[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-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",[32,76,88,100],{"_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":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6212801,"mediaKeyId","3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4","parentId",3683340,"title","Votes at a glance: Fairfax Town Council actions, June 10 meeting","audioSeconds",1395,"startMs",9075000,"endMs",10470000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4&start=9075&end=10470","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4/thumbnail_9075000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6212801/California/Votes-at-a-glance-Fairfax-Town-Council-actions-June-10-meeting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6212801-323acf9956296878bafbda40f2bf7e21/orig.mp4?Expires=1773541830&Signature=Io86rFozzAN6GahPPOp4M9dTAhDI8GZTogbWqe6FRdf8mzdeHg8J4mKwFxvOU101mzDF~htkeHD7N1QyXF9oA62~TWF2D~lYLVXF9Y348W3rE6-FX9ThkpTaDN2DvxtFcJEfHC7Plc4UuONBKpLIp98r50Iwsi74YFfagt39a6w9dWg9lg1i1pG7a4yku5xjBTmMiKOr-XpPGqI3YsSTEmZJDOcGt8~sxIbKcP5LtGO68~Te31D1-Woc9MgAAlcBa058VEGMiCPDb80OaojS~ki~~DDT1B7qt9leZHtiq1a8nuFS99AJZVDxN9Fe~SwV8jtF1kstrGbDKzmb0kK7fQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town Council of Fairfax CA","date","2025-06-05T20:08:14Z","article","This item lists formal actions recorded during the Fairfax Town Council meeting on June 10, 2025. Each entry includes the action text, the vote tally where recorded, and the follow-up direction.

1) Utility Users Tax (UUT) rate set at 5% for FY 2025'26
Motion: Set the UUT rate at 5% for fiscal 2025'26.
Vote: Passed 4'1 (Yes: Council member Egger, Council member Kohler, Vice Mayor Hellman, Mayor Blasch; No: Council member Gearan Gellie).
Follow-up: Finance to incorporate the revenue in the proposed FY26 budget and expand public notice about the UUT cap and prepayment option.

2) Meadoway (Meadow Way) master-agreement transfer and grant acceptance (Amendment #10)
Motion: Approve Amendment #10 to transfer the master agreement from CIC to MGE Engineering, increase the contract by $1,061,666 for final design/right-of-way/utilities coordination, and accept $842,826 in federal grant funds.
Vote: Approved (unanimous among voting members; one councilmember recused for proximity to project).
Follow-up: Public Works to complete right-of-way offers and utility coordination; counsel to assist with title clearing.

3) Creek Road / BPMP environmental studies (Amendment #11)
Motion: Approve Amendment #11 to increase the master agreement by $174,280 for additional cultural and historic resource and environmental studies for Creek Road and the Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program; accept $115,739 in federal grant funding; combine Azalea Avenue agreement into the master agreement.
Vote: Approved unanimously.
Follow-up: Staff to finalize cultural-resource reports and submit regulatory permit applications; return with updates on schedule and any additional funding needs.

4) SB1 Local Road Project Listing
Motion: Adopt the town's list of road projects funded by SB1 for FY25'26.
Vote: Approved unanimously.
Follow-up: Staff to proceed with project scheduling and rebidding where necessary and to coordinate with new Public Works director on priorities.

5) Consent calendar and minutes
Motion: Approve a package of consent calendar items and meeting minutes with a small clerical correction to April 2 minutes as requested by a councilmember.
Vote: Approved unanimously on the remaining consent items; selected items were pulled for separate discussion earlier in the meeting.

Ending: Several of the approved items require substantial follow-up work (right-of-way offers, utility coordination, cultural-resource reports and permitting). Staff will return to the council with schedule updates and any requests for additional appropriations if timing or cost changes.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Fairfax Town Council June 4, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of formal actions and roll-call votes recorded during the June 10 Fairfax Town Council meeting, including tax, contract and road funding measures.","taxTitle","Fairfax Town, Marin County, California","taxId",72288,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6212808,"Residents press council over School Street Plaza project, recall effort and town process",444,176000,620000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4&start=176&end=620","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4/thumbnail_176000.jpg","/articles/6212808/California/Residents-press-council-over-School-Street-Plaza-project-recall-effort-and-town-process","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6212808-3bd4a54d80d89a7970a98f3d06467d05/orig.mp4?Expires=1773541830&Signature=WQnksJ-gapewziznQCLvAxF0Xv6ySEBdYqVcse3Uf-M2dy4lRDPuGCjcw1YLq5XGe0W90CwSzqgTr4xDy25n3dpE9ZKiyFW1UU6byOR3XSpCB5XBbus5AUhd~6-8aHX9XaCbTI4nYXsy86WhC2kxurmS5o-V41O5WcMzpnuJ79jgPPEqDA63lN~LsqDK1esS9n0uAXnc9xlf5pV92SwevUbiSnGUFncyQie4zlVuicZXmNjX4nrd1HKwUXPuV-6tjZnXuXtGVup~6-DxO-Q7ryyjVf6zXvlWcLnjVmJ2l10qOXBT-ZKmyCkWHPwDtVxnoufEUUcI~NeNpzOp9ieOiQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Several dozen speakers used the meeting's open public expression period to press the Town Council on the proposed School Street Plaza project, criticize council behavior, urge or oppose a recall campaign and to promote community events and programs.

