION: That the Town Council review the Recreation Fund revenue and expenditure report for the period ending August 31, 2024.

BACKGROUND
The Recreation Department offers a wide variety of fee-based programs throughout the fiscal year including sports programs and leagues, youth, and adult classes, childcare and camps. Additional revenue is generated through facility rentals and administrative fees.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The August report marks the beginning of the new 2024/25 fiscal year. As of August 31, 2024, 17% of the fiscal year has elapsed and the Recreation Fund is listed at 18% of projected revenues and 17% of projected expenditures.

In past years, revenue was deposited when customers registered. Our Civic Rec software automatically defers the revenue deposit until the date of service. As a result, this is the first year we have an August report. We will continue to build on the table below in the coming years. Please note that while we intake many program registrations in August, most fall recreation programs begin in September and therefore their revenues are not included in the August report.

Enrollment for recreation programs is strong. Families are enjoying our programs, and we have added additional programs and staff positions for the new fiscal year.

You will also find attached the capital outlay budget for the department, in addition to the Recreation Fund revenue and expenditure report.
31 Item #: 1.4
For future historical comparison purposes, staff has developed the following table:

FY Revenue Expenditures Rev Over/(Under) Exp
Budget Actual % Budget Actual % $$ %
2024-25 2,210,355 403,892 18% 2,210,355 381,775 17% 22,116 1% Attachment 1 - Revenue & Expenditure Report FY 2024-25: Recreation Fund as of 8/31/2024.
32 9/9/2024 11:33:14 AM Page 1 of 2
Budget Report
Town of San Anselmo Group Summary
For Fiscal: 2024-2025 Period Ending: 08/31/2024
Fiscal
AcƟvity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
SubCategory AcƟvity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Department: 00 - UNDESIGNATED
670 - TRANSFERS OUT 33,899.00 33,899.00 33,899.00 100.00 % 0.00 0.00 Department: 00 - UNDESIGNATED Total: 33,899.00 33,899.00 33,899.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 % Department: 61 - SPORTS
480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 568,375.00 568,375.00 -541,524.00 95.28 % 8,822.00 26,851.00 600 - SALARIES AND WAGES 30,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 100.00 % 0.00 0.00 602 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 2,295.00 2,295.00 2,295.00 100.00 % 0.00 0.00 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 222,650.00 222,650.00 166,587.04 74.82 % 44,870.97 56,062.96 629 - MISCELLANEOUS 54,500.00 54,500.00 54,436.74 99.88 % 0.00 63.26 Department: 61 - SPORTS Surplus (Deficit): 258,930.00 258,930.00 -288,205.22 -36,048.97 -29,275.22 111.31 % Department: 62 - CULTURE
480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 177,860.00 177,860.00 -175,802.00 98.84 % 1,116.00 2,058.00 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 124,300.00 124,300.00 123,938.05 99.71 % 74.10 361.95 629 - MISCELLANEOUS 3,500.00 3,500.00 3,220.28 92.01 % 0.00 279.72 Department: 62 - CULTURE Surplus (Deficit): 50,060.00 50,060.00 -48,643.67 1,041.90 1,416.33 97.17 % Department: 63 - CHILD CARE
480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 1,408,120.00 1,408,120.00 -1,041,243.64 73.95 % 142,612.73 366,876.36 600 - SALARIES AND WAGES 521,439.76 521,439.76 399,888.21 76.69 % 67,290.51 121,551.55 601 - RETIREMENT 28,941.04 28,941.04 24,765.72 85.57 % 2,120.73 4,175.32 602 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 117,494.32 117,494.32 97,726.14 83.18 % 10,321.90 19,768.18 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 426,200.00 426,200.00 340,640.93 79.93 % 42,481.46 85,559.07 622 - DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 4,500.00 4,500.00 4,427.43 98.39 % 0.00 72.57 629 - MISCELLANEOUS 37,600.00 37,600.00 34,515.66 91.80 % 79.94 3,084.34 Department: 63 - CHILD CARE Surplus (Deficit): 271,944.88 271,944.88 -139,279.55 20,318.19 132,665.33 51.22 % Department: 64 - EVENTS AND OTHER
480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 29,000.00 29,000.00 -23,084.50 79.60 % 3,333.50 5,915.50 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 15,000.00 15,000.00 14,672.30 97.82 % 0.00 327.70 Department: 64 - EVENTS AND OTHER Surplus (Deficit): 14,000.00 14,000.00 -8,412.20 3,333.50 5,587.80 60.09 % Department: 65 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
480 - FEES FOR SERVICES 27,000.00 27,000.00 -24,808.00 91.88 % 987.00 2,192.00 600 - SALARIES AND WAGES 320,106.91 320,106.91 267,086.54 83.44 % 27,179.59 53,020.37 601 - RETIREMENT 34,948.82 34,948.82 29,424.50 84.19 % 2,837.74 5,524.32 602 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 62,562.69 62,562.69 47,348.59 75.68 % 7,679.43 15,214.10 610 - TRAINING 8,000.00 8,000.00 7,848.58 98.11 % 0.00 151.42 611 - OUTSIDE SERVICES 114,500.00 114,500.00 109,127.17 95.31 % 74.00 5,372.83 613 - PUBLICATION / DUES 1,200.00 1,200.00 1,200.00 100.00 % 0.00 0.00 614 - MAINTENANCE 900.00 900.00 900.00 100.00 % 0.00 0.00 615 - BUILDING MAINTENANCE 200.00 200.00 150.00 75.00 % 50.00 50.00 617 - UTILITIES 13,000.00 13,000.00 11,884.64 91.42 % 1,115.36 1,115.36 618 - HIRING 800.00 800.00 218.00 27.25 % 582.00 582.00 619 - MISCELLANEOUS 817.46 817.46 -544.42 -66.60 % 1,361.88 1,361.88 620 - OFFICE SUPPLIES 25,000.00 25,000.00 17,383.91 69.54 % 0.00 7,616.09 622 - DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 6,000.00 6,000.00 5,539.08 92.32 % 149.90 460.92 Department: 65 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION Surplus (Deficit): -561,035.88 -561,035.88 472,758.59 -40,042.90 -88,277.29 84.27 % Report Surplus (Deficit): -51,398.28 22,116.95 0.00 0.00 22,116.95 0.00 % 33 Budget Report For Fiscal: 2024-2025 Period Ending: 08/31/2024 9/9/2024 11:33:14 AM Page 2 of 2
Fund Summary
Fiscal
AcƟvity
Variance
Favorable
Fund (Unfavorable)
Period
AcƟvity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
21 - RECREATION 0.00 0.00 22,116.95 -51,398.28 22,116.95 Report Surplus (Deficit): -51,398.28 22,116.95 0.00 0.00 22,116.95 34 9/9/2024 11:30:34 AM Page 1 of 3
Budget Report
Town of San Anselmo Account Summary
For Fiscal: 2024-2025 Period Ending: 08/31/2024
Fiscal
AcƟvity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Percent
Remaining
Current
Total Budget
Period
AcƟvity
Original
Total Budget
Fund: 21 - RECREATION
Expense
SubCategory: 631 - CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION

21.65.63100 CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION 450,000.00 39,605.18 410,394.82 91.20 % 450,000.00 38,628.00 SubCategory: 631 - CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION Total: 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 38,628.00 Expense Total: 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 38,628.00 Fund: 21 - RECREATION Total: 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 38,628.00 Report Total: 38,628.00 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 35 Budget Report For Fiscal: 2024-2025 Period Ending: 08/31/2024 9/9/2024 11:30:34 AM Page 2 of 3
Group Summary
Fiscal
AcƟvity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
SubCategory AcƟvity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Fund: 21 - RECREATION
Expense
631 - CAPITAL OUTLAY - CONSTRUCTION 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 38,628.00 39,605.18 Expense Total: 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 38,628.00 39,605.18 91.20 % Fund: 21 - RECREATION Total: 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 38,628.00 39,605.18 91.20 % Report Total: 38,628.00 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 36 Budget Report For Fiscal: 2024-2025 Period Ending: 08/31/2024 9/9/2024 11:30:34 AM Page 3 of 3
Fund Summary
Fiscal
AcƟvity
Variance
Favorable
Fund (Unfavorable)
Period
AcƟvity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
21 - RECREATION 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 38,628.00 39,605.18 Report Total: 38,628.00 39,605.18 450,000.00 450,000.00 410,394.82 91.20 % 37 Item #: 1.5

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.5
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: United against Hate Week Resolution
FROM: Linda M. Kenton, Assistant Town Manager
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) to declare the week of September 21-27, 2024, as "United Against Hate Week" in the Town of San Anselmo.

SUMMARY
United Against Hate Week (September 21-27, 2024) represents a vital local civic movement aimed at combating the hate and implicit biases endangering the safety and civility of our communities. This resolution has the full support of the Town’s Racial Equity Committee.

BACKGROUND
Originating from a poster campaign by Bay Area Cities in 2017, this initiative was a direct response to white supremacist rallies in Berkeley and San Francisco. The effort soon evolved, with the first communities mobilized in 2018 by Not In Our Town, a national organization dedicated to combating hate, as part of their commitment to an annual week promoting action and awareness. Gaining momentum, the movement is now making considerable progress not only across California but also attracting attention and participation from communities nationwide, signaling a growing national commitment to standing united against hate.

Town Council voted to establish the Racial Equity Ad Hoc Committee as a Standing Committee with Town Council Resolution #4440 on June 28, 2022.

Mission Statement: To identify, expose, and recommend ways to overturn far-reaching and longstanding systemic and structural racist policies, behaviors and decision making in the Town of San Anselmo and our community. We will achieve social justice, racial equity, and inclusion by partnering with our community as well as other organizations to actively eliminate inequities, welcome many perspectives, and create a safe and inclusive town that works for everyone. We will educate and activate individuals and organizations to invest in interrupting racism, bias, bigotry, and prejudice as a shared responsibility to increase the success for all groups.
38 Item #: 1.5
Charge: The charge of the Racial Equity committee is to examine issues of racial equity, social justice, systemic racial bias, and diversity in the Town and to make recommendations to the Town Council related to addressing the identified issues. The purpose of the committee is to identify and address implicit biases in the Town’s rules, policies, ordinances, and employment practices. The committee will also explore additional opportunities to examine and/or address issues of racial equity, social justice, systemic racial bias, and diversity in the Town and develop strategies and tactics to ensure that the Town’s rules, policies, and laws are fair, equitably enforced, and free of biases of any kind.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
For the third year in a row, the Town of San Anselmo joins many other Marin cities and towns, the County of Marin, and community partners across the Bay Area, in declaring “United Against Hate Week” as a show of solidarity against hate in the community.

The Town acknowledges the vital role of government to speak out against hateful discourse and to proactively advance diversity, equity, and inclusion. In collaboration with the Town’s Racial Equity Committee, several other local jurisdictions and community-based organizations, the Town joins in spreading the message of United Against Hate week: “We reject hate of any kind and believe that building a safer and more equitable world starts by working together.”
In addition to adopting the attached draft Resolution, the Town intends to spearhead United Against Hate initiatives in San Anselmo and invite those in neighboring communities to join us. These include a display in the Town Library of books, Figure 1, including a print brochure of titles, and a booklist available online.

Figure 1 – Library Display
39 Item #: 1.5
Further involvement includes a United Against Hate Poster Campaign. The Town of San Anselmo invites residents to show their support by downloading and displaying a United Against Hate poster, Figure 2. These can be printed at the Town Library or downloaded from Attachment 2.

Figure 2 – Poster
The resolution and planned activities during United Against Hate Week are excellent examples of the Town’s commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and examples of the Town’s work plan in practice.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The approval of this item is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code section 21065, and CEQA Guidelines sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), or 15378 because there is no potential that it will cause a reasonably foreseeable direct or indirect physical change in the environment. The Climate Action Plan is not implicated
40 Item #: 1.5

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 – Resolution
Attachment 2 – United against Hate Poster
41 TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO to Declare the Week of September 21-27, 2024, as
United Against Hate Week in the Town of San Anselmo
WHEREAS, the United States is a nation of immigrants, whose strength comes from its diversity; and
WHEREAS, it has become all too common to see, hear, and witness racist, xenophobic, antiSemitic, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and other hateful acts in this country; and WHEREAS, deep divisions within our country are the result of extreme ideology, further strengthening a cycle of mistrust and suspicion fueled by fear, anxiety, and insecurity; and WHEREAS, the Constitution enshrines equality on all individuals regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation and expression, religion, disability, socio-economic status, education, language, or political views; and
WHEREAS, the Town of San Anselmo is committed to addressing equality and inclusivity in housing, criminal justice, health care, employment, education, and all other aspects of our community; and
WHEREAS, education, compassion, and cooperation are vital to understanding and embracing differences between people; and
WHEREAS, we seek to join other communities across the country in bridging divisions and strengthening our communities; and
WHEREAS, United Against Hate Week is a call for seven days of local civic action by people in every community to stop the hate and implicit biases that are a dangerous threat to the safety and civility of our neighborhoods, towns and cities.

WHEREAS, United Against Hate Week has spread to over 200+ communities including all of Marin County, faith-based groups, LGBTQIA+ communities, and human rights organizations and in communities across the U.S.

WHEREAS, awareness can be increased by posting signs, distributing resources, hosting events, sharing stories and connecting with schools and neighborhood civic institutions. 42 WHEREAS, the week of action is designed to raise awareness about the dangers of hate and the need for respect and civil discourse among all county residents and students.

WHEREAS, this is a great opportunity to engage youth around civic engagement and involvement in social justice issues related to reducing incidents of hate within their communities.

WHEREAS, together, our community can stand united against hate not just this week, but every day.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Eileen Burke, Mayor of San Anselmo, do hereby proclaim September 21 through September 27, 2024 as United Against Hate Week in the Town of San Anselmo.

WHEREAS Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of San Anselmo on the 24th day of September, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
__________________________________
Eileen Burke, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________________
Serge Avila, Town Clerk
43 44
Item #: 1.6

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.6
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Consider reappointing (1) One Incumbent to the Tax Equity Board
FROM: Serge Avila, Town Clerk
RECOMMENDATION: For the Town Council to consider reappointing incumbent Richard Berkson to the Tax Equity Board for a three-year term.

BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION
Per the Council’s direction provided during the meeting of May 9, 2023. There is no need for the Town Council to hold interviews for incumbents when no additional candidates have applied for this position.

The Tax Equity Board is an active committee established in 1983. Its primary role is to conduct hearings for applications for tax rebates from San Anselmo property owner claiming inability to pay the town’s Municipal Services Tax, Pension Override Tax and Library Parcel Tax.

The Tax Equity Board has a membership of four seats appointed by the Town Council to serve three-year terms.

Currently there are two vacancies. The Committee is composed of the following members with their respective expiring terms:

Name Term Term Expiration
Richard Berkson Expired July 1, 2024
Edie Heller Current September 1, 2025
Tom Verkozen Current June 25, 2027

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no direct fiscal impact on the Town to approve this item. 45 Item #: 1.6

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed appointment is not a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act, because it does not involve an activity which has the potential to cause a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (Cal. Pub. Res.

Code § 21065).

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1- Richard Berkson- Application w/Resume
46 Submit Date: May 03, 2024
First Name Middle
Initial
Last Name
Email Address
Home Address Suite or Apt
City State Postal Code
Primary Phone Alternate Phone
Town of San Anselmo, CA
Application for Appointment to a San Anselmo Board/Commission/Committee Profile
Occupation
Consultant
Employer's Address
Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee
If you are a student, what school do you attend?
Which Boards would you like to apply for?
Tax Equity Board: Submitted
Number of years as resident of San Anselmo?
28 Number of years as a resident in Marin?
28 Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee
Please indicate the neighborhood you reside or own property/a business in.

Name and phone numbers of three San Anselmo residents who can be contacted for referral information about me:

Steve Vance 415-453-9477 Patrick Knight 415-250-1018 Rod Miles 415-721-7128 Richard Berkson
Richard Berkson
47 Education Level Achieved *
Master's Degree
Interests & Experiences
Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee
GPAC meetings will take place in person at Town Hall from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on the second Thursday of the month. The General Plan Update will be a two-year process.

I would be able to regularly attend the meetings of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I would be available to attend additional meetings when they are necessary.

Yes No
I am familiar with the responsibilities and functions of this Board/Commission/Committee.

Yes No
I have attended meetings of the Board/Commission/Committee as a member of the public.

Yes No
List briefly, previous experience serving the public office, and/or civic commissions, boards, or committees:

Currently a member of the Town's Infrastructure and Fiscal Monitoring Committee (IFMAC) and Tax Equity Board. I have also served on the ad hoc pension committee. I have participated for several years as a volunteer to the Economic Development Committee (EDC) and prepared its first Economic Development Plan and revised its Action Plan format.

Reasons for this appointment:

I am seeking this appointment to build upon my contributions on Town boards and commissions to improve San Anselmo as a place to live, work and visit.

What are your qualifications for this appointment?
I bring extensive experience with the Town's fiscal/economic planning, as well as over 40 years of related professional experience in the areas of urban economics, real estate, fiscal analysis, government organization and planning.

Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee Why are you excited to be a member of the GPAC? Are there specific objectives you would like to work towards as a member of the GPAC? Please explain:

As noted in my prior response, I wish to make an enduring contribution to improving San Anselmo as a place to live, work and visit. The GPAC offers an opportunity to help develop the General Plan which will shape the Town for years to come.

Richard Berkson
48 Upload a Resume
You may attach other documentation which you
believe would be helpful to the Council in its
selection process.

Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee
The Town is seeking members with a wide variety of skills and experience.

Please indicate below which categories best describe your areas of interest, skills, and experience: *
Land Use
Economic Development and Business
Public Services (i.e., roads, fire, police)
Briefly, what do you consider to be the most important, one or two current issues facing this Board/Commission/Committee?
1) Balancing change against potentially competing community interests, priorities and the resulting trade-offs. 2) Providing a realistic framework for implementation of the General Plan recognizing legal, economic and funding constraints and opportunities.

Question applies to General Plan Advisory Committee
How did you hear about this opening on the GPAC?
Town website and staff
LinkedIn Profile
https://www.linkedin.com/in/richard-berkson-59191513/
Please Agree with the Following Statement
I understand that I and all other applicants will be personally interviewed by the Town Council (or the entity overseeing the Steering and Short Term Committees) as part of the selection process for this appointment. I also understand that my application material will be a public document and available on the Town's website. Sensitive materials that you don't wish to be posted on the website should not be included with the application.

I Agree
E-Signature:

Richard Berkson
Thank you for your interest in serving the Town of San Anselmo and its citizens. For further information, please contact the Town Clerk, [email protected] or 415-258- 4660.

