[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6597579,"mediaKeyId","3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df","parentId",3300767,"title","Votes at a glance: Ross Town Council actions on April 3, 2025","audioSeconds",1096,"startMs",1602000,"endMs",2698000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df&start=1602&end=2698","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df/thumbnail_1602000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6597579/Ross/Marin-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-Ross-Town-Council-actions-on-April-3-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6597579-5fb49c4701536756f4f331c0b7de679c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771162230&Signature=N2YXQR7T5cj3Yle7BpRaWt5LXhPEtoB4VvLBaiFZf9BVw-CrCRLhbbtbxKLBWvRqi4PpVh6BOGWyLzPB1ptIelWrvjkP2XlMp~cHnO0s8k9AiF2xWVW~l1OkQJiOyGGG~ehXfVPUIWUxw98L4cd2CMhUaXFO8SkLum4Yvgk-wWoII6L5qrn2y32NijO~GzZTiF1ZMocMlNr-jnzIzCxtOhhjkHvH5p-NJu-KNcyBiQidjpq1dkEeW4R6OhQD1Hxtecfj06JMTFq5-xL9J33AE-mE7CS8N2c69pHrxrVS1Avbz1WcsSZVdO6BW0bq2pbs~TsCsXhRLvg-qmmtlDP1vg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town of Ross","date","2025-04-04T17:22:55Z","article","The Ross Town Council took several formal actions on April 3. This roundup lists each item, the motion, and the result so readers can quickly see what was approved, continued or introduced.

Consent calendar: Items a, d and e were approved with a single motion. Vote: 5–0.

Items removed from consent and handled separately:
- Item 8b (Balena Storm Drain Improvements Phase 2 — adoption of ISMND): continued to a date uncertain (see separate article). Vote to continue: 5–0.
- Item 8c (Council procedures manual revisions — Resolution 25‑01): adopted as revised; council added a sentence requiring council members to disclose when circulation of materials reflects their individual position rather than the council’s. Vote: 5–0.

Planning and design actions:
- 47 Poplar Avenue: Council adopted Resolution 25‑11 approving the variance and design review for a new in‑ground pool and spa; Councilmember Dowling recused. Vote: 4–0 (one recusal).
- 78 Shady Lane: Council adopted Resolution 25‑12 approving a design review amendment to raise the structure for FEMA compliance, adjust exterior materials and modify the porch/deck. Vote: 5–0.

Nuisance abatement / assessments:
- 61 Shady Lane: Council confirmed the town’s abatement costs and directed staff to record a special assessment. Resolution (25‑09) adopted 3–1 (Councilmember Salter opposed). The vote confirmed the staff cost list after removal of attorney fees and after inclusion of the final contractor invoice.

Municipal code and fire safety ordinances (first readings/introduction):
- Ordinance 728 (various Ross Municipal Code cleanup amendments including holidays, job titles, gendered language, scrivener’s corrections): Council waived first reading and introduced the ordinance by title only; vote to introduce/waive: 4–1 (Councilmember Salter opposed). Final adoption scheduled for May 8, 2025.
- Ordinance 729 (designation of fire hazard severity zones in the Ross local responsibility area): Council waived first reading and introduced the ordinance by title only; vote: 5–0. Final adoption scheduled for May 8, 2025.

Other actions and motions:
- Council adopted Resolution 25‑01 (procedures manual revisions) 5–0 after adding clarifying language on speaking for the town.

How to find the full record: Staff posted minutes, the meeting video and staff reports on the town website. For items with substantial public comment or ongoing work (for example, the Balena storm drain and the 61 Shady Lane abatement), the town will post follow‑up materials as they become available.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Town Council Meeting-04/03/2025 - 6:00pm","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of key motions, resolutions and introductions from the April 3, 2025 Ross Town Council meeting, including consent calendar approvals, continuances, design review approvals, code amendments (first readings) and the nuisance abatement cost confirmation.","taxTitle","Ross, Marin County, California","taxId",79356,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6597584,"Ross council asks staff to prepare FAQ and town‑issued summary after March 13 fire/emergency services presentations",495,7101000,7596000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df&start=7101&end=7596","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df/thumbnail_7101000.jpg","/articles/6597584/Ross/Marin-County/California/Ross-council-asks-staff-to-prepare-FAQ-and-townissued-summary-after-March-13-fireemergency-services-presentations","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6597584-8045e18e732d6e62c2f9e553ae58505d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771162230&Signature=lAABv641S-M2k38683Xvvt7YhNNckPDzELzo8hKQ36IMD2ND09gc8hluLcDk67GTgkjaeTy6yBLEUMotA6tKniPlWm8PqQzZQCs2Gsyo-wX2n5Ugzsr-fwCoJ8HScQuGgzuLu203QiWipISfyPTGnsZToG3Yraej2roEMff-mqo6tknPeS2QaaYyOmEkbZWfeMV8rwaw6G9cTyF-tRKp1A25I34xmBusnEMjUNrrJAhOql6ZPHsna-Y3kswNv~YETViH5p0uy1-wjzpORmPdtg~shhI07gTeuWxFRnpmSGX1hdih1zLsue8qX-px74W3OYFaG7W8RD0woLWcuzQH0Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","After a March 13 agenda item that drew extensive public and expert presentations about fire and emergency medical services, the Ross Town Council met in a short special session April 3 and directed staff to prepare a town‑issued summary and FAQ clarifying what the March presentations covered and what the council decided.

