where you are.
» I am taking care of my children. Um
they my wife was away and I needed to to
take care of them and watch them.
>> Okay, great. So, you're participating
remotely. Um does he need to say if
there's anyone in the room that's 18 or
older?
Matt,
is there anyone in the room with you?
>> There there's no one else in the room
right now. Just me.
>> Perfect. Thank you. Um has the agenda
been posted?
>> Yes, Mayor.
>> Any changes to the agenda?
>> No, Mayor.
>> So, number three, because this is a
special meeting, all public comment for
the other um
three items um will be taken right now.
So, um for people who have public
comment on I items four, five, or six,
not general public comment, but just
pertaining to those three items, um
please come to the podium and
make your public comment.
» I can mute myself.
Good evening, um Mayor McMillan and Ross
Town Council members. I am here today to
formally request that the Town Council
agendize this evening a motion to take
up during its September Council meeting.
This agenda item should instruct the
Town Manager, in conjunction with the
Town Treasurer, to produce a detailed
accounting of all costs incurred by our
town on the fourth issue {slash}
initiative.
The report should itemize the following:
legal expenses, staff's time, the
special meeting at Marin Art and Garden
Center, and the election code report.
Once the final expenditures of our
town's resources is known, the Town
Council must instruct the Town Attorney
to make a formal demand on the Friends
of Ross Fire forth for full
reimbursement and slash restitution of
any and all municipal expenditures
incurred by the town of Ross related to
forth's flawed and untenable ballot
initiative.
As I've noted in prior communications,
the town of Ross has been forced to
expend significant taxpayer resources
including an estimate of $85,000 in
unanticipated consultant fees to address
a ballot measure that was fundamentally
flawed from its inception.
Recent reports including the Citizens
Advisory Committee findings have served
as formal acknowledgement that forth's
own admission, the goal of staffing and
maintaining a fully functional fire
department at the Ross Civic Complex is
no longer realistically objective.
For over a year this community has
endured misinformation that has
fractured our town and compromised our
standing with Marine County agencies.
Throughout the process the town has
acted in good faith adopting resolutions
to evaluate alternative designs and
expending significant resources.
It is only equitable that the
organization responsible for these
extraordinary unnecessary costs be held
financially accountable. Forth has
publicly claimed that they have raised
hundreds of thousands of dollars in
donations. As a 501c4 entity, these
funds should now be utilized to
reimburse the taxpayers of Ross for the
administrative or legal costs squandered
on the initiative that forth eventually
admitted was untenable. Just as a
resident pays for services of the town
arborist when requesting tree removal,
forth must be held to the same standard
of financial responsibility for their
municipal work that they have mandated.
I'm asking the council take the
following actions. Agendize a
discussion, schedule a formal agenda
item to discuss the financial impact of
the forth initiative on the town's
reserve.
Instruct the town attorney, direct the
town attorney to issue a formal demand
to forth for reimbursement of all
consultant fees, staff time, and legal
expenses related to the June 2026 ballot
initiative within 30 days of notice.
And I require that Forfe make uh their
finances uh
public to ensure the donations are not
being hoarded while the town's general
fund it bears the burden of their
campaign. We as residents deserve a
swift resolution, the return of taxpayer
dollars. Accountability must come with
public demand for restitution. In my
opinion, Bob Hurst, president Forfe,
should write this reimbursement check
before his name appears on the of
November ballot. Respectfully, Michael
Roosevelt.
Perfect.
>> Anyone else in the chamber with public
comment on the three agenda items?
Anybody online with public comment?
>> No one online, Mayor.
>> So, we're moving to item number four,
which is Town Council to decide to
decide if it wants to adopt resolution
number 2648
approving a professional services
contract with Gensler Inc. for
facilities master plan amendment
services in an amount not to exceed
$286,879,
establishing a facilities master plan
amendment project with a total project
budget of $320,000,
appropriating $320,000
from the undesignated operating fund
balance in the fiscal year 2026-2027
budget for implementation of the
project, and authorizing the town
manager to execute the professional
services agreement with Gensler Inc.