Berkson_resume.pdf
Berkson_resume.pdf
Richard Berkson
49 Policy Forensics and Forecasting 34 Terrace Avenue § San Anselmo, CA 94960 Understanding the Past, Managing the Future 510.612.6906 § [email protected]

Richard Berkson
Principal, Berkson Associates

EDUCATION
Master of Public Policy,
University of California,
Berkeley
Bachelor of Arts in Social
Science, University of
California, Berkeley
Undergraduate study in
Engineering, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology
(3 semesters)

AFFILIATIONS

CALAFCO,
Associate Member

PUBLIC SERVICE
Capital Program Monitoring
and Fiscal Advisory
Committee, & authored the
Economic Development Plan
for the Town of San Anselmo

HONORS AND AWARDS
Anaheim, CA, honoring
contribution to the success of
the Anaheim Resort Project

PRIOR EMPLOYMENT
Founding Principal,
Economic and Planning
Systems, Inc. (EPS)
ABOUT
Richard Berkson, Principal of Berkson Associates, believes that sound policies and strategies require careful consideration of causality, creative problem solving, and incentive-based solutions. His practice is founded on 30+ years of experience providing clear and concise fiscal and financial analysis based on a solid understanding of local government organization (e.g., formation, annexation, and consolidation), capital improvement policy and programming, and urban economics (demographics, market & financial analysis, and economic development).

EXPERTISE
Government Organization
Prepares governance feasibility and special studies addressing municipal incorporation, annexations, service reviews and special studies, special district formations, dissolutions and consolidations, and assists in the preparation of intergovernmental agreements including tax sharing. Creates detailed pro forma operational and capital budgets as well as analysis of reorganization issues, options and impacts upon existing agencies, and develops sustainable mitigation measures.

Fiscal and Economic Analysis
Analyzes and predicts fiscal and economic impacts of land uses, developments, and policies on municipal budgets. Designs fiscal models to evaluate public service and financing issues and develops mitigation measures for long-term fiscal sustainability.

Forecast budgets and develop asset management policies and programs.

Public Finance
Prepares financing strategies and plans for a wide variety of public services and infrastructure projects, including development project-related infrastructure, areawide capital improvement programs, public safety, and recreation facilities, as well as specific infrastructure projects. Financing techniques applied include formulation of area-specific and facility-specific development impact fees, special tax bonds, sales tax measures, and Infrastructure Financing Districts.

Market and Financial Analysis
Evaluates the market feasibility of a wide range of uses including recreation, residential, office, industrial, retail, and hotel, as a part of development proposals, specific and general plans, and governance studies. Prepares initial market reviews as well as detailed pricing and absorption estimates, demographic forecasting, and economic development strategies. Constructs pro forma financial analysis of largescale mixed-use projects, as well as individual business proposals. 50 Item #: 1.7

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.7
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Consultant Contract for the 2025 Street Resurfacing Project
FROM: Scott Schneider, Asst. Public Works Director
RECOMMENDATION: That the Town Council authorize the Town Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Siegfried Engineering for the design of the 2025 Street Resurfacing Project in an amount not to exceed $145,000.

BACKGROUND
As part of the 2024 Capital Improvement Program approved by the Town Council, local streets are selected for pavement resurfacing to address the town’s pavement management and improve the overall Pavement Condition Index (PCI) in town.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Based on a submission for a Request for Qualifications in 2019, Siegfried was selected to design the 2021 Street Resurfacing Phase B project. Upon successful completion of the design, Siegfried was asked to submit a cost proposal for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 Street Resurfacing Projects, which they successfully completed earlier this year. Based on demonstrated competence on previous projects and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the service required, staff requested they submit a cost proposal for the 2025 Street Resurfacing Project.

The proposed list of streets to be included in the project was based on projected funding available and a rough estimate of cost for each street based on previous unit costs.

Siegfried Engineering has submitted its scope of work and cost proposal listed in the Professional Services Agreement (Attachment 1) that includes the required tasks to complete the design and construction drawings and it is within the available funding.

Staff recommend authorizing the Town Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Siegfried based on the scope of work and cost proposal. 51 Item #: 1.7
The design work is expected to take six to eight months. The completed design will be brought back to the Town Council for their approval in spring 2025 for summer 2025 construction.

The 2025 Street Resurfacing Project consists of the following street segments (see Attachment 2 – Map of Proposed Streets):

Carlson Avenue – Rancho Drive to Butterfield Road (19 PCI) Prospect Avenue – Barber Avenue to Avenue Del Norte (40 PCI) Echo Court – Melville Avenue to End (41 PCI)
Shaw Drive – Sir Francis Drake to End (29 PCI)
Madrone Avenue – Laurel Avenue to San Anselmo Avenue (34 PCI) Savannah Avenue – Redwood Road to End (36 PCI)
Los Angeles Boulevard – Monterey Avenue south to Town Limits (39 PCI) City Hall Avenue – Library Place to End (23 PCI)
Spring Grove Avenue – Greenfield Avenue to Town Limit (7 - 56 PCI) Oak Avenue – Gerlack Road to No. 395 (36 PCI)
Alpine Terrace – Jordan Avenue to End (12 PCI)
Jordan Avenue – Southview Terrace to Alpine Terrace (28 - 40 PCI) Oakhill Drive – Jordan Avenue to End (44 PCI)
Southview Terrace – Jordan Avenue to End (51 PCI)
The rough Engineer’s Estimate for repaving the above streets is $1,300,000 to $1,500,000.

FISCAL IMPACT
The professional services agreement will be drafted for a not-to-exceed cost of $145,000. Funding is available from the Road Maintenance Fund and Measure J, and is included in the 2024-2025 Town Budget and Work Plan.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
This project design is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under a Class 6 categorical exemption, because the scope of work consists of data gathering, analysis and preparation of plans and specifications for a project. No construction or alteration will be undertaken. (14 Cal. Code Regs. § 15306). When the plans and specifications are finalized and ready for bidding and construction, a CEQA analysis will be undertaken at that time.

The project design will propose street and sidewalk improvements that will address San Anselmo’s Climate Action Plan 2030, specifically CAP Measures T-2 (biking) and T-3 (walking).

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1- Siegfried Engineering Scope and Cost Proposal 52 Item #: 1.7
Attachment 2 – Map of Proposed Streets
53 1

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR 2025 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
This Agreement is made and entered into this _____ day of __________________, 20___, by and between the TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO (hereinafter "TOWN"), and SIEGFRID ENGINEERING, INC. (hereinafter "CONSULTANT").

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. PROJECT COORDINATION.

A. TOWN’S Project Manager. The Public Works Director is hereby designated the PROJECT MANAGER for the TOWN and said PROJECT MANAGER shall supervise all aspects of the progress and execution of this Agreement.

B. CONSULTANT’S Project Director. CONSULTANT shall assign a single PROJECT DIRECTOR to have overall responsibility for the progress and execution of this Agreement for CONSULTANT. Adam Merrill is hereby designated as the PROJECT DIRECTOR for CONSULTANT. Should circumstances or conditions subsequent to the execution of this Agreement require a substitute PROJECT DIRECTOR, for any reason, the CONSULTANT shall notify the TOWN within ten (10) business days of the substitution.

2. DUTIES OF CONSULTANT.

CONSULTANT shall perform the duties and/or provide services as follows:

Design work as specified in Exhibit A.

3. DUTIES OF TOWN.

TOWN shall pay the compensation as provided in Paragraph 4, and perform the duties as follows:

4. COMPENSATION.

For the full performance of the services described herein by CONSULTANT, TOWN shall pay CONSULTANT as follows:

Total cost of contract not to exceed $145,000.00.

Payment will be made monthly upon receipt by PROJECT MANAGER of itemized invoices submitted by CONSULTANT.

5. TERM OF AGREEMENT.
54 Revised 9/18/2024
The term of this Agreement shall be for (1) year(s) commencing on _______________ and ending on _______________. Upon mutual agreement of the parties, and subject to the approval of the TOWN Manager the term of this Agreement may be extended for an additional period of up to (____) year(s).

6. TERMINATION.

A. Discretionary. Either party may terminate this Agreement without cause upon thirty (30) days written notice mailed or personally delivered to the other party.

B. Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement for cause upon fifteen (15) days written notice mailed or personally delivered to the other party, and the notified party's failure to cure or correct the cause of the termination, to the reasonable satisfaction of the party giving such notice, within such fifteen (15) day time period.

C. Effect of Termination. Upon receipt of notice of termination, neither party shall incur additional obligations under any provision of this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other.

D. Return of Documents. Upon termination, any and all TOWN documents or materials provided to CONSULTANT and any and all of CONSULTANT's documents and materials prepared for or relating to the performance of its duties under this Agreement, shall be delivered to TOWN as soon as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days after termination.

7. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS.

The written documents and materials prepared by the CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of its duties under this Agreement, shall be the sole property of TOWN. TOWN may use said property for any purpose, including projects not contemplated by this Agreement.

8. INSPECTION AND AUDIT.

Upon reasonable notice, CONSULTANT shall make available to TOWN, or its agent, for inspection and audit, all documents and materials maintained by CONSULTANT in connection with its performance of its duties under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall fully cooperate with TOWN or its agent in any such audit or inspection.

9. ASSIGNABILITY.

The parties agree that they shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of their respective obligations hereunder, without the prior written consent of the other party, and any attempt to so assign this Agreement or any rights, duties or obligations arising hereunder shall be void and of no effect.

10. INSURANCE.
55 Revised 9/18/2024
A. Scope of Coverage. During the term of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall maintain, at no expense to TOWN, the following insurance policies:

1. A commercial general liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence/two million dollars($2,000,000) aggregate, for death, bodily injury, personal injury, or property damage.

2. An automobile liability (owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles) insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) dollars per occurrence.

3. If any licensed professional performs any of the services required to be performed under this Agreement, a professional liability insurance policy in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence/two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate, to cover any claims arising out of the CONSULTANT's performance of services under this Agreement.

Where CONSULTANT is a professional not required to have a professional license, TOWN reserves the right to require CONSULTANT to provide professional liability insurance pursuant to this section.

4. If it employs any person, CONSULTANT shall maintain worker's compensation insurance, as required by the State of California, with statutory limits, and employer’s liability insurance with limits of no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury or disease. CONSULTANT’s worker’s compensation insurance shall be specifically endorsed to waive any right of subrogation against TOWN.

B. Other Insurance Requirements. The insurance coverage required of the CONSULTANT in subparagraph A of this section above shall also meet the following requirements:

1. Except for professional liability insurance or worker’s compensation insurance, the insurance policies shall be specifically endorsed to include the TOWN, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, as additional insureds (for both ongoing and completed operations) under the policies.

2. The additional insured coverage under CONSULTANT’S insurance policies shall be “primary and noncontributory” with respect to any insurance or coverage maintained by TOWN and shall not call upon TOWN's insurance or self-insurance coverage for any contribution.

The “primary and noncontributory” coverage in CONSULTANT’S policies shall be at least as broad as ISO form CG20 01 04 13.

3. Except for professional liability insurance or worker’s compensation insurance, the insurance policies shall include, in their text or by endorsement, coverage for contractual liability and personal injury.

4. By execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT hereby grants to TOWN a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of CONSULTANT may acquire against TOWN by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. CONSULTANT 56 Revised 9/18/2024
agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not TOWN has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

5. If the insurance is written on a Claims Made Form, then, following termination of this Agreement, said insurance coverage shall survive for a period of not less than five years.

6. The insurance policies shall provide for a retroactive date of placement coinciding with the effective date of this Agreement.

7. The limits of insurance required in this Agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and noncontributory basis for the benefit of TOWN (if agreed to in a written contract or agreement) before TOWN’S own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

8. It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to TOWN or any other additional insured party. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be: (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured; whichever is greater. No representation is made that the minimum Insurance requirements of this agreement are sufficient to cover the obligations of the CONSULTANT under this agreement.

C. Deductibles and SIR’s. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions in CONSULTANT's insurance policies must be declared to and approved by the PROJECT MANAGER and TOWN Attorney and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or TOWN or other additional insured party. At TOWN's option, the deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to TOWN shall be reduced or eliminated to TOWN's satisfaction, or CONSULTANT shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claims administration, attorney's fees and defense expenses.

D. Proof of Insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide to the PROJECT MANAGER or TOWN’S TOWN Attorney all of the following: (1) Certificates of Insurance evidencing the insurance coverage required in this Agreement; (2) a copy of the policy declaration page and/or endorsement page listing all policy endorsements for the commercial general liability policy, and (3) excerpts of policy language or specific endorsements evidencing the other insurance requirements set forth in this Agreement. TOWN reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsements from CONSULTANT. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of the right to exercise it later. The insurance shall be approved as to form and sufficiency by PROJECT MANAGER and the TOWN Attorney.

11. INDEMNIFICATION.
57 Revised 9/18/2024
A. Except as otherwise provided in Paragraph B., CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, indemnify, release, defend with counsel approved by TOWN, and hold harmless TOWN, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers (collectively, the “TOWN Indemnitees”), from and against any claim, demand, suit, judgment, loss, liability or expense of any kind, including but not limited to attorney's fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation, (collectively “CLAIMS”), arising out of CONSULTANT’S performance of its obligations or conduct of its operations under this Agreement. The CONSULTANT's obligations apply regardless of whether or not a liability is caused or contributed to by the active or passive negligence of the TOWN Indemnitees. However, to the extent that liability is caused by the active negligence or willful misconduct of the TOWN Indemnitees, the CONSULTANT's indemnification obligation shall be reduced in proportion to the TOWN Indemnitees’ share of liability for the active negligence or willful misconduct. In addition, the acceptance or approval of the CONSULTANT’s work or work product by the TOWN or any of its directors, officers or employees shall not relieve or reduce the CONSULTANT’s indemnification obligations. In the event the TOWN Indemnitees are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from CONSULTANT’S performance of or operations under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide a defense to the TOWN Indemnitees or at TOWN’S option reimburse the TOWN Indemnitees their costs of defense, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred in defense of such claims.

B. Where the services to be provided by CONSULTANT under this Agreement are design professional services to be performed by a design professional as that term is defined under Civil Code Section 2782.8, then, to the extent permitted by law including without limitation, Civil Code sections 2782, 2782.6 and 2782.8, CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless the TOWN and its officers, officials, and employees (collectively TOWN Indemnitees) from and against damages, liabilities or costs (including incidental damages. Court costs, reasonable attorney’s fees as may be determined by the Court, litigation expenses and fees of expert witnesses incurred in connection therewith and costs of investigation) to the extent they are caused by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, or any subconsultants, or subcontractor or anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whom they are legally liable (collectively Liabilities). Such obligation to hold harmless and indemnify any indemnity shall not apply to the extent that such Liabilities are caused in part by the negligence or willful misconduct of such TOWN Indemnitee.

C. The defense and indemnification obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by, the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement, and shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.

12. NONDISCRIMINATION.

CONSULTANT shall not discriminate, in any way, against any person on the basis of age, sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin or disability in connection with or related to the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement.

13. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS.
58 Revised 9/18/2024
CONSULTANT shall observe and comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes and regulations, in the performance of its duties and obligations under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall perform all services under this Agreement in accordance with these laws, ordinances, codes and regulations. CONSULTANT shall release, defend, indemnify and hold harmless TOWN, its officers, agents and employees from any and all damages, liabilities, penalties, fines and all other consequences from any noncompliance or violation of any laws, ordinances, codes or regulations.

14. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES.

TOWN and CONSULTANT do not intend, by any provision of this Agreement, to create in any third party, any benefit or right owed by one party, under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, to the other party.

15. NOTICES.

All notices and other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement, including any notice of change of address, shall be in writing and given by personal delivery, or deposited with the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties intended to be notified. Notice shall be deemed given as of the date of personal delivery, or if mailed, upon the date of deposit with the United States Postal Service. Notice shall be given as follows:

TO TOWN’s Project Manager: Town of San Anselmo
Attn: Sean Condry
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
TO CONSULTANT’s Project Director: Siegfried
Attn: Adam Merrill
3428 Brookside Rd.

Stockton, CA 95219

16. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.

For the purposes, and for the duration, of this Agreement, CONSULTANT, its officers, agents and employees shall act in the capacity of an Independent Contractor, and not as employees of the TOWN. CONSULTANT and TOWN expressly intend and agree that the status of CONSULTANT, its officers, agents and employees be that of an Independent Contractor and not that of an employee of TOWN.

17. ENTIRE AGREEMENT -- AMENDMENTS.

A. The terms and conditions of this Agreement, all exhibits attached, and all documents expressly incorporated by reference, represent the entire Agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement.
59 Revised 9/18/2024
B. This written Agreement shall supersede any and all prior agreements, oral or written, regarding the subject matter between the CONSULTANT and the TOWN.

C. No other agreement, promise or statement, written or oral, relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, shall be valid or binding, except by way of a written amendment to this Agreement.

D. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall not be altered or modified except by a written amendment to this Agreement signed by the CONSULTANT and the TOWN.

E. If any conflicts arise between the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and the terms and conditions of the attached exhibits or the documents expressly incorporated by reference, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control.

18. SET-OFF AGAINST DEBTS.

CONSULTANT agrees that TOWN may deduct from any payment due to CONSULTANT under this Agreement, any monies which CONSULTANT owes TOWN under any ordinance, agreement, contract or resolution for any unpaid taxes, fees, licenses, assessments, unpaid checks or other amounts.

19. WAIVERS.

The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement, or of any ordinance, law or regulation, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, law or regulation, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or other term, covenant, condition, ordinance, law or regulation. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee, performance, or other consideration which may become due or owing under this Agreement, shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach or violation by the other party of any term, condition, covenant of this Agreement or any applicable law, ordinance or regulation.

20. TOWN BUSINESS LICENSE / OTHER TAXES.

CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain during the duration of this Agreement, a TOWN business license as required by the San Anselmo Municipal Code CONSULTANT shall pay any and all state and federal taxes and any other applicable taxes. TOWN shall not be required to pay for any work performed under this Agreement, until CONSULTANT has provided TOWN with a completed Internal Revenue Service Form W-9 (Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification).

21. SURVIVAL OF TERMS.

Any terms of this Agreement that by their nature extend beyond the term (or termination) of this Agreement shall remain in effect until fulfilled and shall apply to both Parties’ respective successors and assigns.
60 Revised 9/18/2024

22. APPLICABLE LAW.

The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

23. COUNTERPARTS AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE.

This Agreement may be executed by electronic signature and in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one document.

Counterpart signature pages may be delivered by telecopier, email or other means of electronic transmission.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day, month and year first above written.

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO CONSULTANT
______________________________
Public Works Director
______________________________ By:______________________________ DAVE DONERY, Town Manager
Name:____________________________
Title:_____________________________
ATTEST:
[If CONSULTANT is a corporation,
______________________________ add signature of second corporate officer] SERGE AVILA, Town Clerk
61 STOCKTON SAN JOSE SACRAMENTO MODESTO
3428 Brookside Rd. 111 N. Market St., #300 1164 National Dr., #20 101 Sycamore Ave, #100 Stockton, CA 95219 San Jose, CA 95113 Sacramento, CA 95834 Modesto, CA 95354 t: 209.943.2021 t: 408.754.2021 t: 916.520.2777 t: 209.762.3580 F:\24projects\24271 San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project\Working Documents\Contracts and Proposals\24271 Town of San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project Scope & Fee Ver 1.docx
PAGE - 1 -
September 18, 2024
Scott Schneider, P.E.