Town manager and staff had already posted the meeting video, staff report and draft minutes online and included brief items in the town’s newsletter, but members of the public and several councilmembers said confusion and misinformation continued circulating. At the special meeting Town Manager Krista Johnson told the council she had been asked by multiple residents to provide more digestible, factual information summarizing the presentations and the council’s direction.

What the council asked staff to do: The council instructed staff to produce a short, factual FAQ and summary for distribution via the town newsletter and website. Mayor Pro Tem McMillan and Mayor Kircher (who placed the item on the special meeting agenda) suggested the document should explain key technical points such as probable ambulance and fire response outcomes, insurance and regulation realities, and which parts of the subject were within the town’s control versus those that are governed by county or regional agencies.

Staffing the draft: Town manager Johnson proposed working with a two‑person council subcommittee to prepare the FAQ so the text could be prepared quickly. Councilmember Elizabeth Robbins and councilmember Julie Dowling (town attorney) were named in the meeting as reviewers to work with staff on the draft. Staff emphasized the document would be factual, cite source reports (including the CityGate consultant work that informed the March presentations), and avoid editorializing.

Why it matters: The March 13 meeting included expert presentations and multiple policy options and prompted strong resident interest. Several residents and commenters told the council the town should produce a clear, town‑issued explanation so neighbors receive the same factual information the council considered, including what the council did and did not decide at that meeting.

Next steps: Staff will prepare the FAQ and summary and coordinate with the two council reviewers. The draft will be published on the town website and distributed via the morning newsletter; staff said they will aim to include links to the underlying reports and video for readers who want full documentation.","Following a lengthy March 13 discussion about fire and emergency medical services, the council held a special meeting April 3 and directed staff to draft a town‑issued FAQ and summary of the presentations. Council asked that two members coordinate with staff on the text to ensure factual clarity.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6597586,"Ross council confirms town’s abatement costs for 61 Shady Lane; vote 3–1",1944,3337000,5281000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df&start=3337&end=5281","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df/thumbnail_3337000.jpg","/articles/6597586/Ross/Marin-County/California/Ross-council-confirms-towns-abatement-costs-for-61-Shady-Lane-vote-31","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6597586-36b55a370c6e1b6f30a70660d3895e7e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771162230&Signature=NfqGqTZt3YGe9J-xBh9kvM7fcPY7UVSspXcuy8Zt9W7IEZ2Gz2AggkQ9-Vieu-Xp9gY3xkWgacBJnAeRSXZ9vvMLr0WsKVgPMmAdDLG-nbWV8Hie0rZt37TxdP6q9AwSt-ATcxDcFO1UU6RgVbiaddIZwYfx06SNUt3TrRW6QIqeFEda8nTMzM8GPOhmRSGI4ef5qT8VayueT2qoOSR-MiRCRlaU4AIOhNnF7rZgflTdmO9c2b5UTw87vaKrbDmvT-1xEurJNfeNvd6DPLxhR2JyYzDwiYxkhlpOCHpnt5JyV-AiVooYfFdDgQ-lZLLSyU6-zsXwqVlzXb5aaSmTKQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Ross Town Council on April 3 confirmed town‑incurred costs to abate a sinkhole at 61 Shady Lane and directed staff to record a special assessment to recover those costs.

Public works director Rich Simonich presented an itemized expense report documenting town time and contractor invoices for the abatement work the town performed in October 2024 after a court granted the town an abatement order. Simonich said most costs were for staff time and emergency contractor work to stabilize a large void created by soil loss beneath the roadway and adjacent sidewalk area.

Why it matters: The property owner has contested responsibility and argued the sinkhole was caused by leaks or abandoned sanitary sewers outside the owner’s control. Expert witnesses for the property owner told the council they believed the sanitary district’s lines or other underground infrastructure likely caused the void. Those causation questions are part of parallel civil litigation and are not before the council in the cost confirmation hearing.

At the hearing, the property owner’s representatives presented a geotechnical engineer who described tunnels and voids that he said pointed to sewer pipe failure and said the town’s emergency placement of concrete did not fully fill the void. The property owner’s counsel asserted the sanitary district should be the responsible party and said the owners had not yet filed a claim against the district.

Town counsel Ben and staff stressed that the council’s role at this hearing was limited to confirming the reasonableness of the town’s abatement costs, not determining causation. After discussion, a motion to adopt the draft resolution confirming the costs passed 3–1 (Councilmember Salter opposed). The motion directs staff to record a special assessment for the abatement costs against the property in accordance with Ross Municipal Code and state law.