Town Manager Johnson.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Uh there is a a
lengthier uh staff report in your agenda
packet. I'll just uh summarize. Um if
you recall on May 6th of of this year,
the Town Council adopted resolution 2623
directing me to initiate an amendment to
the facilities master plan utilizing the
CAC concept as the preferred alternative
to concept B subject to further
technical, operational, and financial
analysis by the town. This resolution
further directed that the amendment
process include pre comprehensive
preparation of a comprehensive project
scope and a fully burdened cost estimate
including updated space programming,
infrastructure analysis, parking
analysis, public works operational
requirements, public safety operational
requirements, and preparation of a fully
burdened project cost estimate. The
resolution also directs that any
amendment continues to support the
town's affordable housing objectives and
include stakeholder engagement
throughout the process.
So, consistent with town council
direction, staff issued a competitive
request for proposals,
um,
also called a RFP, seeking professional
planning, architectural, and technical
consulting services to prepare a
facility master plan amendment. Five
proposals were received.
Town staff completed a technical
evaluation of all the proposals
utilizing the evaluation criteria
established in the RFP document.
Following staff evaluation, the town
council subcommittee of Mayor uh
McMillan and Mayor Pro Tem Robbins and
staff reviewed the proposals and
selected the three highest ranked firms
for interviews.
Following the interviews, town staff
deliberated further and entered into
negotiations with Gensler to refine the
scope of work and budget, clarify
project deliverables, reduce overall
costs, and address the accelerated
project schedule.
The final negotiated proposal with
Gensler includes a comprehensive work
plan attached as exhibit A to the
professional services agreement, and
that is attached to the staff report in
your agenda packet.
Gensler's proposal provides a 12-week
work program with completion anticipated
at the end of October, that's this year.
The plan amendment schedule is intended
to support subsequent town council
consideration of financing alternatives
and and if directed by the town council,
preparation for placement of a potential
general block obligation bond measure on
a 2027 ballot.
Through the negotiation process, town
staff worked with Gensler to refine the
project scope, clarify deliverables, and
eliminate work not essential to
completion of the facilities master plan
amendment.
As a result of our staff work,
the proposed professional services
agreement was a reduced by approximately
$169,000,
which is approximately a 38%
reduction from Gensler's original
proposal.
While preserving the core planning,
engineering evaluation, cost estimating,
and facilities master plan amendment
services necessary to meet the town
council's objectives.
Gensler's scope of work balances
technical analysis, cost, and schedule
while while intentionally limiting the
assignment to planning level validation
rather than advancing into schematic
architectural design.
Exhibit A to the professional services
agreement contains a detailed project
work plan identifying project
milestones, meetings, deliverables,
consultant coordination, engineering
evaluations, cost estimating,
preparation of the actual amended
facilities master plan document, and the
project schedule schedule necessary to
complete the amendment um before the end
of October 2026.
um
A Gensler scope of work also identifies
information that is required to be
provided by the town
including a site engineering or called a
topographical survey and existing
building a laser scan documentation.
>> [cough]
>> Excuse me.
Town staff have already begun the
contracting process to get this work
completed ASAP.
The total project budget is 325,000
dollars which includes 286,879
for the professional services agreement
with Gensler.
Then the rest of the project budget
includes um 32,450
for completion of the additional owner
directed work.
And it also includes a minor amount
5,600 or so for minor expenses that
might arise.
So as mentioned, the 12-week timeline
for this project is very aggressive.
Assuming council approval tonight,
town staff has a kickoff meeting
scheduled on Monday with the
consultants.
We anticipate needing to hold several
special meetings with the council during
this 12-week period to keep the project
moving forward and I will gratefully
accept the council's previously stated
offer to meet as often as needed and ask
that the council set aside the fourth
Thursday of the coming months, more
specifically August 27th,
September 24th,
October 22nd, and November 19th, which
is actually the third Thursday in
November because I don't think you want
to meet on Thanksgiving
for potential meetings. And so I will
ask our town clerk to send um
Outlook notifications to the council so
that you have that.
Um if and the good news is it'll be on
your calendar. For some reason we don't
need them, we can cancel them, but um
that's what we need to do in order to to
move this project forward and meet that 12-week timeline.
