Amid accusations of hidden agendas and recriminations over past behavior, Lagunitas School District trustees postponed until next week a vote on an agreement with the French Ranch subdivision to build and pay for separate sandfilter septic systems.

The amended contract would provide the district with property on French Ranch to install its own leach field, allow it to seek discharge permits independently of French Ranch, and effectively kill the possibility of building the pond-based wastewater system known as AIWPS.

However, it also commits the district to still work with the unpopular subdivision to build two septic systems of unspecified size, location, design, and cost. In addition, the contract provides French Ranch the sole discretion to break the contract if any further delays jeopardize construction.

Opponents of the agreement argued at the school board meeting Tuesday that trustees were rushing into a contract advantageous to French Ranch by letting the development expedite its construction because of its link with the school district.

Several district residents also questioned whether the original contract, which provided for joint construction of the pond-based system, was legally binding because of unresolved questions about the proposed system's ownership and cost-sharing provisions.

Other audience members accused the contract's opponents of targeting the school board for cooperating with French Ranch developer Bruce Burman, and school trustees Steve Charrier, Brian Dodd, and Jeanne Marlow insisted the board's detractors were continually shifting ground.

"There seems to be no end to the objections by the community," Dodd said. "The most telling presentation we heard tonight is that by pursuing this agreement we have entered the planning process. That, in my mind, is exactly what has been pursued tonight [by the agreement's opponents]...

"We are not in the position of serving French Ranch in this agreement," he insisted. "Those that want to stop French Ranch should seek another arena to do it."

Charrier said the school board has been acting in the best interest of the district throughout the protracted wastewater debate by seeking the cheapest alternative that gives the school the most flexibility for future growth.

He said the amended contract provides extra land for a leach field and saves the district money by sparing the expense of constructing and monitoring a mound-disposal system on school grounds. "A contract is always extended in good faith so that both parties get something out of it," he said.

At their last meeting two weeks ago, trustees instructed district counsel Suzanne Reed to work out an agreement with Burman and his lawyers absolving the district of its commitment to build the pond-based system with French Ranch without precluding future cooperation.

"My instructions were to work out an agreement with French Ranch, where French Ranch would give property to the district," Reed said. "It is very difficult to negotiate an agreement where French Ranch is going to give up property and not get anything in return."

But about 15 audience members spoke against the contract, disputing whether the developer was making any worthwhile concessions to the district. They urged trustees to strike a better deal or no make deal at all.

"If [Burman] was doing this out of goodness, he would just drop you from the contract," San Geronimo resident Pamalah MacNeily told trustees. "I'm flabbergasted that members of this public school board would come to the aid of a developer."

Todd Steiner of Forest Knolls argued that the school board has inappropriately involved itself in political issues unrelated to education by dealing with French Ranch

"This contract puts the school board in the position of supporting a development the community does not want," he said. "By signing this contract, you are putting yourself in the position of planning for the community."

Jacqueline Haber of Lagunitas demanded to know whether the amended contract was written out of fear that Burman would sue the district if they decided against building AIWPS.

"Mr. Burman," she asked, "does the threat of a lawsuit not exist?"

"We're not threatening the board," Burman responded after a moment's thought. "We're working cooperatively, as we have for the past five years."

Charrier also told the audience that the board was not under the threat of a lawsuit, and that it had fully considered the questionable legality of the original contract before amending it. "I'd like to know how we could effectively get in a better position than we are tonight," he asked trustees.

Yet trustee Jeanne Marlow asked attorney Reed if it might be possible to negotiate a deal in which the school could still get some French Ranch property, if French Ranch quits the agreement because of lengthy delays.

"I didn't get the feeling that Mr. Burman was prepared to hand over that property under any circumstances," Reed responded.

Trustees, who expressed doubts that the contract could be improved by setting up an ad hoc committee, or by waiting until two new trustees join the board in two weeks, decided to vote on the new agreement next Tuesday night.

Trustees Marlow and Charrier said any suggestions, comments, or questions about the agreement should be submitted to the district office by Friday morning.

After the meeting, trustee Richard Sloan, who has opposed dealing with French Ranch all along, said he doubted the contract could be improved as long as the district's counsel continues to talk more with French Ranch than with district residents.

"French Ranch has two lawyers," he said. "The district has none."