Town of San Anselmo
525 San Anselmo Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
RE: TSA 2025 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT

SAN ANSELMO, CALIFORNIA

PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL DESIGN SERVICES
Dear Scott;
We appreciate the opportunity to propose our services to you for this project.

I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ASSUMPTIONS
The Town of San Anselmo will rehabilitate road segments as provided in the table below:

Road From To PCI SF
Carlson Ave Rancho Dr Butterfield Rd 19 4,432
Prospect Ave Barber Ave Ave del Norte 40 6,700
Echo Ct Melville Ave End 41 5,814
Shaw Drive SFD End 29 6,440
Shaw Drive Lot at end N/A 29,600
Madrone Ave Laurel Ave San Anselmo Ave 34 8,823
Savannah Ave Redwood Rd End 36 6,804
Los Angeles Blvd Monterey Ave S Santa Cruz Ave 59 4,004 Los Angeles Blvd Santa Cruz Ave Monterey Ave N 47 11,536 Los Angeles Blvd Monterey Ave N Town Limit 49 9,660
City Hall Ave Library Place End 23 Not Provided
Magnolia Ave in front of parking lot Not Provided 1,400 Spring Grove Ave Greenfield Ave W. Hillside 7 4,725
Spring Grove Ave W. Hillside Town limits 56 28,584
Oak Ave Gerlack Rd No 395 36 6,552
Alpine Terrace Jordan Ave End 12 2,805
Jordan Ave Alpine Terrace End 41 8,840
Jordan Ave Alpine Terrace Oak Hill Dr 40 10,872
Jordan Ave Oak Hill Dr Southview Terrace 28 9,384
Oakhill Dr Jordan Ave End 44 4,522
Southview Terrace Jordan Ave End 51 12,257
The Town provided Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the road segments range from 7 to 59. The segments of roadways range from about 100 lineal feet to 2,382 lineal feet, totaling about 1.6 miles of roadway. The roads appear to be located in residential and downtown areas.

62 STOCKTON SAN JOSE SACRAMENTO MODESTO
3428 Brookside Rd. 111 N. Market St., #300 1164 National Dr., #20 101 Sycamore Ave, #100 Stockton, CA 95219 San Jose, CA 95113 Sacramento, CA 95834 Modesto, CA 95354 t: 209.943.2021 t: 408.754.2021 t: 916.520.2777 t: 209.762.3580 F:\24projects\24271 San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project\Working Documents\Contracts and Proposals\24271 Town of San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project Scope & Fee Ver 1.docx
PAGE - 2 -
II. SCOPE OF WORK
Task 1 – Topographic Survey

1. Prepare a limited topographic survey of the approximate limits shown in attached kmz file. The survey will be in sufficient detail for use by Siegfried in developing plans.

2. The following features will be located and mapped, at a minimum for the pavement rehabilitation locations:
a. Lip of gutter lines.
b. Crown of roadway.
c. Edge of pavement.
d. Shots will generally be at 50’ station spacing along the roadways, and at grade breaks, beginning, middle and ends of horizontal curves, including side street curb returns. (Essentially a cross section of the impacted area)
e. Manholes and Clean outs
f. Utility boxes/vaults/etc.

3. Field measurements will be accomplished with D-GPS where practicable, and with conventional robotic total stations where overhead obstructions preventing sufficient GPS reception may exist.

4. Office preparation and mapping of the surveyed features utilizing AutoCAD Civil 3D.

5. Mapping will be based on the California Coordinate System, NAD83, NAVD88 datum.

6. Underground utility lines will be mapped as a part of this scope of work, record information and surface utility shots will be used to map the utilities to the best of our ability.

CONDITIONS TO THE SCOPE:

1. Client shall provide full access to property.

2. Client to provide as-builts.

3. Work is to be conducted during regular business hours, Monday-Friday, with no limitations to those hours.

Task 2 – Meeting & Coordination

1. Attend meeting(s) with the Town engineer to coordinate the project related items.

2. Coordinate with the Town engineer to represent and depict the street rehabilitation areas. Project areas are depicted in attached kmz file.

Task 3 – Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate

1. Prepare the project plans and cost estimate for the project areas depicted in attached kmz file.

2. Assist the Town with the project specifications.

It is understood that the following are not included in the Scope:
a. hazardous waste testing, monitoring and contingency plan for both site and building demolition work,
b. Phase I Environmental Assessment, Phase II Subsurface Investigation, and asbestos and lead containing material investigation and report,
63 STOCKTON SAN JOSE SACRAMENTO MODESTO
3428 Brookside Rd. 111 N. Market St., #300 1164 National Dr., #20 101 Sycamore Ave, #100 Stockton, CA 95219 San Jose, CA 95113 Sacramento, CA 95834 Modesto, CA 95354 t: 209.943.2021 t: 408.754.2021 t: 916.520.2777 t: 209.762.3580 F:\24projects\24271 San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project\Working Documents\Contracts and Proposals\24271 Town of San Anselmo Pavement Rehab 2025 Project Scope & Fee Ver 1.docx
PAGE - 3 -
c. record of survey or corner records,
d. survey of exploration locations,
e. geotechnical report, analytical sampling and testing, f. earthwork testing and observations,
g. materials testing and special inspections,
h. infiltration testing,
i. construction administration services,
j. environmental impact report,
k. CEQA/NEPA/EIR
l. potholing to determine location and/or elevation of underground utilities, m. permit applications and fees,
n. construction management, inspection, supervision and scheduling, o. gas, electric and telephone service plans,
p. design of any structural elements,
q. record survey maps, tentative maps, parcel maps, final maps and legal descriptions and sketches,
r. boundary surveys,
s. ALTA Survey,
t. SWPPP, QSD & QSP services,
u. construction staking, and
v. reimbursable expenses.

III. FEE PROPOSAL
Task Fee
Task 1 Topographic Survey $45,000.00
Task 2 Meeting & Coordination $5,000.00
Task 3 Plans, Specifications & Cost Estimate $95,000.00 Total Fee $145,000.00
We look forward to continuing our work with you and the team. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please do not hesitate to call me directly.
_________________________________

SIEGFRIED
Adam K. Merrill, PE, QSD/QSP
Civil Engineer
Vice President, Principal
64 Revised 9/18/2024
Exhibit “B”
Insurance Requirements
Contractor will, at all times under this Contract, maintain the insurance coverage required herein to cover the activities of Contractor and any subcontractors relating to or arising from performance of the Scope of Work. Each policy must be issued by a company licensed to do business in California. Contractor must provide the Town with certificates of insurance and required endorsements as evidence of coverage before the Town authorizes Contractor to proceed with any work.

A. Workers’ Compensation. Statutory coverage is required by the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Safety Act. If Contractor is self-insured, it must provide its duly authorized Certificate of Permission to Self-Insure.

B. Liability. Commercial General Liability (“CGL”) Coverage insurance issued on an occurrence basis, including coverage for liability arising from Contractor’s or its subcontractor’s acts or omissions in performing the Scope of Work, including Contractor’s protected coverage, blanket contractual, products and completed operations, broad form property damage, vehicular coverage, and employer’s nonownership liability coverage, with limits of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 general aggregate.

C. Automotive. Commercial automotive liability coverage for owned, non-owned, and hired vehicles must provide coverage of at least $2,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury, death, or property damage.

D. Subrogation Waiver. Each required policy must include an endorsement that the insurer waives any right of subrogation it may have against the Town or the Town’s insurers.

E. Required Endorsements. The CGL policy and the automotive liability policy must include the following specific endorsements:
(1) The Town, including its Council, officials, officers, employees, agents, volunteers and consultants (collectively, “Additional Insured”) must be named as an additional insured for all liability arising out of the operations by or on behalf of the named insured, and the policy must protect the Additional Insured against any and all liability for personal injury, death or property damage or destruction arising directly or indirectly in the performance of the Contract. (2) The inclusion of more than one insured will not operate to impair the rights of one insured against another, and the coverages afforded will apply as though separate policies have been issued to each insured.
(3) The insurance provided is primary and no insurance held or owned by the Town 65 Revised 9/18/2024
may be called upon to contribute to a loss (“primary and non-contributory”). (4) Any umbrella or excess insurance must contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage will also apply on a primary or non-contributory basis for the benefit of the Town before the Town’s own insurance or self-insurance will be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
(5) This policy does not exclude explosion, collapse, underground excavation hazard, or removal of lateral support.
66 67
Item #: 1.7

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 1.7
MEETING DATE: 9/24/24
AGENDA TITLE: Consideration of Special Event Application – 50th Anniversary of Creek Park Celebration
FROM: Mattie O’Grady – Interim Community Services Director RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the application with the noted conditions for the Chamber of Commerce’s 50th Anniversary of Creek Park Celebration scheduled for Saturday, October 12, 2024 from 1:00 to 6:00pm.

BACKGROUND
The year 2024 marks the 50th anniversary of the opening of Creek Park. The Town is marking this milestone as part of the September 20, 2024 Live on the Avenue event where there will be a presentation by a Town Historian about the park’s history, followed by a performance of the Happy Birthday song and blowing out of a candle on one of the 500 cookies donated to the event by United Markets.

In addition, the Town has produced a set of pole banners commemorating the anniversary which are being displayed on the light poles on San Anselmo Avenue nearest the park.

DISCUSSION
The Chamber of Commerce would like to hold a separate event to celebrate the milestone and is requesting use of the park facilities. This event would take place on Saturday, October 12th between the hours of 1:00 and 6:00pm. This event would feature amplified speeches and music. The on-site event coordinator representing the Chamber of Commerce at this event would be Guy Meyer.

Mr. Meyer is a political candidate and has been informed that there may not be any form of campaigning for any candidate, measure or proposition as part of this event. Any infraction of this would lead to a cancellation of the remainder of the event as the approval of this application is for a community serving activity.

Please note that no street closure has been requested as part of this event application. 68 Item #: 1.7

FISCAL IMPACT
There would be no direct fiscal impact to the Town to approve this item.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
None

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
The proposed event application is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under the “common sense” exemption, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14, § 15061).

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1- Event Application
69 70
71 Item #: 2.1

STAFF REPORT
TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO Item #: 2.1
MEETING DATE: September 24, 2024
AGENDA TITLE: Sorich Park Multiuse Trail
FROM: Sean Condry, P.E., Public Works Director
RECOMMENDATION:

1. That Town Council receive a presentation on the proposed Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project and provide direction on one of the following options:
a. That Staff continue to look at additional alternatives to the existing Sorich Park Trail as a multi modal trail including one for hiker only and another for hiker and biker and come back with more information. b. That Staff proceed with Trail Alignment A concept and work with Marin County Open Space and come back with a trail project for approval, which involves converting the existing Sorich Park Trail, currently designated for hikers and horse riders, into a shared-use trail that also accommodates non-motorized bicycles.
c. That Staff proceed with Trail Alignment A and E concept and work with Marin County Open Space and come back with trail projects for approval.

These projects involve converting the existing Sorich Park Trail, currently designated for hikers and horse riders, into a shared-use trail that also accommodates non-motorized bicycles and adding in a new trail on Town and Cemetery property for hikers only.

BACKGROUND
In 1965 the sixty four acre parcel know as Sorich Park Open Space was purchased by the Town of San Anselmo after being a dairy from 1920-1957. Since then, the Town has looked at various ideas for the park but in 1989 the Open Space Committee looked for a revitalized open space park at Sorich. In 1991 the Open Space Committee worked on a Master Plan for Sorich Park. The Town and Open Space Committee have worked on many projects to improve and maintain Sorich as open space which is used and enjoyed by many residents and visitors, see Attachment 1 history.

In 2018, Tom Boss, formerly with Marin County Bicycle Coalition (MCBC), asked the Town to investigate a multiuse path through Sorich Park. Public Works walked the area with Tom at the time but due to limited funds and staffing, the idea did not get implemented.
72 Item #: 2.1
On April 19, 2023, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) received a presentation from Sandor Lengyel of the MCBC about a proposed project to create a multimodal trail through Sorich Park to connect San Anselmo and Terra Linda (Attachment 2). Currently, no bike-legal option exists through Sorich Park. A multimodal trail through Sorich Park would allow connectivity to the Marin County Parks Department’s Memorial Trail Improvements in Terra Linda as well as easy access to northern San Rafael.

At their June 14, 2023, meeting, the BPAC voted in support of the project and for staff to look into Alignment Alternative A (Attachment 3) – widening the existing Sorich Trail to upgrade for multimodal usage.

At their September 25, 2023, meeting, the Climate Action Committee (CAC) received a presentation on the proposed project and voted in support of the concept but did not vote in endorsement of a specific trail route or design.

At their March 4, 2024, meeting, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) received a presentation on the proposed project and voted in support of the concept and for Alignment Alternative A as their preferred alignment.

At their April 17, 2024, meeting, the Open Space Committee (OSC) received a presentation on the proposed project and voted against the project.

At their August 19, 2024, meeting, the Planning Commission received a presentation and voted in support of converting the existing Sorich Park Trail to a multi modal trail.

There was also a community meeting on September 5, 2024, that had significant community attendance. At the meeting there was strong support for a multi modal trail but there was also opposition from hikers who are worried about being displaced by bikers and safety.

To date four out of five committees/commissions support a bike trail or multimodal option. Three of the four committees supported trail option A using the existing Sorich Park Trail as a multimodal trail.

Over the past 10-plus years the Town has adopted many policies and resolutions to get away from our car-centric culture. The Town is guided by policies and programs such as Safe Routes to School (SRTS), the Complete Streets Policy and the Town’s Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) transition plan. All three of these recognize the need to improve all modes of active transportation, which includes bicycling and walking, as well as accessibility issues.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
73 Item #: 2.1
Currently, there is limited bike connectivity between San Anselmo and Terra Linda. The existing access is comprised of very steep trails at grades that are inaccessible for most beginner and intermediate cyclists. MCBC has proposed a project to close this gap by creating a multiuse trail through Sorich Park. There are four identified alignment alternatives: Alternative A – existing Sorich Trail change of use, Alternative B – new trail to Cemetery Fire Road, Alternative C – new trail to Ridgewood Fire Road, and Alternative D – realignment of Sorich Tomahawk Trail.

In their presentation, MCBC identified Alternative A to be their preferred alignment due to ease and lowest cost of construction and given the fact that it’s currently a hiker/horse trail. The BPAC voted for staff to investigate Alternative A, PRC selected Alternative A as their preferred alignment, and the Marin County Parks Department favors Alternative A as Alternatives B, C, and D would require building new trails instead of making improvements to an existing trail.

Some concerns have been raised regarding the widening of the existing Sorich Park trail to allow for bicycles. During previous meetings with the BPAC, the Town received public comment from residents who are concerned that bicyclists will not properly share the trail and will become a danger to hikers, with suggestions for the Town to explore alternative routes for bicyclists to have a separate trail from hikers. Marin County Parks has indicated that it would include chicanes or other control devices to slow down bicyclists on multiuse trails as prescribed by common best practices for trail construction.

Another concern that has been raised by members of the public is the anticipation of increased demand for parking as riders may treat the improved multiuse path as a “destination trail”, although both Marin County Parks and members of the public who mountain bike in Marin do not see this as a concern and believe this trail will serve more as a connector rather than a destination for mountain bikers.

Marin County Parks stated that they would not pursue a trail improvement project on the Marin County Open Space District land abutting Sorich Park without support from the Town to complete trail improvements within Sorich Park. Approximately 30% of the trail is in San Anselmo Sorich Ranch Park (560 feet) and the remaining 70% (1225 feet) is in Marin County Open Space.

Over the past year or so, the Town has explored various options for multimodal trails as well as options to separate bicycle and pedestrian trails in numerous locations. The options considered included extensions of existing pedestrian trails that would provide a similar path to the Cemetery Fire Road as the Sorich Ranch Trail. In addition, the Town has looked at a few private property alternatives for bikes that may be viable. Marin County Open Space District (MCOSD) also vetted the idea of separate trails at an Environmental Roundtable meeting and the preferred alternative is conversion of the Sorich Park Trail from a hiker/horse trail to a hiker, horse and bike trail due to its limited impact. MCOSD is supportive of a single use trail for bikers and one for hikers but in 74 Item #: 2.1
keeping the existing trail in Sorich as is and providing a separate bike trail on private property if the community doesn’t support Sorich Park Trail as a multimodal trail.

The Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority (MWPA) is also moving forward with a fire fuel reduction plan (San Rafael- San Anselmo Fuel Reduction Zone Project (SRSAFRZ Project)) to remove invasive species such as eucalyptus trees up to 10 inches in this area as well as other fuel removal. Attachment 4 is a map of the project and more information about the project can be found at this link. With the reduction of fire fuels and the removal of eucalyptus trees, the line of sight to observe others on the trail, including bicyclists, will improve dramatically.

The connection of a bike trail from San Anselmo to the Terra Linda area of San Rafael is an important connection to make because it would allow for an alternative means of transportation that is equal to taking a car on the freeway. If Sorich Park trail was converted to a shared multimodal trail, it would directly connect to the new Eagle Rock Trail which is currently under construction by Marin County Parks at this link.

The Sorich Park to Eagle Rock Trail Connection would provide direct access to Kaiser Hospital, Northgate Mall, and Marin County Civic Center which includes the Sunday Farmers Market. Moving away from a car-centric infrastructure is important for environmental impact as well as the health and well-being of our residents. Cities, states, and other countries that have focused on improving infrastructure for bikes, trains, public transportation, etc. continue to demonstrate the positive impacts this has on their communities.

The Sorich Ranch Park Master Plan, Attachment 6, recognizes that people use the park for hiking, horse riding, and biking. On page 71-72 it states that riding mountain bikes is deemed appropriate for Sorich Ranch Park. On Page 65 of the Plan, it also has a survey where use of mountain bikes is split based on public opinion. The Plan has additional information about the park and is available online on this webpage.

Conclusion
The Town has been looking at the idea of a bike connection through Sorich Ranch Park to northern San Rafael for some time. A shared trail for hiking, horseback riding, and bicycling would improve the recreation opportunities as well as transportation options connecting important locations throughout Marin County.

The Town has participated in looking at transportation alternatives in other Countries.

One of the most important tools is planning for the future by making conscious decisions of where we want to be with our community transportation infrastructure.

Since the invention of the automobile most of the country’s infrastructure has been carcentric. However, communities such as Marin County and San Anselmo have recognized this and have begun addressing multimodal aspects of transportation and infrastructure improvements. The Town’s Complete Streets Resolution, ADA Transition Plan, and SRTS participation are plans that have been put in place to improve all modes of transportation making improvements with all projects for walking, biking and 75 Item #: 2.1
accessibility. The addition of a bike trail connecting San Anselmo to San Rafael is an important step in the right direction.