Uh, in summary, approval of the proposed
agreement via resolution number 2648,
which is in your packet,
this will authorize preparation of a
comprehensive amendment to the 2023
facilities master plan that will
validate and refine the town council's
preferred civic center concept, update
project costs, and implementation
strategies, and provide the technical
foundation
for future environmental review,
financing, and consideration of a
potential 2027 bond measure. The
proposed agreement that is in your
packet represents the culmination of a
competitive procurement process and
successful negotiations that have
resulted in a technically comprehensive
schedule-driven scope of work
appropriate for the amendment of the
facility master plan. Approval of the
agreement will allow the town to
complete the technical evaluation
directed by the town council and
position the town to consider future
financing and implementation decisions.
So, specifically, it is recommended that
the town council hold this public
hearing this evening and decide if it
wants to adopt resolution number 2648,
which will approve a professional
services agreement with Gensler
for facility master plan amendment
services in an amount not to exceed
$286,879.
It will establish a facilities master
plan amendment project in the budget
with a total project budget of 320,000.
It will appropriate 320,000
from the undesignated operating fund
balance in the current fiscal year
2026-2027
for implementation of the project during
this current fiscal year,
and it will authorize me, the town
manager, to execute the professional
services agreement with Gensler. The
Gensler has already signed the
agreement, and a copy of it is in your
packet.
Thank you for the opportunity to
>> Thank you, Krista. What
Sorry?
Okay. Questions, council members?
Matt, any questions?
>> [clears throat]
>> Then we will move it to discussion.
» Well,
I'll mention one thing. Oh, thank you,
Krista. Um
it's a great contract, and um
I mean, I think everyone's so delighted
that we can move forward with the
Gensler plan, which
uh has such widespread support. That it
one thing to focus on now now that we've
launched our project, that, you know,
the most important thing is to get
community support behind the project,
you know, and and as you mentioned in
the resolution to include um
engage with stakeholders to provide
input during the process. I mean, people
having community members at the table
who then take this project out to the
community is is probably the best way
for us to make sure that we get the bond
measure passed. And um and and on that topic, um I know that
some of the CAC people, uh especially
Dan Weinick, has said has offered to be
part of of some of the uh meetings going
forward, which I think we should
certainly consider. Where, you know,
he's a big player behind this and has
helped us get to this point with this
beautiful project. And uh you know, so I think that um we
should at least consider and not, you
know, they're not the contract we're
going to approve, but but just how we
run some of the meetings, and can we
have community members there also,
especially Dan who's who we're lucky
said he would be willing to come to our
to meetings so that we can have this as
a community you know, with led by Krista
and and David but also community members
to help us get it out to the community
to get it approved for a bond measure.
So, that's my comment.
» Any other comments?
I I think the beauty of what Krista is
proposing is that there will probably be
two meetings a month where the public
and community members and we can
participate and give feedback.
So, um I think that's built into what
you've said.
Um
any other comments?
>> I was just going to say I I really like
the idea of having stakeholders
participate cuz the
it in hearing what's going on and I
think of stakeholders as age-friendly
Ross and other groups, school.
So,
parts of the community that will be
involved in voting for the geo bond. So,
>> I I I think that's key that everyone
feels that I mean even if everything
goes beautifully, everybody wants to be
a part of it going forward and and that
will get engagement and votes so that's
where
I you know, I I think we'll have to
decide you know, how many people come to
I mean everyone come to council
meetings. Should people also be um and
especially like our our design people
from the CAC, should any of them come to
some of the you know, the other meetings
with Gensler cuz they do have building
skills so that's something to think
about going forward.
» Uh Um thank you. I don't I don't want
our mayor pro tem to leave this meeting
under the impression that
anybody except town staff and our team
and and of course Gensler, our project
team which actually doesn't include Don
Dan Winey. He's not on their project
team as they
presented. I had nothing to do with who they
identified as their project members.
So, um you know, we will uh absolutely
this is going to be coming forward to
the council
very often in this 12-week period of
time. And um
that will be the opportunity. And uh we
can certainly do uh working with the
town clerk and his enhanced um
community engagement skills do our most
to like get the word out about the
special meetings and and hopefully
what's going to happen at that meeting.
What decision points are being brought
to the council to really to engage the
community to come to the meetings. Um
but that that So, that happens in a
public setting
with all five council members here. Um
it's very transparent. Everybody hears
the same thing. And in the meantime,
staff is busy working with the Gensler
project team to to get the stuff done
because it is
um you know, Gensler is the one that
proposed the 12-week turnaround time.
