Council adopts Cal Green Tier 1 in one motion, racing a state deadline

The Council adopted Ordinances 1088 and 1089 in a single unanimous motion Wednesday night, amending the city's building code to Cal Green Tier 1 standards — 1088 applying to the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code and 1089 to the 2025 code. The provisions include electrification requirements for new construction and for remodels exceeding 50% of a building's value.

“Climate change is not something that requires a silver bullet... it's going to be silver buckshot, many many small things we all have to do.”— Tom Flynn, in public comment on the Cal Green ordinances

The timing was the whole argument. Staff told the Council a state legislative deadline restricts future local code updates until 2031, meaning provisions can be dialed back later if they prove burdensome but cannot be added. Assistant City Manager Shannon O'Hare noted that most studies show all-electric new construction is often at cost parity at the time of construction, while cautioning that cost-effectiveness studies analyze policy, not individual projects.

Public comment ran long and mostly in favor, including several students. "This building code update is an economically sensible step towards positive change needed now," said Paul Meerhoffer. Resident David Mahler argued the codes apply only to new construction, so few existing residents would be affected. The sharpest opposition came by phone from James Holmes: "Coerced electrification will be a windfall for PG&E... electricity is four times as expensive as natural gas, and we pay more for electricity than any state except Hawaii."

Council Member Gabe Pollson pressed the cost question from the dais, calculating that a 5.29% cost increase on a thousand units at half a million dollars each would place a $25 million burden on the development community, and saying he was both pro-greenhouse-gas-reduction and pro-fiscal-transparency. The city manager, joining by phone, countered that in his conversations with local developers, no one had named CEQA or code costs as the barrier to building: "I've never actually had one of them say CEQA or code costs were the barrier to construction. The barrier is land acquisition costs and mobilization." Both ordinances then passed on a voice vote with no opposition.

School district wants fencing at all three campuses, citing an insurance 'red citation'

Larkspur-Corte Madera School District staff came to the Council with plans to install perimeter and interior ornamental fencing at Cove Elementary, Hall Middle School and Neil Cummins Elementary. The district's safety task force, insurance carrier Keenan, and a community survey all fed into the recommendation, which the district says can be built to keep fields and park space accessible to the community after hours.

“The one red citation... is the lack of perimeter fencing.”— Superintendent Dr. Brett Geithman, on the district's insurance review

The task force and superintendent favored full perimeter fencing over interior-only fencing, telling the Council that between 89% and 95% of staff preferred the perimeter option — and pointing to the district's insurance review, where the sole red flag was the absence of perimeter fencing.

Council members focused on how the fences would work in practice. Vice Mayor Andre and Council Member Margaliss both asked whether Central Marin Police had weighed in on access points for emergency entry, with Margaliss also raising sliding-gate safety standards taken up after the Mark Day incident. Another council member asked how a fenced vehicle entrance would function when a parent needs to pick up a student mid-day at Hall Middle School. A parent in the audience asked what the other two community-identified safety priorities were and what the fencing project will cost in total.

No Council action was required; the item was presentation only.

ADU rewrite would let owners legalize pre-2020 units without building-code compliance

The Council unanimously introduced Ordinance 1090, a rewrite of Title 18 covering the definition of floor area (18.08.255), lot coverage percentages (18.20.050), maximum and minimum floor areas (18.35.050), and the whole of Chapter 18.23 on accessory and junior accessory dwelling units. The stated purposes: conform to new state law, untangle complicated code language, and clarify the floor area and lot coverage bonus for ADUs.

The provision with the most practical bite establishes a process to legalize unpermitted units built before 2020 without requiring building code compliance. Community Development Director Elise Semonian told the Council the city fielded 20 ADU applications in 2023, 27 in 2024, and is already at 16 this year, with roughly 15% of those seeking to legalize existing non-permitted units — and no extra fees or penalties allowed under state law.

A council member asked whether legalized pre-2020 units count toward the city's regional housing (RHNA) numbers. The motion to waive further reading and introduce the ordinance by title only passed unanimously, which sets up a second reading at a future meeting.