While concerns have been raised at community meetings and via emails (see Attachment 5), the existing Sorich trail conversion could include measures to slow bikes down and improve line of sight. The existing Sorich Park Trail is ideal in terms of location, terrain, cost to convert it to a multimodal trail, minimal environmental impact etc. The MCOSD has also offered to build or improve this trail for the Town at no cost potentially.

Converting this trail to multimodal for bikers and hikers would give direct access to the new Eagle Rock multimodal trail which connects directly to San Rafael. However, there is significant concern from some community members about being displaced and safety. Many view it as a tranquil place for hikers to walk in peace.

In addition, as can be seen on Attachment 5, there are many trails throughout San Anselmo and the County; some of these are multi-modal but there are many that are pedestrian only such as the Memorial Ridge Trail. The Memorial Ridge Trail does provide a pedestrian only path that links up to the end of the Sorich Trail. The Sorich Trail also currently ends at the Cemetery Fire Trail which allows bikes but currently has no way to get into San Anselmo directly from this trail.

There is an alternative, option E, that was recently presented as alternate trail off of the existing Sorich trail at the end of the dirt parking lot that could connect directly to the existing Memorial Ridge Trail and provide a hiker only trail and maybe a multimodal hiker/biker trail, Attachment 7. This option would require a high level CEQA analysis and would be much more costly than the existing Sorich Park Trail to build. Total costs could be in the range of $100,000-200,000 or more for both the environmental study and construction of the trail. Combining Alternatives A and E would provide a multimodal trail for bikers and hikers as well as a hiker only trail that could address the concerns of hikers.

Town staff is also looking at other potential multi modal trail options that are on private property only. This option may be viable but could still have some significant environmental and construction costs. However, staff would like to investigate this option more if authorized by Council.

Town has looked at many options both from a private and public perspective to get a separate bike trail connected to the Cemetery Fire Trail. After looking at all alternatives, Alignment Alternative A seems to be the best option in terms of environmental impact, ease of construction, and location as an existing trail. Town staff believes that converting the Sorich Park Trail from a hiker and horse trail that would allow bikers (non-motorized) is a good alternative to improve community access. However, as stated above there appear to be other viable trails for bikers and/or hikers that could be looked at, but staff would need more time to evaluate these.
76 Item #: 2.1

FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of this project is dependent upon which alignment alternative is selected and the nature of the agreement between the Town and Marin County Parks on the division of the work. However, Marin County Parks has stated that if Alignment Alternative A, Sorich Ranch Trail, is used they would cover all the construction costs.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
A Sorich Park Multiuse Trail Project is consistent with the Town’s General Plan including the goals of the Circulation Element.

CEQA AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN CONSISTENCY
Staff is initially seeking guidance from the Planning Commission and Town Council on the scope of a potential project. Once the scope is defined, the Town and Marin County Parks will proceed with project design and ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through appropriate analysis.

A Sorich Park Multiuse Trail Project is consistent with the Town’s Climate Action Plan including T-2 Bicycling and T-3 Walking.

ATTACHMENT
Attachment 1 – Sorich Park History
Attachment 2 – Sorich Park Trail Proposal from Sandor Lengyel Attachment 3 – Map of Sorich Park Multiuse Path Alternative Alignments Attachment 4 – San Rafael- San Anselmo Fuel Reduction Zone Attachment 5 – Map of Existing Trail Options here
Attachment 6 – Sorich Ranch Park Master Plan
Attachment 7 – Alternative Hiker Trail Option E
Attachment 8 – Public Comment
77 Sorich Ranch Park History
(Compiled by Jonathan Braun)
1920-1957: The land is operated as a dairy ranch.
1965: The sixty-four acres is purchased by Town of San Anselmo. 1970: A plan is developed for football field, pool and 75-car parking lot. Town does not choose to follow through with the concept.
1970’s: Dairy structures are mostly demolished. Barn is used by corporation yard.

The remaining land is left unimproved, but used by Town to dump green waste.

Annual public clean up and waste collection events are held there for many years. 1989: Creek Park architect, Dan Goltz, and Open Space Committee Chair, Jonathan Braun, collaborate on vision for a revitalized open space park at Sorich. 1991: San Anselmo Open Space Committee takes lead on planning park’s future. It enlists UC Berkeley Landscape architecture graduate student, Tom Murphy, to create a park Master Plan as his graduate thesis project. There is no cost to the Town, saving a $25,000-$35,000 consultant expense.
1991-1992: Work proceeds on Master Plan. Site inventory is completed. A Town wide survey is conducted, five public workshops are held. 135 people participate. 1992: Town Council approves Sorich Ranch Park Master Plan.

Sorich Park is considered as a site for a dog park. Deemed inconsistent with Master Plan, it is eventually sited at Red Hill field.
1994: Open Space Committee applies for and is awarded a $20,000 matching grant for the park from the State of California Habitat Conservation Fund. 1995: Grading for drainage and asphalt removal commences. A new parking lot is constructed.

Oak trees started from acorns collected in Sorich Park are planted. Redwood trees started from seed are established near the creek.
“Friends of Sorich Ranch Park”, an entirely volunteer organization dedicated to improving and maintaining Sorich Park is founded, led by John Walters from 1995- 2003. Subsequently, Ted Bakkila has led the monthly work parties at the park to the present. It is estimated that over 6,000 hours of volunteer labor has been donated during Ted’s tenure.
78 1996: Drake High School students complete a six-week project assisting with planting native plants and trail improvements, receiving natural history instruction from Open Space Committee member John Walters.

Other improvements include: Building a loop trail though lower park, extensive native plant landscaping. The construction of a shade arbor is done with donated design and materials and is built by the Boy Scouts.
2001: Open Space Committee applies for is and is awarded a $5,000 grant from the J.M. Long Foundation. Later, the Committee receives a second $5,000 grant from the J.M. Long Foundation and a $5,000 award from the Marin Community Foundation. 2005: A memorial plaque is installed and dedicated in the Redwood Grove in honor of John Walters who passed away in 2003.
2006: New trail to the “Rock Fort” is designed by Open Space member, Brian Crawford, and is built by Eagle Scout volunteers. The trail is named after former Parks Superintendent Dean Nyberg.

Other amenities are added to the Park including a water fountain for humans and dogs, as well as picnic tables and benches.
2018: An archery practice facility is proposed for Sorich Ranch Park. It is deemed inconsistent with the passive-use principle of the Master Plan. 2020: Eagle Scout project repairs major erosion caused by hikers and bike riders who violated posted rules by creating a shortcut across a hillside between the main terrace and the Rock Fort.
2021 – Eagle Scout project installs steps and restores erosion on Dean Nyberg Trail. 2022: Goat grazing used for fire fuel reduction is found to be impacting vegetation and damaging some trees. Partnering agencies meet to work out modifications to previous practices.
2024: Town Council approves biological survey of Sorich Ranch Park to document the impact of goat grazing.
2024 – Open Space Committee and Town Council approve the Committee’s Action Plan, which includes revitalizing the Sorich Staging and Parking Area with landscaping, tree planting, and vegetation.

The Friends of Sorich Ranch Park continue to meet once a month to manage the park. Many of these volunteers put in extra hours watering and weed whacking throughout the summer and fall months.
79 SORICH PARK TRAIL PROPOSAL
Town of San Anselmo
Marin County, CA
Prepared for the San Anselmo Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Council
by Sandor Lengyel- San Anselmo Resident
February 2020
Resubmitted April 2023
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 1 of 27
80 SUMMARY
This document outlines a proposal to create a bicycle legal non-motorized multi use trail from Sorich Park to San Rafael Ridge. This trail would close a connection gap for bicycles, and create new routes for community recreation recreation and transportation.

This trail would mostly benefit hikers/runners/and bicyclists who live in Ross Valley. It is not a destination trail but closure of a decades old connection gap between San Anselmo and San Rafael Ridge.

This is located in Sorich Park at the end of San Francisco Boulevard in San Anselmo.

Project Area Overview
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 2 of 27
81 INTRODUCTION
Bicycle connectivity between San Anselmo and Terra Linda and San Rafael Ridge is poor in reality. Bicycle routes are steep, not family friendly, or involve long detours on heavy traffic roads.

This proposal outlines four options to improve connectivity and close connection gaps for bicyclists in San Anselmo.

Alternative A- Change of Use in Sorich Park Trail to Cemetery Fire Road Alternative B- Trail from Sorich Parking lot to Cemetery Fire Road Alternative C- Trail from Sorich Parking lot to Ridgewood Fire Road Alternative D- Re-route and new trail along the Tomahawk Sorich Road corridor

PURPOSE AND NEED
The purpose and need for action reflect the difference between the existing condition and the desired condition for meaningful bicycle connectivity from san Anselmo to the San Rafael Ridge, Loma Alta, and Terra Linda.

Bicycle access from central San Anselmo to San Rafael Ridge is limited to Fawn Drive (Sleepy Hollow), Sun Valley (San Rafael), and Tomahawk. All options are steep and inaccessible to many cyclists. There are currently no beginner/intermediate trail options for bicycles.

There is a need for a bike legal trail in San Anselmo that would accomplish the following goals:
• Closure of connection gap for bicycles from San Anselmo to San Rafael Ridge. • Benefit Ross Valley residents.
• Create more high quality outdoor recreation opportunities for Ross Valley residents. • Addresses need for recreational opportunities away from vehicle traffic. • Link to Marin County Parks Memorial Trail to create a car-free transportation corridor between Terra Linda and San Anselmo.

CURRENT ALTERNATIVES FOR BICYCLES to access San Rafael Ridge • Sleepy Hollow- Fawn Drive (long detour on Butterfield Road and steep) • Tomahawk Drive- Tomahawk Fire Road (very steep and inaccessible for most) • San Rafael- (heavy traffic through San Rafael)
• Tomahawk Sorich Fire Road (highly eroded and inaccessible for most)

PROJECT GOALS
• Closure of connection gap for bicycles
• New recreational and transportation options for Ross Valley residents • Trail that meets modern erosion control standards.
• Great views of Ross Valley and Mt. Tamalpais
• Minimize construction cost through alignment.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 3 of 27
82 NOTES ON LEGACY “TRAIL ALIGNMENTS”
In evaluating construction of new trails, consideration of the history of legacy trails is important.

Many of Marin’s ranch and fire roads were never built for recreation. Bulldozer operators often followed the path of least resistance, following ridgelines and fall lines (Fall lines run straight down hillsides. They are often unsustainably steep and subject to constant erosion). Unsustainably steep grades and erosive alignments are common in legacy alignments.

Outdoor recreation, erosion control, sustainable trail grades and maximizing trail user experience were not considerations of legacy alignments.

Many ranch roads have unsustainable grades in excess of 20%. By comparison, ideal recreational trail grades range between 5-10%.

This is not an issue isolated to Marin. There are thousands of miles of poorly aligned bulldozer tracks that are grandfathered into poor quality recreational trails.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 4 of 27
83 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page
5 of 27
84 TRAIL CONSTRUCTION GOALS
• Meet erosion control standards through sustainable alignment and frequent drainage controls
• Maximize trail user experience with a visually interesting alignment • Avoid waterways and sensitive areas
• Beginner to intermediate difficulty trail
• Bi-directional trail. Trail should be an easy climb and descent for trail users • Maintain 5-8% average grade
• Maintain erosion controls with frequent grade reversals and outslope • Avoid the use of stairs and waterbars
• Cost effective- Trail design should minimize cost by avoiding expensive trail features (e.g. engineered bridges)

TRAIL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
• “Best practices” trail building consistent with USFS, BLM, and IMBA standards for non-motorized recreational trails
• Similar width to other multi-use trails in Marin County. • Drainage accomplished through frequent grade reversals and outslope • “Half rule” in effect- Trail grade shall not exceed 1/2 the hillside slope. • Large radius “climbing turns” where feasible
• Trail should integrate with the flow the the land, using natural benches where possible.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 6 of 27
85 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page
7 of 27
86 ALTERNATIVE A- Sorich Park Trail Change of Use
This option is a Change of Use of Sorich Park Trail to allow bicycle use between the Sorich Park parking lot and Cemetery Fire Road. This is the easiest and lowest cost solution to close the connection gap for bicycles. The Sorich Trail is approximately 0.3 miles long (with 300-500 feet on Town of San Anselmo property). This alternative would be coupled with maintenance and improvements to the existing trail.

Maintenance and improvement would be performed prior to change in use. Most of the trail improvements could be accomplished with volunteer trail crews.

Sorich Park Trail is 48-60+ inches wide. It is similar in width to other multi-use (bike legal) trails in Marin County. Comparable width multi-use trails in Marin include- 680 Trail, Big Rock Trail, China Camp State Park Trails, Octopus Trail, Miwok, Coast View, Dias Ridge, Tenderfoot, Porcupine, and others. Other Marin County multi-use trails of this width accommodate both bicycle, equestrian, and pedestrian traffic.

Alternative A is split between two land managers. The western end is on Town of San Anselmo property and the Eastern end is on Marin County Parks land. Change of use would involve cooperation of two land managers.

Maintenance and improvements are as follows:
• Widening the trail as necessary to allow passing
• Restoration of outslope as necessary
• Installation of grade reversals for drainage above and below switchbacks • Increase the size of turning platforms at switchbacks as necessary. • Removal of trench drains and replacement with armored grade reversals as necessary
• Change of signage
Alternative A is the lowest cost alternative. A Change of Use coupled with improvements to the existing trail would close the connection gap at the lowest cost. No new trail construction would be necessary.

Trail Statistics
Length- 0.3 miles
Average Grade- 9.8%
Vegetation
Sorich Park trail is a mix of native grass (approximately 0.1 miles) and a dense stand of eucalyptus, poison oak, and broom.

Waterways and Stream Environmental Zones (SEZs)
Sorich Park Trail has one seasonal stream crossing with an existing bridge. Apart from winter/spring ground water seepage onto the trail surface, there are no waterway or Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 8 of 27
87 drainage issues. Cemetery Fire Road has large drainage swales and excellent erosion controls.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 9 of 27
88 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 10 of 27 89 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 11 of 27 90 ALTERNATIVE B- Trail from Sorich Parking Lot to Cemetery Fire Road This alternative is a new 0.46 mile long trail at 7% average grade from Sorich Parking lot to Cemetery Fire Road.

This alignment provides a separate multi-use trail from Sorich Parking Lot to separate bicycle and pedestrian traffic on Sorich Park Trail. This trail could connect to Cemetery Fire Road near the old quarry.

While this trail is the shortest distance to close the connection gap for bicycles, it is also a difficult project.

Issues with this alignment include:
• A seasonal drainage crossing that would require two bridges (at the confluence of two creeks).
• A dense stand of eucalyptus, poison oak, and broom.
• This alignment falls on both Town of San Anselmo and Marin County Parks property.

Vegetation
Alternative B is a mix of open grassland (lower section, approximately 50%) and a dense eucalyptus grove. The eucalyptus grove is scheduled for removal by the Marin Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 12 of 27
91 Wildfire Prevention Authority. Removal of the eucalyptus grove would make trail construction much easier.

Trail statistics
Length- 0.46 miles
Average Grade- 7.0%
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 13 of 27
92 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 14 of 27 93 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 15 of 27 94 ALTERNATIVE C- New Trail from Sorich Parking Lot to Ridgewood Fire Road.

This option follows the lower alignment of Alternative B but continues to Ridgewood Fire Road. Alternative C keeps the trail entirely on Town of San Anselmo property. It closes the connection gap and will provide an intermediate level climb to San Rafael ridge for all trail users (7.2% average grade).

This alignment avoids crossing drainages and seasonal waterways. The trail corridor is entirely native grass with light brush.

Alternative C is a visually stunning alignment with continuous views that would provide new recreational opportunities for Ross Valley residents.

Proposed use of this trail is for bicycle and foot traffic only. Equestrian use is currently permitted on Sorich Park Trail/Cemetery Fire Road. This would provide separation of bicycle and equestrian traffic.

This is the preferred alternative for the following reasons:
• Avoids drainages and seasonal waterways
• Eliminates the need for high cost trail features (e.g. bridges) • Keeps the trail entirely on Town of San Anselmo Property mitigating two separate permitting processes
• Trail is routed away from homes
• Requires no cutting of trees and minimal brushing
• Visually stunning alignment! Continuous views of Mt. Tamalpais and Ross Valley. • Interesting natural features
• Open sightlines will help mitigate user conflict.
• Upper end of trail uses an existing social trail (an abandoned bulldozer trail) • Existing trailhead infrastructure (parking, water fountain, trash, etc.) Vegetation
This alignment is dominated by native grasses. There a few oak and laurel trees and some light brush. This alignment does not require removal of any trees (though some limbing may be required).

Trail statistics
Length- 0.98 miles
Average Grade- 7.2%
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 16 of 27
95 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 17 of 27 96 ALTERNATIVE D- Realignment of Sorich Tomahawk Fire Road.

This alternative involves a realignment of Sorich/Tomahawk Trail to a recreational trail that meets modern grade and erosion control standards. This project would also decommission parts of the old road. The upper part of the trail would adopt and improve a popular social trail on MCOSD land to make the connection to Ridgewood Fire Road.

The Sorich Tomahawk fire foad is no longer needed for fire protection or ranching purposes.

Sorich Tomahawk “Trail” is a legacy fall line ranch/bulldozer road. It has an average grade of 17.7%. Most of the Sorich Tomahawk Road runs in a straight fall line alignment over 20% grade. Most erosion controls have failed. The road prism is cupped and directs water and erosion down the old road. This “trail” does not meet any standards for erosion control or recreational trail alignment.

Additionally, the road runs along the spine of a ridge flanked by two drainages. Slope angle on either side of the ridge runs in the 25-40+% range. There is very little working room to build a properly graded recreational trail.

This road is so steep that it is unrideable for the vast majority of bicyclists in the uphill direction. In the downhill direction, the trail is so steep that many cyclists will skid to try to maintain speed control. It is not family friendly.

The proposed trail starts on Town of San Anselmo property between 140 and 152 Sacramento Avenue.

Alternative D would require the construction of two bridges and one armored drainage crossing.

Starting the trail here reduces the grade and avoids the stairs at the end of San Francisco Blvd. Stairs are not appropriate for a bike legal trail.

This alignment has several challenges. Because of its proximity to houses on Sacramento, there is the possibility for neighborhood opposition.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 18 of 27
97 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 19 of 27 98 Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 20 of 27 99 Vegetation
Mix of native grasses, oaks, laurel and brush.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 21 of 27
100
Trail Statistics
Length- 0.84 miles
Average Grade- 9.2%
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 22 of 27
101
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 23 of 27
102
Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 24 of 27
103

COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
Comparison of Alternatives
Length Average
Grade
Cost Project
Complexity
Other factors
Alternative
A- preferred

0.3 Miles 9.8% Low LowMaintenance and
drainage
improvements
only
Easiest, lowest
cost. Potential
for hiker
opposition
Alternative B 0.46 Miles 7% High- Requires two
bridges and significant
tree removal
High- Requires
engineered
bridges and
logging
operations
Shortest length
of new trail
construction to
close
connection
gap.