The council subcommittee was very
supportive of that
12-week turnaround time. And it is um
it's going to be super challenging to
get it done. We won't be able to have um
lots of other extra meetings um
to it just won't you know, you you could
do that if you were willing to extend
the time that you're conducting. If you
recall, the first facilities master plan
project took well over a year. Several
meetings with the council, several
meetings with the public. And so, you
know, you're it's difficult for us to
get it all. And so, in order to get this
done in 12 weeks, in order to get it
done in what I consider to be a
reasonable cost, which is still by the
way twice as expensive as the first
facilities master plan,
this is what we you know, this is what
we need to do.
Take advantage of the council's very
generous
um offer to meet as much as needed.
And um everybody will be hearing the
same thing and
lots of opportunities.
» Any other comments?
>> Can I just say um that I remember when
the original master plan was being
vetted in the community. There was a lot
of community meetings.
Um and so I realized that time is so
short, so it's going to have to be
abbreviated
if we have any. But having people from
the community come to our town council
meeting, so it's public, makes perfect
sense to me. Um I just want to thank you
cuz I know that there wasn't much time
since the last time the council met and
today
to put together to do the interviews, to
negotiate the contract, to get
everything set up for the special
meeting. So I really want to thank you
and the staff for going sort of above
and beyond to make it possible to have
this meeting tonight. So thank you.
>> And I also want to just reflect on where
we are versus where we were. Um in
January, we were having a very
contentious
discussion about options and trying to
go forward. Um thanks to the citizens
advisory committee and Jeff and Dan and
all the members um
who came up with I think a brilliant
compromise um and with Gensler's input,
with Dan Whiney's input, um
I think this is a really huge milestone
um building consensus and turning a
corner for our community. So I am really
optimistic that
we will get this done in 12 weeks. We
will be able to have good
financing information to put something
on a
general obligation bond ballot hopefully
in March of 2027
and get the this project started and
delivered in order to keep the
paramedics here and deliver a new
facility to them by January of 2029.
So
and and you know, this would not have
happened I don't think without Forths
effort. So I want to also thank Forth
for pushing hard and going forward and
there was a lot of controversy and
heated discussions, um, but I think you
have helped us reach a beautiful place
with a
gorgeous facility and turn the corner
and we can
preserve the option
of dealing with the fire station and
operations down the road but we can
deal with the building now and that's
what everybody needs and wants.
So I think we need a motion.
>> I'll make a I'll move that we adopt a
resolution number 2648.
>> Second.
» Motion by Councilmember Dowling second
by Mayor Pro Tem Robbins.
Mayor McMillan.
>> Yes.
>> Mayor Pro Tem Robbins.
>> Yes.
>> Councilmember Kutscher.
>> Yes.
>> Councilmember Dowling.
>> Yes.
>> Councilmember Salter.
>> Yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously 5-0.
>> So now we are going to take a brief
recess and we will resume in 5 minutes.
Our
We are moving on to item number five.
Town Council to consider adopting
resolution number 2647
one acknowledging the proponents timely
withdrawal of the Friends of Firehouse
Initiative under election codes
elections code section 9215.5
and rescinding resolution number 2609
which ordered the initiative submitted
to the voters and requested
consolidation with the November 3rd,
2026 election and requesting the Marin
County Board of Supervisors and County
Elections Official to remove the measure
from the November 3rd, 2026 consolidated
ballot.
Krista.
>> Thank you. Um
Our Our town attorney, Miriam, has
kindly offered to give a brief staff
report. Thank you.
>> give a very brief staff report. So, this
item will ask the council to adopt
resolution 2647 which does two things.
It acknowledges the proponent's timely
withdrawal of the fourth initiative and
it rescinds resolution 2609
and asks the Marin County to remove the
measure from the ballot. So, this is
largely requested from the county. They
asked us to adopt some kind of
resolution that acknowledges the
withdrawal and because we set in motion
a series of events with resolution 2609,
this resolution will unwind all of that
and ask that the county to remove from
the
remove the initiative from the ballot.