What the council decided: The confirmed expense report (included in the staff packet) excludes attorney fees and includes the latest contractor invoice. Councilmembers who supported confirmation said the town acted to eliminate a public hazard and the costs were reasonable for the emergency response. Councilmember Salter voted no and expressed concern about assigning the costs while causation and potential third‑party liability (the sanitary district) may ultimately be unresolved in court.

Next steps: Staff will record the special assessment for collection. Separately, the property owner retains civil remedies and was advised by the court to pursue claims against any third parties (including the sanitary district) if they believe the district caused the sinkhole.","Council confirmed costs to abate a sinkhole at 61 Shady Lane after a months‑long dispute over responsibility and causation. The confirmation orders the special assessment as allowed under municipal code; the council vote was 3–1 with Councilmember Salter opposed.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6597587,"Ross council pauses Balena storm‑drain approval after neighbors say they weren’t notified",674,1656000,2330000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df&start=1656&end=2330","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3300767-f49c96c201d600ed93d090a50b4106df/thumbnail_1656000.jpg","/articles/6597587/Ross/Marin-County/California/Ross-council-pauses-Balena-stormdrain-approval-after-neighbors-say-they-werent-notified","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6597587-ffe536f99f0d1dbcccb80a72e17afef7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771162230&Signature=a3fcha3MysQ5Dm7Jk6bZ4OS6uARmsKiXYQQImkF77~eJ1ER-GMPbqwcNny4qVbsBJt1OLBI3s~i-Ec3eDyBxvSJdak-UFhYLZ8MEoXdqvjZpQwKhvm8rVRUT6pC-L78vGPw7mF-Tr-NH-FYv77zC7AGKW~tzQV6C5XTYpkup18Ub6rIpsKxbZ-O~Z2yFHtmax2~k4GITHn5RfgdDQlzgf5mraDtMUng7dYidFGflYjHP0ygpXPhwhvx2UzGrypmpnRct5K1kptpMk1dJJU94qcWTym55gsPGionCTRTR2UDUMvB~vgwMATo3g67bNTNDPZb3fDgzSEBQePAVl~vJXw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Ross Town Council on April 3 unanimously voted to continue action on the Balena Storm Drain Improvements Phase 2 after nearby residents said they had not received required direct notice and asked for more time to review environmental documents.

The project would extend a storm drain installed three years ago at Balena Avenue through the Sir Francis Drake Boulevard intersection and down toward the Sir Francis Drake bridge over Arroyo—or Murphy—Creek. Public works director Rich Simonich told the council staff had published an initial study/mitigated negative declaration (ISMND) and performed the standard 30‑day public review, but neighborhood residents said they first learned the town had moved the project from 2026 into May–June 2025 only on March 18, after the public comment window had closed.

Why it matters: Residents who use the easement at the construction site said the work would affect driveway access, scheduled private construction, and may expose groundwater and historical contaminants in an old rail bed adjacent to their homes. The council’s action means the town will pause formal adoption of the ISMND and re‑notice the document under CEQA so people within 300 feet of the project receive direct notice and have a new 30‑day comment period.

Resident Orna Meyer, whose property fronts the easement, told the council she and two neighbors were surprised to learn the town had moved the construction schedule forward and asked the council to delay the project so they could review the 200‑plus‑page ISMND. Meyer said the excavation would be “literally less than 20 feet from my front door and living room,” raised medical concerns related to possible toxins in old fill beneath the site and said the homeowners had already changed personal construction plans to accommodate the town’s revised schedule.

Public works director Rich Simonich acknowledged the town missed the 300‑foot notice required for the ISMND. “That is a regrettable circumstance,” Simonich said, adding that state regulatory agencies had not commented during the initial review but that neighbors had submitted comments after the deadline. Simonich also said some permits and agency reviews remain outstanding and that doing both the Balena work and a separate paving project on Sir Francis Drake simultaneously could be unmanageable.

Council discussion focused on fairness to neighbors and practical scheduling; one council member urged fairness and another said staff could make the schedule work but agreed more notice was appropriate. Town counsel advised continuing the item to a date uncertain so the town could re‑notice for 30 days and receive any agency comments. The council voted 5–0 to continue adoption of the ISMND to a date uncertain and to re‑notice the project.

What’s next: Public works will reissue the ISMND notice with direct mailings to property owners within 300 feet and allow a fresh 30‑day comment period. Staff said they expect to complete outstanding regulatory meetings (including with the Department of Fish and Wildlife) and return to council after public comments are collected and reviewed.","Council voted to continue action on the Balena Storm Drain Improvements (Phase 2) after neighbors said they hadn’t received required 300‑foot notices and raised health and schedule concerns. Public works director acknowledged the notice error and recommended re‑noticing and additional review.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Ross Town Council actions on April 3, 2025

Ross council asks staff to prepare FAQ and town‑issued summary after March 13 fire/emergency services presentations

Ross council confirms town’s abatement costs for 61 Shady Lane; vote 3–1

Ross council pauses Balena storm‑drain approval after neighbors say they weren’t notified