Alternative CPreferred 0.98 Miles 7.2% Moderate- Easy building terrain. Trail can be built
mostly with volunteer
crews
Low- Easy
building terrain,
single land
manager, avoids
drainages and
waterways
Visually
stunning
alignment.

Open
sightlines.

Alternative D 0.84 Miles 9.2% High- Requires bridges
and armored crossings.

Difficult terrain with some
evidence of prior slope
instability
High- Difficult
terrain, bridges
are required,
limited space on
ridgeline makes it
difficult to meet
desired grade.

High potential
for
neighborhood
opposition.

Trail is located
between
homes.

Bridges are
required for
drainage
crossings.
potential for
complex EA
due to
waterway
crossings.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 25 of 27
104
Discussion of Alternative A- Change of use in Sorich Park Trail (Preferred Alternative)
In evaluating all potential alternatives, Alternative A is a clear winner.

This is the easiest and lowest cost way to close the connection gap for bicyclists in San Anselmo. The Sorich Park trail could get a maintenance pass to improve erosion control and drainage and bring the trail to modern multi-use trail standards.

Approximately 300-500 feet of the trail is on Town of San Anselmo property. Most of the trail is on Marin County Parks property.

The trail corridor is similar to other bike-legal multi-use trails in Marin.

There is a long history of prior use. At least three abandoned bulldozer trails cross the area, along with evidence of past ranching. There is an existing social trail from Sorich Park Trail to the ridge (fall line trail following the bulldozer trail).

The top and bottom of the trail are located in open areas that could accommodate trail users. Sight lines at both the top and bottom of the trail can be improved. The bottom end of the the trail (At the Sorich park parking lot) has existing facilities for trail users.

Parking, water, trash collection, and picnic tables are already at the trailhead.

The entire area is scheduled for defensible space and native plant restoration projects (Ridgewood shaded fuel break). The eucalyptus grove is scheduled for removal. This would greatly enhance visibility and sight lines through the area.

Grade of the trail is in the beginner-intermediate range. This trail would be family friendly and suitable for all ability levels. Additionally, the alignment of this trail (lots of turns), makes it a low speed trail. Clear sight lines and a low-speed alignment mitigate user conflict.

Social and traffic impacts
It is unlikely that this would generate excessive parking or overuse concerns. At less that one-half mile in length, the trail is not a destination trail. Trail users are likely to be current Ross Valley residents using the trail to access Loma Alta, Terra Linda or Sun Valley. Bicycle users will likely ride from their homes. It is unlikely that this trail would create a spike in trail usage. San Rafael Ridge is one of the most popular open spaces in Marin County.

Creation of a dedicated bike legal route will reduce unauthorized riding on adjacent trails.

Short Term impacts
Spoil (during the trail maintenance and improvement) will be scattered. Visual disturbance from maintenance and trail improvements should disappear within 1-2 years.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 26 of 27
105
Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority Prjects
The (invasive, non-native) eucalyptus grove between San Anselmo and San Rafael Ridge is scheduled for removal through Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority. This project is the “Ridgewood shaded fuel break”.

There will be large scale short term disturbance in the area for restoration of native species and removal of the eucalyptus grove. San Anselmo residents should be prepared for forestry operations in the area. This is an excellent opportunity to make trail improvements linked in timeline with the forest restoration operations.

More information on the project:
https://www.marinwildfire.org/project/ridgewood-shaded-fuel-break-planning-projectcentral-marin-zone-share Trail Construction ResourcesUS Forest Service Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook https://www.fs.fed.us/t-d/pubs/pdfpubs/pdf07232806/pdf07232806dpi72.pdf Sustainable Trail Development- A guide to designing and constructing native surface trails
http://crgov.com/DocumentCenter/View/1430/Sustainable-Trail-DevelopmentGuidelinesBLM Guidelines for a Quality Trail Experience https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/Guidelines-for-a-Quality-TrailExperience-2017.pdf

AUTHOR NOTES
I am a San Anselmo homeowner (25 years), and have lived in Ross Valley most of my life. I am a frequent user of Marin’s outdoor spaces as a hiker, trail runner, dog walker, and bicyclist. I have been active in trail work and outdoor stewardship for approximately 30 years. I am a volunteer trail crew leader in Tahoe, where I run large trail building and maintenance projects and work with local and federal land managers. I am currently managing a 5-mile trail building project on Tahoe’s West shore.

My focus in trail work has been in conversion from legacy resource extraction (logging, mining, and ranching) roads to trails built for recreation and sustainability.

Sorich Trail Proposal Draft- June 2023 Page 27 of 27
106
107
San Rafael – San Anselmo Fuel Reduction Zone
• Upcoming Project Activities: Summer/Fall 2024
- Defensible space work along eastern edge
- August
- 3.7 acres
- Primarily broom removal, shrub thinning, dead and down removal, limbing up of trees, some euc removal - San Rafael Fire
- Measure C funding
- Defensible space work at Cedars of Marin
- August
- Broom and hazard trees adjacent to buildings
- Marin County Fire Department
- Measure C funding
- Phase 2 eucalyptus thinning
- August-November (weather permitting)
- 17.9 acres
- San Rafael Fire and Marin County Parks
- Measure C and Measure A funding
- Pilot Project (Phase 1) follow-up stump treatment
- Initial treatment completed June 2024
- September/October will include follow-up treatment of sprouting stumps - Up to 10 acres, as needed
- San Rafael Fire
- Measure C funding
- Public field trip
- Date TBD
- Phase 2 project area
Phase 2
Euc Thinning
(SRF, MCOSD)
Phase 1
- Pilot Project -
Euc Thinning
(SRF)
Defensible
Space Work
next to homes
(SRF)
Defensible Space
Work near Cedars of
Marin (MCFD)
108
109
From: J Reynolds
To: Sean Condry; Eileen Burke; Steve Burdo; Alexis Fineman; Brian Colbert; Tarrell Kullaway Subject: Comments - Proposal for Sorich Park Shared Trail Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 10:26:51 AM
CAUTION: External Sender
Hello Sean, Mayor Burke, Councilmembers,
I am writing to strongly oppose the favored proposed plan, Alternative A, for the change of use of the Sorich Park Trail. While I understand the intent to improve connectivity for bicyclists in San Anselmo, this plan fails to adequately consider the long-term environmental, social, and ecological impacts that such a development would inevitably bring to the area.

Environmental Concerns: The Sorich Park Trail lies within a sensitive ecosystem that has already suffered from historical disturbances, such as bulldozer trails and fire prevention projects. Introducing further development, even under the guise of maintenance and erosion control, threatens to exacerbate the degradation of this environment. The plan mentions improvements to drainage and erosion control, but the construction and increased foot and bike traffic will only intensify erosion problems over time, disrupting native plant species and wildlife habitats.

The proposal's reliance on the removal of the eucalyptus grove as part of a broader wildfire prevention strategy is deeply troubling. While I acknowledge the importance of wildfire mitigation, the removal of mature, healthy trees outside the 100-foot defensible safe zone severely undermines the irreplaceable value these trees provide in a rapidly warming world. These trees are vital for carbon sequestration, providing shade, maintaining healthy soil, supporting wildlife habitat, and preserving established biodiversity. As our planet continues to heat up, we cannot afford to lose these essential natural assets. Proper maintenance is necessary, but wholesale removal is not the answer.

Social and Recreational Impacts: The assertion that this shared trail will not generate excessive parking or overuse concerns is speculative at best. With Marin County’s reputation as a prime destination for outdoor activities, it is naïve to assume that a new, family-friendly, bike-legal trail will not attract significant attention from residents and visitors alike. This will lead to increased traffic, noise, and congestion in what is currently a relatively peaceful and lightly disturbed area.

The plan dangerously overlooks the inevitable conflicts that will arise from forcing hikers, families, and bicyclists to share narrow trails. The notion that trails are "low speed" with "good sight lines" is misleading. In reality, mixing these different users on a confined path creates a recipe for disaster, especially in sections with poor visibility. The risk of accidents 110
and injuries will be significantly heightened, and there is no clear plan for how dangerous riding behavior or the use of motorized bikes will be effectively monitored or enforced.

Long-Term Consequences: The short-term impacts of trail construction and the associated forestry operations are acknowledged, but the longterm consequences are downplayed. Spoil scattering and visual disturbances may “disappear” in 1-2 years, but the ecological scars left by such development will persist much longer. The irreversible damage to the natural landscape, coupled with the increased human presence, will forever alter the character and value of Sorich Park as a tranquil natural space.

In conclusion, Alternative A is far from the "clear winner" it’s made out to be. This reckless, short-sighted proposal sacrifices conservation in favor of increased recreational access, prioritizing bike use over the preservation of Sorich Park’s natural integrity. By doing so, this plan threatens to erode the park’s character and disrupt its delicate ecological balance. I strongly urge you to reject this misguided approach and instead explore alternatives that protect Sorich Park's sensitive ecosystem. The true value of this space lies in its natural state, and any development must be approached with unwavering caution, respect, and a steadfast commitment to safeguarding this environment for future generations and the abundant wildlife.

Thank you for considering my comments. I trust that you will make the right decision to protect Sorich Park for future generations and healthy ecosystems.

Jinesse Reynolds
Sequoia Park
111
From: Lisa Dal Gallo
To: Sean Condry
Subject: Sorich Park / Terra Linda
Date: Sunday, August 4, 2024 1:20:32 PM
CAUTION: External Sender
I think if you want to put in an alternative trail that may work.

However the space as currently used is mostly for neighborhood kids, people with dogs, hikers, runners. Having bikes on narrow trails is dangerous. There are so many mountain bike trails in Marin. So I would not be in favor of using the same paths. Bikes are already welcome on the fire roads.

Sent with BlackBerry Work
(www.blackberry.com)
112
From: Ted Bakkila
To: Heidi Scoble
Subject: Sorich Trail
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 9:16:19 AM
CAUTION: External Sender
Dr Ms Scoble,
I head up the Friends Of Sorich Park group of enthusiastic volunteers who help maintain Sorich Park.

I am strongly opposed to mixing hikers and bikers on the Sorich Park Trail. It would be very dangerous to combine bikes with the large number of hikers of all ages along with dog walkers, little children and occasional horses.

Please vote no against approval of this combination.

A separate trail for bikes is the only reasonable solution.

Thank you,
Ted Bakkila
from my iPhone
113
From: Joanne Bender
To: Heidi Scoble
Subject: For Sorich Park Hiking Trail planning meeting
Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 7:03:13 PM
CAUTION: External Sender
Hello Ms. Scoble,
I apparently sent my letter to the wrong place when attempting to send it to the planning committee, per Mayor Burkes suggestion. Please include my letter in opposition to the removal of the Sorich hiking trail at the August 19th meeting.

Please see below for letter I originally sent to the town council, Thank you,
Joanne Bender
24 Alderney Rd
San Anselmo
(45)246-5155
Hello,
I am a long time walker of the Sorich Park trails and am writing in opposition to the widening of the foot trail from the San Francisco Blvd parking lot up to the bridge and top of the ridge.

There are alternative ways for cyclists to go up and over as well as to access the entire trail system without destroying and damaging the terrain on the narrow trail.

There is existing bicycle access to the area. I read that the bicycle coalitions’ concern is to be able to access Terra Linda / Kaiser. Both my son and neighbors have been able to get to Kaiser/ Terra Linda & Sleepy Hollow or access the bike paths by going up Indian Rock to Tomahawk up to the Sorich trail head or up Oakland to Tomahawk to Sorich Trail head.

It is also potentially dangerous for bikes to get past walkers and dogs on the trail.

Please do not damage or widen the short trail from Sorich parking lot to the bridge .

Sincerely
114
Eric Cutter
28 Durham Rd.

San Anselmo, CA
Sean Condry, P.E.

Public Works Director
Town of San Anselmo
Dear Mr. Condry, Mayor Burke, and Councilmembers,
I live near Sorch Park and am writing to express my strong support for the proposed plan to allow bikes on the Sorich Park Trail as part of the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project, particularly in favor of Trail Alignment Alternative A. As a resident of the neighborhood near Sorich Park and a regular user of the trail, I believe that this proposal will bring significant benefits to our community and should be supported.

Sorich Park is a cherished open space in our neighborhood, and I frequently enjoy hiking with my wife and dog in the park. I also regularly ride my bike over the ridge to Terra Linda to visit Kaiser and meet with friends. The proposed trail would make my ride much easier and shorter, significantly improving the convenience of my trips. By making this connection more accessible for cyclists, we can encourage more people to choose biking over driving, supporting sustainable transportation and reducing our community's carbon footprint.

The proposed alignment of the trail, which involves converting the existing hiker and horse trail to a shared-use path, is a practical and low-impact solution that respects the natural environment while also promoting active transportation. I understand that some concerns have been raised about the potential for increased traffic and the impact on the trail's natural surroundings. However, I believe that these concerns can be effectively managed with thoughtful planning and appropriate measures, such as the installation of chicanes to slow down bike traffic and improved sightlines following the removal of invasive eucalyptus trees as part of the Marin Wildfire Protection Authority's fuel reduction plan.

I have also seen people comment that there alternative bike routes over the ridge between San Anselmo and Terra Linda already exist. This is true and I use those routes regularly.

These can be seriously raised as alternatives to a much more convenient route through Sorich Park only by people who have not biked them. I am attaching below maps of two alternatives. The closest route up Miwok and Tomahawk Dr. A bit longer is Butterfield Rd and Fawn Drive. The Tomahawk route includes 3 separate sections with several hundred 115
yards over 18% grade, which is quite challenging even for fit riders. The Fawn Drive route also has very steep sections on both sides of the ridge is over 3 miles longer.

The conversion of the Sorich Park Trail to a multimodal path aligns with the town's goals of promoting sustainable transportation and reducing reliance on cars. This project not only enhances recreational opportunities but also provides a valuable transportation alternative that supports the health and well-being of our residents and the environment.

I urge the Planning Commission and the Town Council to approve the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project and support Trail Alignment Alternative A. This project represents a forwardthinking approach to community planning, one that prioritizes accessibility, sustainability, and the well-being of our residents.

Thank you for your consideration.

Eric Cutter
Maps and Elevation Profiles of Alternative Bike Routes
Miwok – Tomahawk
116
Butterfield – Fawn Drive
117
From: [email protected]
To: Heidi Scoble
Subject: Opposition to bicycles on the Sorich Park Trail.

Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 6:32:31 PM
Attachments: Reso 3662 Park use ordinance.pdf
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Ms. Scoble
I oppose the multi-use trail concept (addition of bicycles) for Sorich Open Space Park.

The reasons for my opposition are as follows:

1. The Town of San Anselmo’s notification of the multi-use trail concept was posted at Sorich Park roughly three weeks ago. This notification was provided after the Town received complaints. The various Town committee meetings where the multi-use concept was approved, no prior notification of the change was provided to the public.

2. The Open Space Committee voted to oppose the use of bicycles on the Sorich hiking trail. Notification of the change in bicycle access on the Sorich trail was posted by Cathy Sanders and me, not the Town of San Anselmo. Our notification of the change in use allowed the users who were opposed to the addition of bicycles on the hiking trail to voice their concerns.

3. There are three blind curves on the trail leading to the existing fire road. No modification of the existing trail will eliminate the danger of bicycle traveling down the slope at high speeds and encountering hikers at those blind corners.

4. The widening of the trail to accommodate the bicycle and pedestrian use will require deep cuts into the upper bank. No slope stabilization will rectify the disturbance. The downhill slope is excessively steep. That will also require engineered stabilization. The Town has not provided even a very preliminary civil engineering drawings to address these issues.

5. The Town planned a public outreach at the end of the committee approval process. The reasoning behind informing the public at the end of this process is ridiculous at best.

6. An ordinance was approved by the Town Council in 2003 which prohibits the use of bicycle on open space trails. See attached. Perhaps the Town should modify its own ordinance before allowing bicycles.

7. The construction process to make the current trail bicycle access would deny access for the hiking public for two months minimum. This is not acceptable.

Say NO now.

Sincerely
Roseann Dal Bello
Roseann Dal Bello ASLA
Registered Landscape Architect # 2216
Licensed Landscape Contractor # 557591
118
17 Brookside Drive
San Anselmo, CA 94960
415-297-4364 Mobile
119

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
RESOLUTION NO. 3662

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF

SAN ANSELMO ESTABLISHING PARKS RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR

ALL PARKS, OPEN SPACE PARKS, AND OPEN AREAS
WHEREAS, the Town Council has heard testimony from Town Staff, residents, and other community members regarding the establishment of new Parks Rules and Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the San Anselmo Parks and Recreation Commission and the San Anselmo Open Space Committee have reviewed and approved the new Parks Rules and Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council is committed to maintaining and fostering Parks that are safe and enjoyable for all users; and
WHEREAS, The Town Council finds that it is in the best interest of the community to adopt the Park Rules and Regulations as stated in attachments A and B.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of San Anselmo that to facilitate and enhance the protection of the public's health, safety and welfare, the Town shall immediately adopt the Park Rules and Regulations as stated in attachments A and B.

AYES: Breen, Chignell, Kilkus, Kroot and Thornton
NOES: (None)
ABSTAIN: (None)
ABSENT: (None)

APPROVED
~_.c~)~ Peter Kilkus, Mayor
ATTEST:

Debra ~.~ Stutsman, Town Clerk
Date: '0 1~0103
120
'.
)
(Attachment A)
Rules and Regulations for all Parks
• No person may be in the park between Y2 hour after sunset and Y2 hour before sunrise. • No commercial use
• No amplified sounds
• No motorized vehicles
• No ~andalism
• No riding of horses or other animals in the park.
• No littering or dumping of off site debris.
• No person may drink beer, wine, or alcoholic beverages or have in their possession any receptacle containing any alcoholic beverage.
• Where permitted, dogs and other domestic animals must be fastened to a chain or leash no more than six feet in length and must be under the direct and immediate control of a responsible person.
• A dog's owner/keeper must clean up their dog's waste. • Violation is a misdemeanor, SAMe 4-6.06: 11-1.02
Additional rules for Open Space Parks
• Dogs are to be controlled by owners/keepers at all times and are not allowed to enter signed environmentally sensitive or restricted areas or chase other dogs or wildlife.
• Professional dog walkers must obtain a permit from the Recreation Department before using Town Park property. No more than 3 dogs at a time are allowed off leash on Town Park property.
• No smoking of tobacco or other substances is allowed within the boundaries of this park at any time.
• No person shall operate any bicycle or similar vehicle on Town Park property except upon paved roads, fire protection roads, designated bicycle pathways or public roads not signed against such use. Furthermore, no person shall operate or possess any bicycle or similar vehicle elsewhere on Town Park property, including trails, unless signed specifically to permit such operation.