So, uh we have the withdrawal, a full
withdrawal from the Friends of Ross
Firehouse. It is uh
full withdrawal that says this is uh
withdrawn that it will not appear on the
ballot and is now part of the record and
will be part of the resolution you adopt
tonight. So, the
uh withdrawal is timely. You can uh
Proponents can withdraw anytime before
the 88th day before the election, which
is coming up actually very It's this
week. So, it is a timely withdrawal and
uh that's That's it. The action is
acknowledge the timely withdrawal
and rescind the past resolution.
And that's it.
Thank you, Miriam. Thank you.
>> Any questions from council members?
Stephanie, would you like to make a
public comment?
» I just wanted to make um
a brief statement. So, when Friends of
the Ross Fire House created the ballot
initiative a year and a half ago, we
really had three goals. One was to
preserve the architectural legacy of the
historic John White building, preserve
the option of restoring local fire
operations and emergency response in the
future, and accomplish this in a
fiscally responsible fashion. And so,
with the CAC plan and Gensler as the
architect, we really feel that the town
is on the right path and we're it's a
great outcome for the citizens. It I
know it's been painful at times, but I
think we've really landed in a great
place and we hereby withdraw the
initiative. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Stephanie.
And thank you for accomplishing those
goals.
Um all right, any discussion?
>> I have an
>> [clears throat]
>> I don't know if you can hear me.
>> We can hear you.
» So, um I I think that this is a a
wonderful moment for our town. I really
appreciate the friends stepping forward
and withdrawing this measure and saving
the town from a very divisive campaign
in November.
But I think that the goals should be
very clear that that the citizens have
spoken and I have no doubt in my mind
that over 50% would have voted to
restore fire services in town and
medical.
And so, it's now upon us to follow
through with this plan by building a
facility that can support an operational
fire station. There are fires raging all
over Europe in Canada
in California in Sonoma County. They're
everywhere. And it's unconscionable as
people that are here to
elected to secure these people who've
left voted for us that we would close
the fire station and not try to preserve
the option to restore it when our people
and the society around us demands it.
So, I hope that
>> [clears throat]
>> the council has heard the people whether
they have voted for this initiative or
not
and that we move forward to restore
local fire services and medical in Ross
because that's what we're here to do.
Thank you.
» Any other comments in the discussion?
» I move we approve resolution 2647.
>> I'll second.
» Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Robbins, second
by Council Member Dowling.
Mayor McMillan?
>> Aye.
>> Mayor Pro Tem Robbins?
>> Aye.
>> Council Member Currier?
>> Aye.
>> Council Member Dowling?
>> Aye.
>> Council Member Salter?
>> Aye.
>> Motion passes unanimously 5-0.
» All right. Number six, Town Council to
consider approval of the argument
language in support of the Ross Valley
Paramedic Authority parcel tax renewal
measure to be submitted to the County of
Marin Elections Office for the November
3rd, 2026 general municipal election and
decide who should sign the argument on
behalf of Council Members.
For example, Mayor, all five Council
Members, or a portion thereof.
Zach, is this your item?
>> It is, Mayor.
Thank you, Mayor McMillan and Town
Council Members. This item asks the
council to approve the argument in
support of the Ross Valley Paramedic
Authority parcel tax renewal measure for
the November 3rd election.
For decades, paramedic services in the
Ross Valley have been funded by a
voter-approved parcel tax that supports
trained paramedics on our fire engines
and ambulances.
That tax is set to expire, and on July
9th, the council voted to place a
renewal measure on the November ballot.
Under the elections code, the council
may submit a written argument in favor
of the voter in favor for the voter information
guide, which the council has opted to
do.
The proposed argument, included as
attachment one, describes the purpose of
the renewal and the fiscal
accountability protections that apply,
including that the funds may be used
only for local paramedic services and
are subject to annual audits and public
disclosure. I'll note that state law
limits the argument to 300 words with
proper nouns, acronyms, numbers, and
dictionary-recognized hyphenated words
each counted as a single word. Since the
agenda was published, I identified that
the current draft runs slightly over at
305 words, and will need minor trimming
before submission.
Amending and approving the argument has
no direct fiscal impact on the town.
If approved, it will be finalized and
submitted to me as the town's election
official no later than August 14th, with
the deadline to be submitted to the
Marin County Elections Office no later
than end of business on Monday, August
17th.
The council's action tonight is twofold:
amend and approve the argument language.
I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Any questions? Um did you say that it's
over 300 over 300 words?
>> Yes, Mayor Brechtal. It's 305 words.