Town Attorney Janet Colson told the meeting a letter had been sent that day to the developer and the developer's attorney regarding the School Street Plaza project; she said the letter will be posted to the town website. Colson also confirmed the court had taken under submission the Coontz v. Town of Fairfax matter on the town's motion to dismiss and that the judge's decision was pending.

Speakers who identified themselves as nearby residents or long-time town members urged the council to require the developer to follow the public process, criticized aspects of the School Street proposal (building height, wetlands impacts and commercial square footage), and said the project does not deliver the promised affordability. Several said they did not want a seven-story structure in downtown Fairfax.

Other public speakers addressed unrelated community matters including festival logistics, an energy-upgrades program for low- and middle-income homeowners, and a panel about older women's resilience in Marin County. Several speakers urged the council and the community to work together to reduce rancor and to resist the circulating recall petitions targeting the mayor and vice mayor; others said they supported a recall. One speaker said they would consider legal action if the town's letter did not block any perceived unlawful exemption claims by the developer.

The mayor and council did not take immediate action on the School Street Plaza matter during the open time segment; the town attorney said the letter to the developer would be posted publicly and further legal updates would follow.

Ending: The meeting's open-comment period made clear the project remains a focal point for contention in Fairfax; the town attorney's letter and a pending court ruling are likely to determine the next formal steps.

","Public comments at the Fairfax Town Council meeting focused on the contested School Street Plaza development, criticism of council conduct, support and opposition to a recall effort, and an announcement from the town attorney that a letter had been sent to the project's developer.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6212813,"Council approves contract transfers and federal grant acceptances for Meadoway and other bridge projects",2695,7835000,10530000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4&start=7835&end=10530","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4/thumbnail_7835000.jpg","/articles/6212813/California/Council-approves-contract-transfers-and-federal-grant-acceptances-for-Meadoway-and-other-bridge-projects","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6212813-a3c6655a7f24b96bab9e60e02e71e8cf/orig.mp4?Expires=1773541830&Signature=S0xns0XdiKFueZDOLIjRyeAByKikffM63lDwMECLijSa5FpNXPsRz5YAMAZC1hdv6e2h0FomUHIjBxrO39uynvxJiRLrETx47kmZt3348qiJ-XJrClDcyj0hN77PXOKI0VIAi5xO8jRXXf2ponKoBLjFzSRaVwUJfTGNnKGx1qbBRUx2lWXQInWdZFaOE~5lFO06JGKMYIa~nsk3W3fuvx~6KkLK2gwouF5eXjMmvuVWCcSLd4XzkBn-MgowHWIYL6I05TW25DArB-4L3aOvr9GdePtmpe-g7mdXiekJ-VGOqbvKQzjEviMBkK3IRpjygfKa-ZLVYXjalbiqPbDQPg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Fairfax Town Council approved contract amendments and accepted federal grant awards for multiple bridge projects, including the Meadoway bridge replacement, Creek Road seismic retrofit, the bridge preventive maintenance program and Azalea Avenue.

Council action authorized a transfer of the existing master agreement from California Infrastructure Consultancy (CIC) to MGE Engineering for Meadoway bridge final design, right-of-way and utilities coordination and increased the contract by $1,061,666. The council also accepted $842,826 in federal grant funds for that phase. Separately, the council approved a related amendment to add $174,280 for cultural and historic resource studies and environmental work for the Creek Road and BPMP projects and accepted $115,739 in additional federal funding. The council also combined a separate Azalea Avenue agreement into the master contract to streamline administration.

Nader, the town's project presenter, reviewed the federal grant timeline and explained that federal (NEPA) and state (CEQA) environmental clearances and right-of-way work must be done before the projects can be advertised for construction. He told the council that Meadoway's right-of-way history required clarification: portions of the road were offered to the county a century ago and were never formally accepted, so the town needs a right-of-way acquisition process and temporary easements for five properties along the route. That work is on the critical path to advertising the Meadoway project for construction.

Councilmembers and residents pressed staff on schedule risk: staff said they had been working with outside counsel on a quiet-title/eminent-domain path that can clear ownership questions, but that the legal phase can take months and could push construction beyond the previously targeted 2026 start. Residents representing Meadoway-area neighborhoods urged the town to accelerate the right-of-way and permit steps; several said the bridge is a life‑safety and wildfire-evacuation priority.

The council voted to approve the contract transfers and grant acceptances in two separate actions. Both measures passed unanimously. Staff said the town will continue outreach to affected property owners, finalize agreements with utility providers for relocations, pursue regulatory permits and seek to advertise construction once right-of-way is cleared.