Additional rules for Urban Parks
• No group of twenty five or more persons may use the park without written permission from and payment of fee to the Recreation Department, 1000 Sir Francis Drake Blvd. 258-4640
• No golf or motorized airplanes
121
Dog use regulations for each separate Park
Memorial Park:
• Dogs must be fastened to and restrained by a chain or leash no more than six feet in length in all areas of the Park between 8:00 a.m. and one hour before sunset. Hours of Park use still apply.
• Dogs may not be on turf areas during organized sports or group activities. • Dogs are to be controlled by owners/keepers at all times so as to allow the safe use and enjoyment of others in the park.
• Do not tie dogs to fences, trees, or other objects
• Dogs may not enter the fenced children's playground area. • A dog owner, keeper, or guardian must clean up their dog's waste.

Robson-HarringtonPark:
• Dogs must be on leash at all times in the area being used by organized children's programs.
• Dogs are to be controlled by owners/keepers at all times so as to allow the safe use and enjoyment of others in the Park.
• Dogs may not interfere with informal recreation activities. • A dog's owner/keeper must clean up their dog's waste.

Creek Park:
• Dogs must be leashed at all times.
• A dog's owner/keeper must clean up their dog's waste.

Millennium Playground Rules and Regulations
• For your playground enjoyment please obey the following safety rules, failure to do so may cause injury to your self or to others. • No person may be in the Park or playground between Y:z hour after sunset and Y2 hour before sunrise.
• Dogs are not allowed in the fenced playground areas.
• Do not tie dogs to fences, trees, posts or other objects. • Dogs must be leashed between 8:00 a.m. and one hour before sunset in the park.
122
)
• This is a smoke free zone. Smoking or disposal of tobacco products is not allowed in the playground or within 25 feet of the fenced playground area.
• No bicycles, skateboards, rollerblades, or scooters are allowed within the playground or on the walkway.
• All children must be supervised at all times.
• The Tot Lot is intended for children ages 2-5
• The Main Play Area is intended for children ages 6-12 Slides
• Slide feet first only.
• No crawling or walking up the slides.

Swings
• Hold on with both hands.
• Standing on swings may cause injury.
• Stop swinging before you get off.
• Never swing or twist empty seat.
• Stand clear of moving swings to avoid contact and possible injury.

Caution
• The water at the Animal fountain wall is continuously recycled and is not suitable for drinking.
• Bare feet may cause injury
• Throwing sand, gravel, or any other objects within the play area may cause injury.
• Playing on this equipment when wet may cause injury.
• The sun can cause slides and other surfaces to become hot. Test surfaces before allowing children to play on equipment. • Do not assist children onto equipment they cannot reach on their own.

Courtesy
• No pushing, running, or shoving
• No climbing on benches, fences or over handrails.
• Play safely and be courteous to others.
• Please use the waste and recycling containers provided.

All other Park rules and regulations apply.
123
)
Lansdale Station Playground Rules and Regulations
Same as the Millennium Playground.

Fires
Elders Garden Area
• No smoking or disposal oftobacco products are allowed within 25 feet of the garden area.
• No climbing is allowed on the water fountain feature and park structures.

No person shall build, light or maintain a fire of any nature on Town Park property, except in permanent fixed barbecues, camp stoves, or fireplaces established by the Town.

The use of portable barbecues and camp stoves is prohibited except in designated areas.

Barbecues and stoves shall be operated at all times in a manner which does not endanger facilities. In addition, hot coals must be disposed of in a designated manner.

Fireworks
No person shall possess, bring onto, set off or otherwise cause to explode on Town Park property any firecrackers, skyrockets or other fireworks or explosives, unless authorized by a law enforcement officer.

Smoking
Smoking is permitted in designated areas only.

Firearms. Traps and Other Weapons
No person shall possess, use, carry, discharge, or cause to be discharged any gun, firearm or weapon while on Town Park property, including air or gas weapon, spring gun, spear, bow and arrow, crossbow, sling shot, animal trap, knife with blade over 5 inches long, explosive or any other form of weapon potentially dangerous to wildlife or human safety, unless authorized by law. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any firearm or weapon onto or across Town Park property from outside the boundary of such property, unless authorized by law.
124
New Rules and Regulations for Consideration from
Marin County Parks and Open Space Regulations
(Attachment B)
Parking and vehicle Removal
No person shall park, leave, abandon, possess or otherwise store any vehicle on Town park property, except in locations designated for such use. No person shall park any vehicle on Town Park property during periods when parking areas are closed nor in the following locations:
a) Within the traveled portion of any road;
b) On any service road or trail;
c) In front of any gate;
d) On any undisturbed or natural hillside;
e) In areas designated for disabled or handicapped persons without appropriate authorization;
f) In more than one parking space per vehicle;
g) Within posted "no parking" areas;
h) in any manner obstructing the free flow of traffic.

Except in designated overnight parking areas, no person shall park any vehicle for more than 24 consecutive hours. Any enforcement officer mentioned in California Vehicle Code section 22651 is authorized to remove any vehicle parked in violation of this section. .

California Vehicle Code. Except as otherwise provided in these regulations, the provisions of the California Vehicle Code shall be applicable to the operation of vehicles on Town Park property.

Dogs and Other Animals. Dogs and other domestic animals are allowed on Town Park property, except in areas designated otherwise. Where permitted, dogs and other domestic animals must be fastened to and restrained by a chain or leash not exceeding six feet in length and must be under the direct and immediate control of a responsible person. Where dogs are allowed off-leash, a dog's owner/keeper must be able to show verbal command by demonstrating a call back upon request by Staff.

No person shall do any of the following on Town Park property:
a) allow any dog or other domestic animal to enter signed environmentally sensitive or restricted areas;
b) allow any dog or other dorpestic animal to interfere with, bother or disturb others using Town Park property;
c) allow any dog or other domestic animal to hunt, pursue or harass other animals or wildlife;
d) bring or keep a noisy, vicious or dangerous dog or other animal e) tie or hitch any dog or domestic animal to a tree or plant; f) bring or keep a dog 4 months of age or more without proof that the dog has a valid rabies inoculation or a valid license;
125
g) leave a dog or other animal in an unattended vehicle without adequate ventilation, or in such manner as to subject the animal to extreme temperatures which adversely affect the animals health or welfare; h) fail to promptly remove from Town Park property any dog or other domestic animal after being ordered by department personnel to do so.

Dogs and other animals, other than dogs and animals which assist disabled or handicapped persons, are not permitted in Town buildings.

Horses and Saddle Animals. Horses and saddle animals are not permitted on Town Park property, except in areas designated otherwise. When permitted, horses and saddle animals must remain on trails, service roads and other areas not signed against such use. No person shall do any of the following on lands managed by the department:
a) ride, drive, lead or keep any horse or saddle animal at such speed or in such manner which may endanger the safety of others, other animals or the protection of environmental resources.
b) Allow any horse or saddle animal to stand unattended or insecurely tied;
c) Tie or hitch any horse or saddle animal to a tree or plant.

Animals at Large. No person shall do any of the following on Town property:
a) Permit any cattle, sheep, goat, horse, dog, cat or other animal to graze or run at large;
b) Abandon a dog, cat, fish, fowl or other animal on Town property.

Any domestic animal found at large on Town property may be turned over to the County pound keeper for disposition as outlined in the Marin County Code.
126
From: KATHLEEN FRANKS
To: Heidi Scoble
Subject: Bikes in Sorich Park
Date: Monday, August 19, 2024 1:08:55 PM
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Ms Scoble,
Please do not add or alter any existing trails to accommodate bikes in Sorich Park.

Keep this one little piece of nature to allow people of all ages to go to a place to escape our fast-paced world. As a community let's start to appreciate and protect what we already have instead of tearing it down to make something “better”, safer or easier to access. Please preserve Sorich Park .

Thank you,
Kathy Franks
36 Santa Barbara Ave
127
From: Gotshall-Maxon, Lee
To: Heidi Scoble; [email protected]; Steve Burdo; Brian Colbert Cc: Gotshall-Maxon, Lee; [email protected]
Subject: Planning Commission Agenda Item regarding the Sorich Ridge Trail; Meeting August 19, 2024 Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 3:37:37 PM
Attachments: Sorich Email to Open Space Committee 4858-2271-9671 v.1 (002).pdf CAUTION: External Sender
I attach for consideration by the Planning Commission, my correspondence to the Open Space Committee regarding the proposal to create a multi-modal trail on what is now a wonderful, quiet, hiking and horse trail to the Sorich Ridge.

My comments are all still applicable, including that the proposed endorsement of the idea should be deferred until the project in question has been analyzed under CEQA. That aside, as my attached analysis demonstrates, although I generally support bike access and multiuse trails, the concept here will likely ruin a lovely and unique trail that is used by many children and elderly hikers and it may create a bicycle freeway of sorts linking San Anselmo and San Rafael. That sort of a link may be a good idea, but it should certainly not be located here, in the open space. An environmental analysis will show the environmental impacts of this proposal and the serious resulting degradation of the affected open space. San Anselmo has worked long and hard for its open space treasures. They are irreplaceable and should not be squandered.

If you could please provide this email to the other members of the Planning Commission I would greatly appreciate that. I only received notice of this meeting on Friday, two days ago, after 10 p.m.

Lee Gotshall-Maxon
383 Quietwood Drive
San Rafael, CA 94903
415-601-4040
_____________________________________________________
Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic e-mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be 128
confidential and/or privileged. If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient, unauthorized use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail, and delete the original message and all copies from your system. Thank you. 129
4858-2271-9671.1
888888.00180/4-16-24/lfg/lgm
Jonathan Braun and other Members of the Open Space Committee:

I am a resident of San Rafael. I hike twice a week on the trails in the Marin open space and often hike the trails through the former Sorich Ranch, including the trial from the parking lot at the end of San Francisco Blvd. in San Anselmo to the top of the ridge; the trail which is the subject of the Sorich Park Trail Proposal which is on your agenda for Wednesday April 17, 2024. The Proposal is to convert a heavily-used, narrow hiking and horseback riding trail into a multi-use trail that allows bicycles as well as hikers and horseback riders.

The proponents, who are bicycle enthusiasts, have advanced several alternate bike trails, all of which have pretty serious costs, other than Alternative A which makes the existing trail from the parking lot at the end of San Francisco Blvd. to the road legal for bike use. The 27 -page proposal summarizes the proposed permitted use as being for “non-motorized” use, but it seems that once bike use is permitted it would be difficult to confine use to non-motorized bikes.

The documents point out that opening the existing Sorich Park Trail for bike use will permit travel from San Anselmo and Ross to the San Rafael Ridge. This would also create access to Ridgewood Drive in San Rafael and could become a major bicycle corridor from San Anselmo to San Rafael and vice versa. It is assumed that fixing this “connection gap” is a good thing.

Converting a peaceful hiking trail into a multi-use trail creates conflicts and if there is a lot of bicycle traffic, as there might be, then those dangers are multiplied. The Staff report says these can be addressed using control devices to slow down the bicycles, but if this becomes a major bike corridor, which the proponents seem to argue is needed, then speed is only one issue. Even slow-moving bikes create hazards for hikers and horses and hikers and horses use this trail -- a lot.

Another concern, brushed off by staff, is the concern expressed by the public that the proposed creation of a bike corridor to and from San Rafael would become a destination route and create traffic and parking issues. The staff’s answer to this is that the Marin County Parks and members of the public who mountain bike don’t see this as a problem and believe that the trail will serve more as a connector rather than a destination. This answer is insufficient; it is difficult to understand what it means, if it means anything. The concern remains and should be addressed.

A key issue, not addressed in these papers, is that the Sorich Ridge trail is unique : it provides a relatively flat trail, accessible from the San Rafael-side by car, which allows access by young kids and elderly and disabled people, to a trail that provides fantastic views and quiet without having to hike up steep inclines to get to the views. The trail is rolling, but quite walkable, by folks with illnesses that prevent them from scaling steep terrain, and it is walkable by parents with young future hikers. If closing the “connection gap” loads this trail with a significant number of bicycles then the trail becomes dangerous and noisy. It seems like Marin ought to have at least one reasonably flat trail on a ridge that can be used by the less-abled of our community to connect with their hiking buddies and nature without having to deal with the conflicts created by frequent, and possibly heavy, bicycle traffic. 130
4858-2271-9671.1
888888.00180/4-16-24/lfg/lgm -2-
As noted, the Proposal assumes that a “connection gap” is a bad thing. The history of Marin and San Francisco preservation efforts have demonstrated that such gaps are sometimes critical parts of the preservation efforts that have so enriched our area, enhanced our property values and given us the wonderful recreational opportunities we have. Where would West Marin be without a gap in its access to the Federal Highway System? What would Marin be like if BART had been installed in Marin? What would San Francisco or Marin be like if all of the planned freeways had been completed and linked to the Golden Gate Bridge? Before any alternative is selected, a CEQA analysis should be prepared to determine if the proposed bicycle thoroughfare from San Anselmo to San Rafael will result in significant impairment of a resource, an accessible ridgeline trail, which is unique and probably irreplaceable. The CEQA analysis and the resulting environmental analysis should be prepared before any further discretionary decision is made by the Open Space Committee or any other committee. Moreover, consideration should be given to the additional bicycle traffic that will result from this project and the effect of that traffic on the affected environment.

I should point out that I am not only an avid hiker, but I am also an avid bicycle enthusiast, although my bicycle of choice is a road bike, not a mountain bike. I generally support bike trails and multiuse paths, but the path in question is narrow1 and not suitable for conversion into a multiuse bicycle corridor linking major towns in Marin. Such a corridor is probably needed, but not here: not in the Open Space, not in a place where owls nest and songbirds can be heard without competition from the din of traffic noise. And certainly not in a location that will cause the loss of such a wonderful, reasonably accessible, peaceful, ridgeline trail that is heavily used for hiking by hikers of all ages including the very young, the old and the infirm, who have very few alternative accessible hikes with ridgeline views.

Respectfully,
Lee F. Gotshall-Maxon
383 Quietwood Drive
San Rafael, CA 94903
415-601-4040
1 The proponents say that the Sorich Park Trail which they seek to convert to allow hiking and biking, is 48 to 60+ inches wide. This morning I went up the trail from the parking lot at the trailhead which starts at the end of San Francisco Blvd. in San Anselmo. It was about 8:15 am and there were seven hikers starting their hikes in the 10 minutes I was there. I took the picture, below this email, about 100 yards from the trial head, and it is a fair depiction of the trail’s width which is nowhere near the width the proponents have included in their materials. My hat is in the picture, to provide scale, and it is 15 ½ inches long. The trail here, and for most of its length is not sufficiently wide to permit comfortable sharing by hikers and bikers; not even close. 131
4858
-2271-9671.1
888888.00180/4-16-24/lfg/lgm
-3-
132
4858-2271-9671.1
888888.00180/4-16-24/lfg/lgm -4-
Sorich Park Trail. Without major widening, which would destroy much of what makes this trail so special, there is no way that that this trail, which is now heavily used by hikers of all ages, can be safely shared by those hikers and by mountain bikers, many of whom will likely have motorized bikes.
133
From: Kathleen Lipinski
To: Heidi Scoble; Lindsey Klein; Jackson Dobronyi
Cc: Roseann Bello; [email protected]
Subject: Opposition to Sorich Park Bike Use
Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 4:36:01 PM
Attachments: Sorich Bike Opposition KL.rtf
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Planning Commission,
I’m writing to express my concern in regard to opening the Sorich Park trails to bikes.

I have lived on San Francisco Blvd. in San Anselmo since 1979 and hike in Sorich Park at least once a week, often daily. Over the years I have enjoyed the silence, peacefulness, nesting birds, wildflowers, and- over the past few years- the delightful pre-school children who use the trail to explore nature. The pre-school children often sit on the trail to share snacks and listen to a story being read. Seniors use this trail regularly. Young parents carry infants and walk alongside children of all ages. People walking dogs abound. The trail is also used by people on horseback.

I’m an avid hiker and walk Marin trails extensively throughout the watershed, open space and park lands. While hiking, I’ve encountered the full gamut of bike riders, from those who are respectful of people on foot to those who speed recklessly and break all rules. I’ve experienced aggressive bikers on single track trails on countless occasions, ripping up trails and and endangering hikers. I have seen little or no enforcement of trail usage rules.

I understand that creating another bike path from San Anselmo to Terra Linda would be good for reducing auto traffic, but I’m concerned that opening this particular trail to bike use will put hikers, children and dogs at risk. I’m also concerned that this trail will become a destination for recreation, increasing traffic on neighborhood streets and impacting parking in the trailhead lot and surrounding streets. The San Anselmo Open Space Committee is against opening this trail to bikes. Please respect what Open Space has worked do hard to establish and don’t dismiss their opposition.

A paved trail from Fawn Drive in Sleepy Hollow already provides access from San Anselmo to Terra Linda. The Cemetery Fire Road provides access as does the Indian Rock/Tomahawk fire road. I urge the Commission to preserve the one remaining trail where hikers of all ages can walk in peace and not have to be on guard for their safety.

At this time the proposed multi-use trail prohibits motorized bikes, but I suspect this could change rather quickly, lawfully or not I also doubt that “traffic calming” features would be effective.

I urge you to not relinquish a tranquil, hiker friendly, kid friendly, elder friendly trail and look for an alternate bike route. At any time of day and any day of the week this trail is heavily used by members of our community to experience nature, bird song, and quiet. Please don’t take away this refuge.

Respectfully,
Kathleen Lipinski
38 San Francisco Blvd.

San Anselmo, Ca 94960
(415) 453-3648
134
From: Melanie Nichols
To: Heidi Scoble; Lindsey Klein; Jackson Dobronyi; Roseann Bello Subject: Re: Opposition to Sorich Park Bike Use
Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 5:28:54 PM
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Planning Commission:

I am an avid hiker and my husband is an avid mountain biker. I am 68 he is 78. We’ve lived in San Anselmo since the early 70’s and raised 2 children here. We came for the proximity to open space.

He has many fun, easy and challenging trails/dirt roads that he bikes .

I prefer hiking and do so with weekly with friends at from Sorich where we hike up to the fire road.Along the way we see other hikers ,dogs, children and an occasional horse and illegal? bikers on the thin trail.

It would be disruptive for those of us , adults,children,and elders who go to nature to have some quiet, and peaceful interaction with nature, to only have access to a wider trail with many more bikers.

With Respect,
Melanie Nichols
135
From: Ann Politzer
To: Heidi Scoble; Planning
Cc: Sean Condry; eileen burke; Brian Colbert; Alexis Fineman; Steve Burdo; Tarrell Kullaway Subject: Opposition to Sorich Park Bike Use/Multiuse Trail Date: Sunday, August 18, 2024 6:39:34 PM
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Ms. Scoble and Members of the Planning Commission, I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the current plan to add bicycle use to the trails in Scorch Park.