>> So, we need to cut out five words.
>> Correct.
>> And I want to add two three words.
Um
Well, we can word smith this pretty
quickly by the on and the dash is
probably counting as two words.
>> Can we first see if we have it anybody
has any questions?
Okay. Now, we will move to
collective word smithing.
>> All right. Well, can I say something?
>> Yes, Bill.
>> You know, I I went with I think we've
all been through this because we
submitted statements and the county has
a certain way of counting words. Is that
the county saying this or is it local?
>> It is a mixture of myself and the
county.
>> I'm sorry, say again?
>> It's a combination of myself and the
county.
>> So, you have talked to the county. Okay,
because sometimes, you know, you can
what you think may be separate words,
you can count all as one word.
Okay, you've taken that into account?
>> I'm aware of that, Councilmember
Kirtcher.
>> Thank you, sir.
>> I can offer a suggestion.
>> Sure.
>> Um
I can take out one word, local paramedic
funding is set. Take out the now is now
set. That's one word. And then go up to
1 2 3 4
>> one thing
>> 5
>> If you just get rid of the on and the
dash and you just have voting yes will,
then we get rid of two words three times
without even editing. You see?
>> a good idea.
>> Yeah, cuz it says voting yes on and then
there's a dash. So, I'm thinking
assuming that on and the dash counts as
two words. All we need is voting yes.
>> Does that work for you, Zach?
» [clears throat]
>> It is my understanding that that dash is
a placeholder for the measured letter.
>> So, you're saying instead of saying
voting yes on
H, just vote yes.
>> If you take out all of those, then yes,
it would be under 300 words.
>> And and if somehow that doesn't work,
you can always if the that the
fourth bullet points is funds for
measure may for measure X may only be
used, it could just be funds may only be
used for local paramedic services.
That's if you need like something more
cuz that's the same thing. It's just it
kind of repeats the measure over and
over, but I think on and the dash gets
rid of it. Are you okay?
>> places where there's on and dash that we
could take those out.
>> Yep.
>> Right? So, take those out and
>> that should be eight.
>> Then I can get it get in my three words.
>> [laughter]
>> Oh, that's Yeah, right. You
What What's your What are your three
words?
>> me. I I wanted to and I think Council
Member Dowling started this off. Can you
tell us where
what your suggestion was?
>> What my five words were?
Is that what you're asking?
>> Yeah, I just I
>> Okay. Yes. My five My other four words
cuz I took out one word.
>> What was the Sorry, what was the first
one?
>> It was local paramedic funding is and
that's the last paragraph. Is set.
I take out now. It's not of any use.
>> Last paragraph?
>> No, the third paragraph.
>> Yeah.
>> I'm I'm sorry. I'm not clear on where it
is. Can you tell me?
>> Third paragraph down.
>> Okay.
>> Local paramedic funding is set.
>> So, you're saying get rid of the word
now?
>> Why don't we just say will expire
instead of is set to?
>> Okay.
>> How about will?
>> Will.
>> Now I'm getting more words.
>> Yeah.
>> [laughter]
>> Will
expire. So, that gets rid of now, set
to. So, we've got a We We got rid of two
words there. Good job.
>> Okay.
And then a list Mayor Pro Tem
Robbins, I think had the next
suggestions and yours were
>> I think it takes care of eight. I We get
rid of on and then the underline, which
I think is counting as a word all four
times.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, the first one is in the second
paragraph.
>> Yes.
>> Where it says voting yes on dash, you're just say voting yes
>> Exactly.
>> will ensure.
>> Yes.
>> Right? So, that gets rid of two. So, now
we're at negative four.
And then we go down to right before for
first set of bullet points.
>> Yes.
>> Voting yes on blank will you just want
to say voting yes will.
>> Correct.
>> [snorts]
>> So
that gets rid of two. So now we're at
-6.
And do you want to do the same in the
next
>> Well, let's just get rid of them all. I
mean
>> Okay, voting yes on
blank voting yes continues strict fiscal
accountability. So now we're that's -2.
So now we're at -8.
» Keep going. There's two more yet.
>> On dash. Yeah.
>> Maybe we keep the last one if they get
that far so that the measure so the
measure letter sticks in case there are
lots of measures on the ballot.
>> Okay.