Ending: With the council votes the projects remain federally eligible and funded for right-of-way and environmental work; staff cautioned that property‑title work and permit timing may shift the expected construction calendar.

","The Town Council authorized amendments to transfer bridge-design contracts to a new engineering firm, accepted federal right-of-way and utility grants for the Meadoway (Meadow Way) bridge replacement, and approved related environmental study funding for three additional bridges.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6212818,"Fairfax council approves 5% utility tax to fund restored police position after extended budget debate",5532,3668000,9200000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4&start=3668&end=9200","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3683340-556071841f6a041aa479939d0f0a37b4/thumbnail_3668000.jpg","/articles/6212818/California/Fairfax-council-approves-5-utility-tax-to-fund-restored-police-position-after-extended-budget-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6212818-b62895b6ec445145278176f478cf223d/orig.mp4?Expires=1773541830&Signature=pASxzPi6Ucogu4M4xGvphllLkxRXXAHDO1CUhiDYwb0BysGMmlQ2sr2fRNhHoXOHOb6Qambn1tFsEScaBm4Dy16FPxNLcQ4Q9eK8f7nf1-WxaOeBrG9~HC0Thiat9SMrLkcpqG0TQkFMPps5btwZlqJ3W~uNvtH~-rtImCih0M9z~QpPAMU90Or84ttXE8m5GT0mg-qg8FpNUSjTGHUY9ZNaQFQ1DkzxqygbYSSBYHJ3caaiQQVf8MX62vEFWAiCBgRSzVOrXsjrmbksX~Df~U9wIK2j~qgomCD2~O-8qEcMDwH9BiykcSIMbqAHsHxpAjPqqtOQoHTUphGDRajEAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Fairfax Town Council voted 4–1 Tuesday to set the town's utility users tax (UUT) at 5% for fiscal year 2025–26, a 25% increase from the current 4% rate, a move staff said will fund an unfrozen entry-level police position and reduce chronic overtime pressure in the department.

The Council adopted the rate after a long budget hearing that included a detailed presentation of revenue sources by Finance Director Michael Vifret and extended public comment. Vifret told the council the 5% cap in town code had previously existed and the tax could be set at that rate by council action; he said the town is projecting roughly $14.6 million in general fund revenues for the coming year and that the UUT increase would create an ongoing revenue stream to cover an unfrozen ongoing expense.

Vret said property tax remains the town's largest revenue source (roughly 58.6% of general fund receipts) and projected a small drawdown of reserves compared with prior-year assumptions. He identified public safety, particularly police and the Ross Valley Fire contract, as the largest areas of recurring expense.

Councilmembers pressed staff on overtime and hiring. The police chief explained that unpredictable overtime — covering sick leave, court time, training, special events and large incidents — means hiring a single officer will not eliminate all overtime costs immediately. The chief told councilmembers a newly hired lateral officer would reduce overtime faster than an entry-level hire but could start at a higher pay step. The chief estimated that filling the frozen position could conservatively reduce overtime by about $30,000 a year, but said full impacts depend on hiring timing and training requirements; a newly hired officer typically takes months before carrying a full solo shift.

Councilmember discussion reflected concern about longer-term budget choices and town staffing levels. Several speakers from the public urged restoring the officer to improve overnight patrol coverage; others urged caution and asked staff to show line‑item tradeoffs. At least one speaker urged redirecting franchise and utility receipts toward roads rather than general fund uses.

The council then voted on a resolution setting the UUT rate at 5% for FY 2025–26. The roll-call vote recorded Councilmember Egger, Councilmember Kohler, Vice Mayor Hellman and Mayor Blasch in favor and Councilmember Gearan Gellie opposed.

The council paused the meeting multiple times for public input and agreed to continue refining the proposed budget before a final adoption likely at a July meeting. Staff said they will incorporate additional clarifications and update the budget document based on council direction.

The tax increase takes effect for the fiscal year starting July 1; the county auditor will collect the tax and remit proceeds to the town. Staff recommended and the council accepted additional public outreach about the UUT cap and the option for high-usage customers to prepay the statutory annual cap (a procedural point discussed by staff during the hearing).

While voters previously authorized a 5% cap in town code, staff and some councilmembers agreed the preference is to use the Council process for timely action when funding an ongoing expense is necessary.

Looking ahead, the council and staff will continue to refine the FY26 budget, including capital and storm-drain projects, and will return for final budget adoption at a later meeting.

Ending: The UUT vote gives the town a new recurring revenue line expected to fund a restored police spot and modestly improve early‑morning patrol levels; the council signaled more budget detail will be returned before final adoption.","After hours of public comment and a lengthy staff presentation on revenues and capital needs, the Fairfax Town Council voted 4–1 to set the utility users tax at 5% for fiscal 2025–26 to help restore a frozen police position and shore up the town's operating budget.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Fairfax Town Council actions, June 10 meeting

Residents press council over School Street Plaza project, recall effort and town process

Council approves contract transfers and federal grant acceptances for Meadoway and other bridge projects

Fairfax council approves 5% utility tax to fund restored police position after extended budget debate