Please, do not put bikes on the trails at Sorich Park! The existing trails are narrow, steep in places and have inadequate sight lines for anything with wheels. They are frequented by many older hikers, families with kids and folks walking dogs. There is no space to widen the existing trials. Putting slow moving hikers and faster moving bikes on the same narrow up-down trajectory is nuts and an accident waiting to happen. Instead of pressuring the Town to accept this arrangement, the County should realize that they are putting both hikers and bikers at risk.

The Commission’s primary concerns re: the use or modification of existing trials or the creation of new ones should be: the original Passive Use designation of Sorich Park, the ecological/environmental impact to terrain, the safety and best interest of the public and the legal liability to the Town of San Anselmo. The SA Open Space Committee has been an exemplary steward of the space. They voted down bikes on the Sorich trails. Their reasoning should be heard and valued.

There is another issue that you have to get straightened out before you make any recommendation on the Multiuse trail plan. The bikers and Bike Coalition affiliates say that they want a commuter route through the Park enabling bikers to get from the San Anselmo side of the divide up to the fire roads and over to Terra Linda. I also heard several Bike Coalition members say in public meetings that it is ”not fair” that they can’t bike on Sorich trails. So which is it? What is the Bike Coalition, via the County, actually asking for? The intention and the purpose of any changes to Sorich regarding bikes has to be clearly stated up front.

I very much appreciate Sandor Lengyel’s careful study of potential dedicated bike routes through Sorich Park.

Possibly, a bike path could run through the cemetery. Mr. Lengyel is a good example of a broad thinking and community-minded biker. There are MANY responsible bike riders in Martin County. There are an adequate number of irresponsible ones, too. I spend a lot of time dodging those guys on various SAN ANSELMO trails and ridge lines, including the supposedly bike-free Faude.

Please, don’t get me and my dog killed on a Town/County trail. Let us walk and contemplate the intentional meditative peace of Sorich Park without getting run over.

Thank you for your service and concern.

Sincerely,
Ann Politzer
San Anselmo
136
Eric Cutter
28 Durham Rd.

San Anselmo, CA
Mayor Eileen Burke and City Council
Town of San Anselmo
Dear Mayor Burke and Councilmembers,
I have attended the 2023 BPAC and Open Space Committee meetings, as well as the Planning Commission and Community meetings in August and September 2024. As a resident of the Sorich Park neighborhood, I am writing once again to express my strong support for the proposed plan to allow bikes on the Sorich Park Trail as part of the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project, with particular endorsement of Trail Alignment Alternative A.

As a frequent user of Sorich Park’s trails for both hiking and biking, I can attest to the immense benefit this proposal would bring to our community. This project represents a thoughtful and essential improvement to our open spaces, one that promotes greater access and utility for a wide range of users.

Sorich Park is an invaluable resource in our community, and I regularly hike with my family and ride my bike over the ridge to Terra Linda for personal errands and social visits. The proposed trail would make these trips far more accessible and efficient, significantly enhancing the ease of cycling between San Anselmo and Terra Linda. This improvement aligns with our broader goals of promoting sustainable transportation and reducing the town's carbon footprint. Enclosed with this letter is a comparison of the Sorich Multiuse Trail with three alternative bike routes from Imagination Park to Kaiser, highlighting the Sorich Park route as both shorter and less steep.

Addressing Community Concerns:

1. Environmental Impact:

While Sorich Park holds personal significance for many in our community, it is important to maintain a balanced perspective. Much of the park is covered by invasive eucalyptus trees, many of which are scheduled for removal to mitigate wildfire risk. Sorich Park does not hold the same environmental or recreation value as unique ecological preserves like Ring Mountain or scenic hikes such as Cascade Falls. In this context, widening an existing trail for multi-use purposes is a modest and practical accommodation that enhances connectivity between San Anselmo and Terra Linda without undue harm to the environment.

2. Separate Trails for Bikers and Hikers:

While some have proposed creating separate trails to reduce the impact of trail widening, such an approach comes with increased costs and greater environmental disruption. As San Anselmo grows and strives to provide affordable housing for a more diverse population, it is crucial that we prioritize shared resources that serve the broadest possible community. Multi-use trails are an efficient use of both space and budget, and they support a vision of inclusivity and shared public spaces, which will become increasingly important as our town expands. 137

3. Concerns Based on Fear vs. Evidence:

I understand that some community members fear that widening the trail and allowing bikes will lead to safety concerns or diminish the natural experience. While these concerns should be acknowledged and respected, I urge the Council to base its decisions on evidence rather than apprehension. The vast majority of interactions between hikers, bikers, horseback riders and dog walkers on Marin’s multi-use trails are positive. Examples such as Bill’s Trail, Ponti Ridge, and 680 Trail illustrate how shared-use paths can function smoothly, fostering an environment of mutual respect. The actions of a small number of inconsiderate users should not dictate the course of this project.

4. Recreation vs. Commuting:

It’s important to recognize that the biking community is diverse, and cyclists often bike for both recreation and commuting. However, the proposed trail’s primary utility will be as a commuter route between San Anselmo and Terra Linda. While local cyclists will undoubtedly appreciate the connection to nearby trails such as Ponti Ridge, 680 Trail, and Tamarancho, Sorich Park itself will not become a major destination for recreational mountain biking. The vast majority of users will be respectful, local cyclists seeking an efficient route, not aggressive riders looking for high-speed thrills.

In conclusion, I respectfully urge the Council to approve the proposed Sorich Park Multiuse Trail and to prioritize Trail Alignment Alternative A. This project is a forward-thinking solution that enhances community access, promotes sustainability, and accommodates our town’s growing population. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
138
4 Bike Routes
Imagination Park, San Anselmo to
Kaiser Hospital, Terra Linda
Sorich Park Tomahawk Fawn Drive San Rafael
Miles 5.0 5.6 5.7 6.2
Minutes 23 26 26 28
Elevation Gain (ft.) 700 780 450 400
Steepest Grade 7.5% 18% 16% 11%
139
Sorich Park – Eagle Rock
140
Tomahawk – Eagle Rock
141
142
Fawn Drive
143
San Rafael
144
Outlook
concern about bikes at Sorich
From Sandra Howard <[email protected]>
Date Wed 9/18/2024 8:57 PM
To Serge Avila <[email protected]>
CAUTION: External Sender
I am a 40 year hiker of the Sorich park trail currently prohibiting bikes. In the discussion to make Sorich a multi-modal trail, the following points are of great concern to me:

1. There has been no study of the users. How many hikers currently use the trail? I encounter lots of hikers of all ages when I'm there.

How many hikers will be unable to hike there while the trail is under construction and for how long? How many bikers will actually use it?

2. There has been no study of how many bikers are really going to Terra Linda. Will allowing bikes really get a lot of cars off the road? How many Kaiser patients will bike to their doctors' appointments or to pick up prescriptions? How many people going to the farmers market will be able to carry home their purchases on a bike?

3. There has been no engineering study of the grading, drainage and fill required to widen the path. The work necessary to widen the trail would be a colossal, expensive, disruptive and long-term undertaking. I can't believe the few bikers who would commute on the trail warrant such heartache and disruption to the people currently using the trail. Or will there be lots of recreational bikers (from out of the county?) using the trail making it dangerous for the hikers and horseback riders? Would the trail be for a handful of commuters or for a horde of recreational bikers? I've heard it described both ways.

Lots of positive things are being said about making Sorich a multi-modal trail. But none of the positives are based on studies and facts.

How can such a serious decision be made based on anecdotes? Sandra Howard
10 Woodside CT.

San Anselmo
145
Outlook
Petition for Recusal
From [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date Thu 9/19/2024 4:43 PM
To 'eileen burke' <[email protected]>; Brian Colbert <[email protected]>; Steve Burdo <[email protected]>; Alexis Fineman <[email protected]>; Serge Avila <[email protected]>
CAUTION: External Sender
Honorable Members of the Town Council
Allowing bicycles on the Sorich Hiking Trail is an incredibly divisive issue Town issue. In order to ensure the Town Council retains its reputation as balanced and neutral on the bicycle access issue for the Sorich Hiking Trail, I request that Vice Mayor Kullaway, as Executive Director of the Marin Country Bicycle Coalition and as one of the catalysts of the current plan to add bikes to the Sorich Hiking Trail, recuse herself from any current or future votes on this topic before Council.

Respectfully,
Roseann Dal Bello
Roseann Dal Bello ASLA
Registered Landscape Architect # 2216
Licensed Landscape Contractor # 557591
17 Brookside Drive
San Anselmo, CA 94960
415-297-4364 Mobile
146
Outlook
Sorich park trails. No, for bikes
From JAYNE MCDONAGH <[email protected]>
Date Fri 9/20/2024 12:37 PM
To Planning <[email protected]>; Town Council <[email protected]>; San anselmo Town council <[email protected]>
CAUTION: External Sender
To whom it may concern.

I was at the recent planning, commission meeting, where they discussed the possibility of making the Sorich Park Trail, a multi- modal trail. I am both a hiker and a biker, and I came to the meeting, mostly to listen to see what people had to say, and to get a feel for the general consensus. I did not have an agenda at the time, because I could see this issue from both sides. However, after listening to all the comments, and now thinking it over for some time, I would advocate for NOT making a bike trail out of this hiking trail. I can definitely understand why bicyclist would love to use this trail to access the ridge and also to get over to TerraLinda. I agree, and do not love going through downtown San Rafael on my bike, with traffic, to get to that area. However, they said it was too difficult to go up and over Fawn Drive to Manuel Freitas Parkway. I agree that it is a steep and challenging hill, but I am a 69-year-old woman, who is fit, for my age, but definitely not a bike racer or triathlete or anything of the kind, and I go over that hill whenever I go to Terra Linda. So, I am pretty sure that all of those hard-core bikers and kids on the mountain biking team can do the same. Would it be easier to have a more graded bike trail? Yes, of course it would and, and if it is built, I would probably use it too. However, also being a hiker, I know that I do not like hiking where bikes come careening down hills and around corners. I avoid hiking on fire roads for that reason and stick mostly to hiking trails. Bikers and hikers say that etiquette is important, and for the most part, I believe that people try to be polite. But anyone who hikes knows that there are some who assume that it is up to the hiker to jump out of the way, whether it be into the poison oak on the side of the road or clinging to the edge, even when there is a drop off. I know there are many seniors who walk on that Sorich Park trail, enjoying the peace and quiet that it offers. At a hikers pace you can enjoy the flora, the fauna, listening to birds… I know that bikers enjoy the nature as well, but the enjoyment is very different. I believe that what most bikers enjoy about being out in nature is managing roots, ruts and rocks, climbing up the hills and flying down the other side. They go too fast to even notice the flowers and birds. Both are valid methods of enjoying being outdoors, but they are very different. I fear that the consequence of allowing bicycles on this trail, would discourage many of the local senior citizens who use this trail regularly for walking, and they would discontinue going there.

If there must be a compromise, and allowing hikers bikers and equestrians on this trail, I suggest making it one way uphill for bicycles. That cuts the speed of the bicycles way down to a manageable speed so that people can get out of the way safely. The bikers can easily ride their bike down any of the several roads that come down from the ridge.

I would also like to discourage the use of ebikes, especially the ones you don't even have to pedal.

They go way too fast. I would also hope that youth who ride electric bikes would be required to have some kind of training or licensing, whether on the mountain or on our roads. Most young people have a mobile phone with them, where they could have a digital image of the license. I imagine we have all 147
witnessed the kids in packs riding unsafely on our local streets. Instilling the awareness of safety is imperative! And there should be a price for them to pay when they are endangering their lives and that of others.

Jayne McDonagh
San Anselmo resident, Brookside Dr.
148
San Anselmo Town Council
[email protected]
Re: Sorich Park Multiuse Trail Project
September 24, 2024 Town Council Meeting
Dear Town Council:

I am writing on behalf of the Sierra Club Marin Group Executive Committee to provide public comment setting forth our position on the Sorich Park trail item.

We believe that our local governments must prioritize the creation of safe, efficient bicycle connections between and within our communities in order to decrease GHG emissions, promote car-free culture, and support infill housing and commercial activities along the east Marin communities/101 corridor.

Currently, there is neither a safe nor efficient bicycle connection between the major communities of Fairfax/San Anselmo and Terra Linda/Civic Center. The Town Climate Action Committee unanimously supported a Sorich connector.

If the Sorich connector alignment Alternative A does not meet with your approval, we respectfully request that the Town Council enact a definitive and funded plan to create a long-overdue connector, that will open no later than the end of 2025, in coordination with other jurisdictions and agencies if and as necessary.

Sincerely,
Shea Putnam
Chair, Marin Group Executive Committee
San Francisco Bay Chapter, Sierra Club
cc: Sean Condry, Public Works Director ([email protected]) 149
Outlook
Proposed change to Sorich Park
From nancy bennett <[email protected]>
Date Fri 9/20/2024 7:57 AM
To Brian Colbert <[email protected]>; Alexis Fineman <[email protected]>; Serge Avila <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Steve Burdo <[email protected]>
CAUTION: External Sender
Honorable members of San Anselmo Town Council,
Who will benefit from Sean Condry's plan for "multiple use" in Sorich Park?

1. the Bicycle Coalition
Who will suffer from Sean Condry's plan for "multiple use" in Sorich Park?

1. dogs

2. little children

3. hikers

4. runners

5. invalids

6. horses

7. elders

8. nature lovers
Please consider that not only has Sean Condry set neighbor against neighbor, but his spending over a year on his proposal for his and the MCBC's interest that we as taxpayers are paying!!! questions the legality of this.

Thank you for considering and reconsidering, I remain
Very sincerely,
Nancy Lyle Bennett
405 San Francisco Blvd
San Anselmo
--
Nancy Lyle Bennett
Feng Shui/Energy Worker
Pianist, We Three Trio
(415) 456-7989
150
Outlook
* Re:Sorich Park Trail ...*
From [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date Thu 9/19/2024 4:45 PM
To [email protected] <[email protected]> Cc Steve Burdo <[email protected]>; Brian Colbert <[email protected]>; Alexis Fineman <[email protected]>; Serge Avila <[email protected]> CAUTION: External Sender

1. The Bicycle Pedestrian Committee began the discussion of opening the Sorich Park Trail on Wednesday, June 14, 2023. The users at Sorich were notified in July, 2024. For almost a year, the Town of San Anselmo made no public notification to the Sorich Park hikers and horseback riders.

2. Opening the trail to bicycles did not originate from the Town Council. It originated from the Bicycle Pedestrian committee. Not top down, rather bottom up

3. The staff report did not examine if bicycles on the trail were wanted, only which trail Sean Condry wanted us to grin and bear.

4. There was no study of the users. The amount of people that currently use Sorich as a hiking trail.

5. There was no study of how many bikers are really going to Terra Linda.

6. There was no engineering study of the grading, drainage and fill required to widen the path.

7. There were no commitments in writing from the Marin County Open Space about what had been discussed and agreed to prior to the push to add bicycles to the Sorich Trail As a resident of since San Anselmo, who lived at the end of San Francisco Blvd for 25+ years, now living on Plumas Ave, SA., I strongly agree with all of these points in regards to digging into this small safe quiet trail to make room for bike traffic. I agree with all those who have spoken to save this Sorich Park Trail, as I have been at the past meetings.

This is not a win/win situation. It is a win/Lose situation for the many who have lived near this park for 30,40, + years. We were younger and more agile back then when we hiked and walked our dogs there. The same people are still hiking, walking their dogs, and enjoying the peace and calm of Sorich Trail. The 1st area when we enter the park, is used and enjoyed by groups of children, and The proposal will ruin this part of this unique trail, and the addition of wheeled vehicles ( mountain bikes and most probably invite the e-bike crowd-), will displace those to who this Sorich Trail area is precious and irreplaceable.

As a horse owner, I also believe that Horses will no longer be able to wander up into the upper park. Horses and bikes do not mix well. I have had 5 experiences over the past years, on different trails with bikes- which were horrendous. (I will not go into the rude and vicious comments made from those who rode up fast, and around blind curves- and, from illegal trails.

Are we waiting for a disaster to happen ??
Please hear us, and respect us.

Respectfully.

Elizabeth Briggson. ( Lived at 404 then 402A San Francisco Blvd since 1992-- now in San Anselmo on Plumas Ave.) I still hike Sorich Trail a few times a week, also I walk a dog up there. 151
I am requesting that Tarrell Kullaway recuse herself. We know her to be the Executive Director for Marin County Bicycle COALTION. The MCBC is a large coalition. (( Which means "votes"- correct? )) Please hear us. Thank you
152
From: Chris Craver
To: Sean Condry; Erica Freeman; Michae Legault; Bill Johnson; Town Council Subject: Construction on Laurel & Hillside Ave.

Date: Saturday, September 21, 2024 10:01:26
Attachments: IMG_0085.jpeg
IMG_0083.jpeg
IMG_0084.jpeg
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear San Anselmo Town Council and Building Department:

We’re the Craver family. We reside at 118 Laurel Ave.

We’re writing to you because of the amount of construction noise we are surrounded by. From work on Hillside behind us, where at least three excavators are running 7 days a week, and next door to us, where a house is being remodeled from the foundation up.

We’re proponents of the need for housing in our community and we’re pragmatists in that construction is necessary.

However, we feel we’ve been imposed on by the amount of noise from 8a in the morning until sometimes well after 5 and 6pm at night. We have seen that permits allow up to 8pm!! I can easily measure 80+ decibels outside during the day. This is noise pollution, and it’s oppressive. Our house vibrates from the heavy machinery use. Last night (9/20), the project at 61 Hillside was using heavy excavation equipment until 6p. You are more than welcome to come to the neighborhood and witness this for yourself.

It seems unreasonable that building permits would allow this type of disturbance from heavy construction for 7 days a week with 12 hour duration. It is counter intuitive that the town would have rules on use and hours of operation on such things as gas-powered leaf blowers yet allow heavy equipment, impact drilling, sawing and other loud disturbances for 12+ hours a day, 7 days a week.

Our expectation in the neighborhood is that construction is allowed from 8a to 4:30p, Monday thru Friday, per the attached photo of a sign on Hillside Ave, limitations specific to the Bald Hill area. We’re also attaching conflicting signs posted at the project site, with one showing extended hours. The Bald Hill area is specifically called out on your website as having restricted hours.

Our neighbors are just as frustrated as we are. We feel trapped inside our homes (where the noise is still incessant).

We can’t enjoy our outdoors. On a recent Saturday afternoon we were invited to the backyard gardens of a neighbor’s home on Hazel Ave where they hosted a violinist and guitarist from Spain to perform. It was impossible to hear the performance over the incessant noise of excavation (beeping, shouting, digging, motors). We felt horribly bad for the performers and the impression this experience left them with of our Town.

In addition we’ve witnessed close calls on our “safe route to school” with children on bikes dodging cement trucks on sidewalks, exacerbated by street parking completely filled by construction workers and no flaggers or traffic directors. As parents to two children who walk and ride their bikes to school, this is a scary situation. Amanda wrote an email directly to the Public Works Director about this issue last month and received no response.