>> I don't know. I mean we don't need we've
got extra words.
Then we get rid of eight and then keep
it keep it the letter at the very end.
>> If I if I may mayor, we are now at -11
which brings us to six below the 300.
>> Okay, so
>> That's getting rid of this one.
>> Yes, I'll I'll further discuss.
>> I I just have three
words that I want to add.
And it's in the second to the last line
of the first paragraph.
So I would add I'll just read the
sentence. As our community has grown in
emergency medical services evolve
dedicated local paramedic funding
now helps support. So I would add helps
and make support singular.
Two ambulances as well as
state-of-the-art fire department units
with trained paramedics and equipment. I
would add and equipment.
A board fire engines so that and then
nothing else changes.
>> Or are you sure that
I mean it covers equipment. I guess it
does.
>> I talked to Chief Mahoney this morning.
>> Okay.
>> Yes.
>> I mean I think that's fine.
You know, my real the edit I made was
what what we all agreed to on the ballot
wording, which was I took out the line
about response time so that we didn't go
into down the rabbit hole talking about
response times and paramedic ambulances
and fire engines. And there was a line
here that had the same, you know,
same comment about response times. And
that was really basically the only edit.
I mean, there were one or two words, but
otherwise
this was that was the same. And and Dan
had looked Dan Monihan looked at this
also and said it looked fine.
>> Well, I got a better understanding of
the financing for the paramedics. And part of it is
based
on the parcel tax, but part of it's
based on the billing.
>> Well, it's about 50/50.
>> It helps
>> So
>> helps support, I think, is more
accurate. And then
>> Oh, I see because the other
>> The parcel tax also pays for significant equipment that are put on
fire engines with paramedics.
>> Okay. I think helps is better. I mean,
because it doesn't support it fully.
>> Okay. Um
we [clears throat] have a brief Is there
Are there any other changes?
Can we have a brief discussion about who
should sign this argument? I would
suggest that each one of us agrees to
sign this argument.
>> That was my suggestion. I I I don't see
why we wouldn't.
>> I think it's a good idea.
>> I mean, the only reason we wouldn't is
sometimes we go out to community members
and try to have like the school board
president and our POA and uh you know,
age friendly. But I I don't know that it
really matters who signs it. I I think
it probably looks better if all five of
us sign it because then we're all united
in moving the paramedic parcel tax
forward and that if there
you know, as we've had differences of
opinions about other things, I think
it's great that that all it's clear that
the whole council wants you to vote for
this. There's not any split here.
>> What What's the deadline in getting this
to the county?
>> I think it's the 14th, which is why we
did it today, so that August 14th,
because our meeting on August 13th, I
thought was going to be too close.
>> Zack.
>> So, the deadline to get it into the town
clerk is August 14th. The deadline to
get it into the county is August 17th.
>> August 17th?
>> Yes, Mayor.
>> Okay, Matt, what are could you be
available to swing by and sign this
argument
um before that date?
» Sorry, what was the date?
» August 17th.
>> Yes.
>> Uh
August 14th, he needs to be at the town
clerk's office and signing it, cuz
that's what the resolution placing it on
the um ballot. So, you'll be back in
town.
Council member Salter will
>> Yeah, I'll be back. Sorry, I I I didn't
hear the date.
>> Yeah. Okay. Okay.
>> Hold on. I won't be back necessarily.
>> You can sign it right now. Yes.
>> I'll be happy to sign it now. In fact,
I'll sign anything other than a check.
>> You're not allowed to leave this room
until you sign.
>> printed final.
>> Okay, let's make a let's have a motion.
>> I move we approve this the wording as
edited,
and that all five of us sign it.
» Is there a second?
Can someone second the motion?
>> I will second it.
>> Awesome.
>> Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Robbins, second
by Council member Dowling. Mayor
McMillan?
>> Yes.
>> Mayor Pro Tem Robbins?
>> Yes.
>> Council member Kircher?
>> Yes.
>> Council member Dowling?
>> Yes.
>> Council member Salter?
>> Yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously, 5-0.
» Thank you. We're adjourned. Thank you
for being here.
>> committees to go on.
» Oh, so this should be wrapped up by
tomorrow.
What? Oh.
>> [laughter]
>> Long time coming.
Oh, that's good enough?
Okay.
What if
» Mhm.