San Anselmo residents want their money back after pulling out of flood control district

By John Ramos

Two years ago, the town of San Anselmo voted to withdraw from a controversial flood control district.  But homeowners continued to be charged to support its operation. Now, advocates are saying they want that stopped and they want their money back.

San Anselmo has good reason to be concerned about flooding. The storm in December 2005 sent a river of water running through the downtown, and in 2007, homeowners began being taxed an average of $150 per year to support flood control projects. But now, after almost 20 years, and with $48 million collected and spent, residents say there hasn’t been a lot to show for the effort.  

And in San Anselmo, the residents’ revolt really gained steam after Marin County ordered the demolition of a town bridge, it called a flooding hazard, that contained a popular outdoor public plaza. Ross Asselstine was the leader of the opposition.

“Our town took the unique opportunity for the citizens to vote whether or not to stay in–and see this wasted money all the time — or withdraw from the district.  And the town voted to do that,” he said.

But there was a catch.  The residents could leave the district, but they would still have to pay the annual fee.  Marin County Supervisor Brian Colbert, who lives in San Anselmo, said that was explained in a legal document before the election.

“The town attorney and the county at that time said, even if you leave the district, you’re still going to be responsible for the fee, right?” he said. “So, this is not a new posture that’s been taken. And there’s more than these projects that the fee is being used for.” 

But Asselstine disputes that. He said the legal ruling actually said that residents would be responsible to pay for projects that existed at the time of the vote. And in the meantime, the bridge demolition has been cancelled and another project, the removal of an old fish ladder in the town of Ross, has been put on hold.

Those are the only two projects listed in a 2025 district report, and they were halted after FEMA ruled the obstructions could not be removed because they would simply cause greater flooding to communities downstream.

“It came with obligations of what was underway at that time, which is legitimate. But what has happened is those projects that were an obligation are now either ceased or the smaller contracts are completed. So, the money they’ve collected from us for the last two years, and the money they intend to collect from us next year, was to go against obligations in 2024 which are no longer valid.”

Colbert still supports collecting the fee again next year, even though he too has his concerns about how the money has been spent in the past.

“I’m sure not going to say that the program has been a success as what it’s been, right?  I mean, certainly not,” he said. “But that does not mean we cannot continue to try, as long as it exists for this last year, to continue the projects that we have, and be good public stewards and try and address and alleviate flooding.”

It’s the “last year” because the fee sunsets in 2027.  But Asselstine is standing on principal and says not only should next year’s fee be halted, but the money that has been collected since 2024 should be refunded.

“San Anselmo citizens voted on a legal document, with information from a legal document,” he said.  “And we need to go back to that document and say, ‘yes or no. Applies or doesn’t.’  And then give us our money back.”

It’s hard to see how that would happen, absent a lawsuit. Asselstine says he would like to avoid that and hopes the district will decide to refund the money voluntarily.