We recognize that construction is unavoidable, however we ask for you and the board to consider limits on the hours of disturbance that is caused to the neighborhood by construction. We and our neighbors should be allowed a peacefully quiet neighborhood for a portion of the day, during daylight. In the 13 years we have resided here, we’ve seen the many wonderful improvements the board has supported in improving our downtown. I would ask that you extend that same level of care and consideration for quality of life for the residents you represent to areas beyond.

We ask you, the Town Council and Building Department:
-Please establish limits on the type and amount of noise disturbances before 8a and after 4p during weekdays and 153
disallow construction disturbances altogether on weekends, allowing us to enjoy our outdoors peacefully. -Please enforce parking plans and traffic safety during construction, especially important on streets such as ours, designated “Safe Routes to School.”
Please let us know what next steps we can take, along with our neighbors, to address this critical quality of life and safety issue with you all.

Regards,
Chris Craver
(415) 580-0716
[email protected]
Amanda Craver
(415) 342-4402
[email protected]
154
From: Bob Mittelstaedt
To: Town Council
Subject: Sept. 24 meeting, Agenda Item 2.1 (Sorich Park) Date: Saturday, September 21, 2024 21:29:20
Attachments: Screenshot 2024-09-21 at 8.39.50 PM.png
CAUTION: External Sender
Without repeating all the points made by others in support of Alternative A, I offer three additional observations in support of the proposal.

1. The staff report says the San Anselmo portion is “approximately 300-500 feet.” It seems odd that a more precise measurement is unavailable. The aerial view suggests that the San Anselmo portion (the red line to the left of the white line) is closer to the lower end of the estimate, because the entire length of the trail including the MCOS portion is only 1,760 feet.

Screenshot 2024-09-21 at 8.39.50 PM.png
In any event, the tail here should not wag the dog, or obstruct the project. With the County having adopted a multiuse approach for most of this trail, San Anselmo should do the same — especially when the County is footing the bill.

2. Consistent with the MCOS approach, the Marin Municipal Water District has approved converting six miles of hiking/equestrian trails to multi-use trails open to bicycles. The GGNRA has allowed bicycles on most single track trails for years. Its superintendent is required to review each trail on an annual basis. Each year, the superintendent has approved continuation of the multi-user approach, signifying the absence of any material problem. This is consistent with the success of numerous other multi-use trails in the County, ranging from Octopus Trail to Ponti Ridge and 680.

It's not unusual for some users to resist change and inclusion of others. But history shows that once a decision is made, users tend to find a way to get along and accommodate each other. The same is sure to happen here.

3. As explained by others, this trail is an important connector that will take cars off the streets, not add them.

It will permit a bicyclist to go from San Anselmo residents to cycle to Terra Linda (and vice versa) in less time than it takes to drive a car through San Rafael.

Sorich Park, however, will not become a "destination" to which cyclists from afar will drive a car. For all its beauty, etc., it just isn't that kind of place. The connection will reduce, not increase, the number of car trips. 155
From: kathy o"sullivan
To: Town Council
Subject: Fwd: Agenda for Town Council on Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 6:40 PM PDT has been posted Date: Friday, September 20, 2024 18:24:21
CAUTION: External Sender
Public Comment for 9/24/2024 meeting, Item 2.1 (Sorich Trail/Bike Access) - Opposed Hi. I'm a long-time San Anselmo resident, Sorich walker, and biker. I'm opposed to the proposed expansion of bike access to/on Sorich. I suspect walkers may be outnumbered by bicyclists at your meetings, perhaps because we lack a vocal advocacy group, but our concerns are no less valuable.

1. No on Alternative A (changing use of Sorich Park Trail): If this narrow, steep, rutted/bumpy trail, frequently impinged on from both sides by poison oak and weeds, is opened up to bikes, let's just be honest and admit it will really mean no one can safely or comfortably walk there.

When bicyclists careen down hills (as they do and will), it is the walkers forced to the sides and possibly off into the ravine altogether. (And factoring in all the dogs - of which there are a lot on this trail, and occasionally horses, adds even more complications). Knowing this, walkers will quickly be dissuaded from trying; others may tempt fate and be sorry. There are other trails in Marin sure, that allow bikes. We avoid them whenever possible, and dislike them when we've got no other option to get where we want to be. Let's not follow poor examples. Even less narrow/steep trails are uncomfortable and unsafe feeling (and often unsafe period) for walkers - Sorich Trail will be unusable.

Please keep this trail usable and safe for walkers - keep prohibiting bikes on it.

2. Not Necessary or Best Use of Resources. Granted I'm not a mountain biker, so I don't understand the need for access over Sorich given all the other trails - and roads - w/bike access in Marin. And for accessing the ridge's fire road, I don't understand why those interested in biking on it can't make use of existing paved roads to get there - like Ridgewood Drive (that connects up top by the water tower). That they can't then bike down a steep hill into San Anselmo doesn't seem to me to create a need for which the Town should invest its resources (and perhaps incur liabilities) - and all these options will require a lot (in addition to all the staff time already spent). If there are resources to spare, as someone who enjoys (for now) walking on Sorich I'd prefer to see some used to trim back the poison oak from the sides of the trail more often (it gets really wild), and repair the existing (deeply rutted) parking lot.

Finally, speaking of parking, I expect increasing bike access will bring in plenty of undesired traffic and pressure on the small existing parking lot and the narrow gravel street leading to it.

Bikes arrive at a lot of trailheads, maybe most, via car. When that parking lot gets filled, as it will, trying to turn around will be an unpleasant adventure for all concerned.

Thanks for taking this feedback into account.

Kathy O'Sullivan
Redwood Road, SA
156
This email was sent to [email protected] using govDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: Town of San Anselmo · 525 San Anselmo Avenue · San Anselmo, CA 94960 ---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Town of San Anselmo <[email protected]> Date: Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 2:11 PM
Subject: Agenda for Town Council on Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 6:40 PM PDT has been posted
To: <[email protected]>

LATEST MEETING AGENDA AVAILABLE
Town Council
Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 6:40 PM PDT

VIEW AGENDA
SUBSCRIBER SERVICES:

Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe All | Help
157
From: Nick Pappas
To: Town Council; Serge Avila; Lindsey Klein
Subject: Item 2.1 - Sorich Park Trail
Date: Monday, September 23, 2024 10:37:33
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Councilmembers,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment on Item 2.1, the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail proposal.

The Sorich Park Multiuse Trail would close a critical gap in the town's active transportation network. This proposal is critical to facilitate safe, carbon-free, active transportation between San Anselmo and Terra Linda - a neighborhood where many of us work, visit family, and have medical appointments, among other travel needs.

The trail is wide, has a gentle grade, and has numerous features (especially tight, unbanked turns) which make fast descents improbable and undesirable for bike commuters. If this is a concern, there are a range of options to further mitigate, such as the log gates currently installed on Bill's Trail in S.P. Taylor State Park. Despite being a scant 0.4 miles, it has spent years in procedural review and discussion. In the meantime, San Rafael has rebuilt the northern connection (Memorial Trail) to accommodate bike travel.

I appreciate that some in the hiking community feel apprehension about this potential change, and support efforts to address any safety gaps on the 0.4 miles of trails proposed to be opened to bike commuters. However, it is also critical to recognize that we cannot let our shared vision of a sustainable, less car-dependent future - a vision shared strongly by hikers, bikers, and the broader San Anselmo community - be abandoned because change is intimidating.

Climate change and sustainability are core values of the town, reflected in its Climate Action Plan, General Plan vision statement and principles (as proposed), and its adopted Climate Emergency Ordinance. While these proclamations are important, their success relies on decisions like this - day-to-day policy choices where we move forward with our vision for a sustainable future for San Anselmo which gives residents alternatives to a car-dependent lifestyle.

If we cannot be bold enough to open 0.4 miles of trails to enable a key active transportation corridor, how can we expect to achieve our much bolder 2030 and 2045 climate goals? Thank you for taking a bold stance in support of active transportation and for helping my next trip to Terra Linda be car-free.

Thank You,
Nick Pappas
San Anselmo
158
From: Ross Blanchard
To: Steve Burdo
Cc: Serge Avila
Subject: Sorich Park Trail Project
Date: Saturday, September 21, 2024 15:39:03
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Councilmember Burdo:

As a long time San Anselmo resident, and as an avid hiker and biker, I am writing to express my strong support for the proposal to convert the Sorich Park Trail to multi-modal use, specifically option B from the staff report for the September 24th meeting. This initiative represents a significant opportunity to enhance our community’s accessibility, promote healthy activities, and support environmentally friendly modes of transportation. It will improve the quality of life for San Anselmo residents without increasing traffic from surrounding areas.

Converting the existing pedestrian trail through Sorich Park to a multi-modal trail is a viable and practical option that would significantly enhance connectivity between San Anselmo, Marin County Open Space, and San Rafael. Utilizing the existing infrastructure will also be cost-effective and minimize environmental disruption during construction. The current pedestrian trail can accommodate bidirectional travel by both pedestrians and bicyclists with minimal changes, ensuring minimal environmental impact.

A multi-modal trail that accommodates both pedestrians and bicyclists will offer numerous benefits to our community, including:

1. Increased Accessibility: By providing a safe and convenient route for walking and cycling, the trail will connect San Anselmo with neighboring areas, making it easier for residents to access both recreational opportunities in Marin County Open Space properties and popular destinations in San Rafael including the Civic Center, Kaiser, Northgate and China Camp. This change would create the most direct connection to the larger network of trails in the area.

2. Environmental Benefits: A trail that supports non-motorized travel reduces reliance on cars, which in turn lowers traffic congestion and emissions. This aligns with San Anselmo’s commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship. By providing an alternative to car travel, the multi-modal trail will contribute to cleaner air and a healthier environment.
159

3. Safety Enhancements & Alignment with Marin County Parks: The current trail is weathered and in need of maintenance. An improved trail will provide a safer environment for all users. Further, MCOS has committed to maintaining the trail at no additional cost to the Town of San Anselmo.

In communities around the state and around the country, hikers, bikers and equestrians share trails without significant incidents. Providing equitable access to this and other trails will greatly add to recreational options for the people of San Anselmo.

In conclusion, the conversion of the Sorich Park Trail is an exciting and transformative project that will benefit our community in many ways. I urge the Town Council to prioritize this initiative and support its implementation.

Sincerely,
Ross Blanchard
160
From: Bridget Clark
To: Town Council
Cc: Serge Avila
Subject: Sorich Park Project
Date: Sunday, September 22, 2024 23:11:40
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Town Council,
Converting the existing pedestrian trail through Sorich Park to a multi-modal trail is a viable and practical option that would significantly improve connectivity between San Anselmo, Marin County Open Space, and San Rafael. Utilizing the existing infrastructure would be cost-effective and minimize environmental disruption. The current trail can accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists with minimal changes yet improve a weathered trail to widen it in some places to help make space for dog walkers too.

It will offer numerous benefits to our community and help connect San Anselmo to Terra Linda to help with less car travel and contribute to cleaner air. There are numerous senior living communities in Terra Linda and I would welcome bicycle travel when visiting people in these facilities that are quite close to the trail head.

As for recommendations based on the staff report for the 9/24 meeting, please continue to move ahead with a multi modal trail concept based on the offer from Marin County Open Space and IF the extra hiker trail (Option E) is viable, then after it is built, separate one trail for hikers and another for bikers on the lower end of Sorich Park. Based on what I’ve noticed with trail building in Marin, it may take permits, EIR reports and years of building for this to take place (based on the Azalea Hill project that still is not open).

I’ve seen lots of examples of how to slow down bikes with ‘speed calming’ devices that work on trails throughout Marin that could be built into the multi-modal trail for safety as has been done on Bill’s trail in the Samuel P. Taylor area.

Thank you for considering this connector trail conversion that could be a significant improvement to our community for travel in both directions of Marin.

With gratitude,
Bridget Clark, San Anselmo resident and volunteer
161
From: Casey Cowgill
To: Town Council
Subject: Support for Sorich Park Multiuse Trail
Date: Saturday, September 21, 2024 17:44:58
CAUTION: External Sender
Hello Town Council,
I'm unable to attend the meeting on Tuesday, but I am supportive of a path which creates legal and sage access to Cemetery Fire Road, which enables reasonable access to Sorich and connections to Terra Linda, Loma Alta, and beyond.

As an avid, regular user of Sorich Park on foot (running and hiking) and bike, Alternatives A and B make the most sense to make access broadly useful for all groups - especially for riding and hiking with my kids.

My community greatly appreciates the consideration being brought to bikes, which has historically had very little representation in Marin.

Thank you!
Casey Cowgill
San Anselmo Ave
162
1 Serge Avila
From: Elizabeth Adler <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 9:28 PM
To: Town Council
Subject: Comment for September 24 Meeting
CAUTION: External Sender
Dear Councilmembers,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment on Item 2.1, the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail proposal.

I commute daily from Fairfax to Kaiser San Rafael in Terra Linda, as do many of my colleagues.

The existing route via Fawn drive is very steep - steep enough that I find the commute untenable without an e-bike - and has several blind corners on the road that make it dangerous for those of us commuting along that route. The Sorich Park Multiuse Trail would provide a less strenuous route that would make it safer for all commuters to travel between San Anselmo and Terra Linda. It would also make it feasible for many more potential commuters and others who do not own and/or cannot afford an e-bike.

I understand the worries of hikers along the trail, and would support measures to prevent excessive bike speeds and otherwise make it safe for those using the trail on foot.

Making it easier and safer for more people to commute by bike is one of the most important things our community can do to combat traffic, local air pollution, and climate change.

Commuting by bike can be safe, provide exercise, and benefit mental health, but our current transportation system makes it infeasible for most. This trail would make biking to work feasible for more people, and that would make their lives better and reduce environmental damage at the same time.

Thank you for supporting clean, healthy transportation.

Elizabeth Adler, MD
(650) 302-2949
163
Xantha Bruso
118 Bolinas Avenue
San Anselmo, CA 94960
(415) 730-6271
[email protected]
Mayor Eileen Burke and City Council, Town of San Anselmo September 24, 2024
Dear Mayor Burke and Councilmembers,
I appreciate the opportunity to provide public comment on Item 2.1, the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail proposal. I am a resident of San Anselmo, a frequent bike rider, and mom to two boys who bike to school every day and who use their bikes to get to sports and other activities. I support the proposed plan to allow bikes on the Sorich Park Trail as part of the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project, particularly Trail Alignment Alternative A.

The Sorich Park Multiuse Trail would close a critical gap in the town's active transportation network. A bikeable, multi-use trail would facilitate safe, carbon-free, active transportation between San Anselmo and Terra Linda, where my family travels for sports games, medical appointments, shopping, and social visits. The route would be safer, easier, and more direct for my family and other Marin residents than other existing routes for getting between the two communities.

San Anselmo has numerous policies, commitments, and plans to address climate change, such as its Climate Action Plan and Climate Emergency Ordinance. Facilitating car-free travel is one of the most effective ways to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. While the Sorich Park Trail is short, it is a key connector to making bike travel between the two towns more viable. As such, it is a critical part of making San Anselmo a more climate-friendly place to live, consistent with its goals.

A multiuse trail would also serve more community members and promote a culture of inclusivity in San Anselmo. Multiuse trails are used throughout Marin and are some of our best assets for reducing vehicle-miles traveled, making biking safer. Similar to these other multiuse trails, safety for all trail users can be addressed through trail design, signage, and education such as that provided by the Safe Routes to School and Slow and Say Hello programs.

I urge you to support the Sorich Park Multiuse Trail project as part of facilitating bikeable, car-free routes of travel in our community.

Sincerely,
Xantha Bruso
164
1 Serge Avila
From: Bill Engelhardt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2024 10:07 PM
To: Town Council
Subject: Please vote in favor of Sorich Park Trail Alternative A CAUTION: External Sender
Dear San Anselmo Town Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the conversion of the Sorich Park Trail to allow bicycle use between the Sorich Park parking lot and Cemetery Fire Road ("Alternative A"). This is the easiest and lowest cost solution to create a safe path for bicycles between San Anselmo and Terra Linda/San Rafael. The current trail is wide enough accommodate bidirectional travel by both pedestrians and bicyclists with minimal changes, ensuring a smooth transition.

Marin County Parks Department, Marin County Open Space District, and Marin County Bicycle Coalition all indicated that "Alternative A" is their preferred option and the San Anselmo Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Planning Commission all voted in favor of that alternative.

I understand that there has been some resistance to this proposal by hikers and equestrians worried that they will be "displaced" but, sharing 300-500 feet of the many miles of trail in San Anslemo doesn't seem like to much to ask in order to allow a safe connection to Terra Linda/San Rafael for cyclists.

Please vote in favor of Alternative A.

Thank you.

Bill Engelhardt
Laurel Avenue, San Anselmo
165
1 Serge Avila
From: Kim B <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 3:33 PM
To: Town Council
Subject: Agenda #2.1 Scorch Park Trail
CAUTION: External Sender
Hello
I am unable to attend this evenings meeting, but I oppose the multi-use consideration to include bicycles on Sorich Park Trail.

The switchback level of the trail is not safe for hikers if bicyclists are allowed.

The quality of enjoyment to have to be careful of bicyclists would decrease substantially.

Please disallow this request.

Thank you.

Kim
166
1 Serge Avila
From: Casey Barbarino <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2024 6:41 PM
To: Town Council
Subject: Support of Sorich Park Multi Use Trails for Bikes CAUTION: External Sender
Hello,
I'm writing to you in support of creating a multiuse trail in the Sorich Park area for bikers to be able to access this land that we all love.

I am a local resident of Sorich Park (Monterey Ave), and hike these trails regularly.

There is plenty of space for hikers and bikers to love these trails together, and we are only currently talking about a very short single portion of the trail that would be accessible to bikes.

I think that this is the minimum that we can do, as we bikers do not have enough local singletrack trails, especially ones that can be used to provide access to Terra Linda easily.

I urge you to please provide a commonly shared access for multiuse in this beautiful community so that we can all enjoy it together.

I am confident that we will find a respectful way to enjoy these trails together as both hikers and bikers.

I look forward to hearing the decision on this trail use, and very much hope that you can join me in support of communal trails.

Thank you,
Casey Barbarino
167
Dear Members of the San Anselmo Town Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the proposal to convert the Sorich Park Trail to multi-modal use, specifically option B from the staff report for the September 24th meeting. This initiative represents a significant opportunity to enhance our community’s accessibility, promote healthy activities, and support environmentally friendly modes of transportation. It will improve the quality of life for San Anselmo residents without increasing traffic from surrounding areas.

A multi-modal trail that accommodates both pedestrians and bicyclists will offer numerous benefits to our community, including:

Sincerely,
Laura Childress
4 Francis Ave
San Anselmo, CA 94960
168

San Anselmo City CouncilSeptember 24, 2024

San Anselmo City Council
September 24, 2024