Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20111019 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 11-28 Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District Meeting 11-28 SPECIAL MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Administrative Office 330 Distel Circle Los Altos,California Wednesday, October 19, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT BEGINS AT 6:00 P.M.* SPECIAL MEETING 6:00 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT— PUBLIC SESSION i I ROLL CALL SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY Resolution Honoring Assemblymember Rich Gordon ADOPTION OF AGENDA 6:05* CONSENT CALENDAR I. Approve Minutes of the District's Special and Regular Meeting—None 2. Approve Revised Claims Report 3. Approve Written Communications—None 6:10* BOARD BUSINESS 4. Consideration of General Counsel Recruitment Process Timeline Candidate Profile and Transition Process; Authorize the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee to Undertake Next Steps in the Recruitment Process— Board Appointee Evaluation Committee 5. Consideration of District Ward BoundaryRe-Alignment(Redistricting)—C. Cleve g � g) 9:00* ADJOURNMENT *Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed.Agenda is subject to change of order. TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: The President will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the Board concerning other matters during Oral Communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately,you may comment to the Board by a written communication,which the Board appreciates. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,if you need assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the District Clerk at(650)691-1200. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. Written materials relating to an item on this Agenda that are considered to be a public record and are distributed to Board members less than 72 hours prior to the meeting,will be available for public inspection at the District's Administrative Office located at 330 Distel Circle,Los Altos,California 94022. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA 1,Michelle Radcliffe,District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(MROSD),declare that the foregoing amended agenda for the Special Meeting of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on October 12,2011,at the Administrative Offices of MROSD,330 Distel Circle, Los Altos California,94022. The agenda is also available on the District's web site at littp://www.openspace.org. Signed this 12"day of October,at Los Altos,California. District Clerk October 12,2011 L Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date 10/19/11 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16075 $85,254.02 TRAK Microwave Corporation Equipment For District Radio Project 16076 $58,459.04 Product Source International Equipment For District Radio Project Datacomm 16077 $17,100.00 *1 Pacific Underground Services Water System Improvements-Folger Ranch House Project 16078 $5,455.00 Timothy C. Best,CEG Geotechnical Consultant For Construction Oversight,Testing And Final Reporting For The Big Dipper Ranch Roads Restoration Project 16079 $5,048.78 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Excavator And Dozer For Road Maintenance &Culvert Replacement At Various Preserves 16080 $5,000.00 Omega Coaching Preparation&Facilitation Of Board And Staff Retreat 16081 $5,000.00 *2 Catering By Dana Deposit-Catering For Volunteer Recognition Event 16082 $4,874.95 Videografix Video Services For Veteran Interviews At Mt.Umunhum Event 16083 $3,894.06 Ecological Concerns Native Revegetation Maintenance&Monitoring-Skyline Ridge Tree Farm 16084 $3,726.92 County Of Santa Clara Parks& District's Share Of Consultant Services To Develop Guadalupe Recreation Department River Watershed Mercury TMDL Coordinated Monitoring Plan 16085 $3,700.00 D&J Septic Risers&Plumbing Services-Rental Residences 16086 $3,684.93 The Ferguson Group Legislative Consultant-Lobbyist For Mt.Umunhum 16087 $3,230.00 Conscious Creative Web Development For Openspace.org 16088 $3,214.49 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services-Personnel 16089 $2,950.00 Minh Le Leadership Consulting Services 16090 $2,322.22 Ecological Concerns Native Revegetation Maintenance&Monitoring-Skyline Ridge Tree Farm Phase III 16091 $2,087.40 PT Armor Body Armor 16092 $1,616.64 Accountemps Accounting Temp 16093 $1,600.00 Rutherford&Chekene Structural&Geotechnical Assessment-Mt.Umunhum Radar Tower 16094 $1,600.00 Hazard Management Services Consulting Services-Safety Manual Revisions 16095 $1,540.00 Koff&Associates Classification&Compensation Study Expenses 16096 $1,519.41 Big Creek Lumber Puncheon-Purisima Creek Redwoods 16097 $1,483.75 The Sign Shop Additional Signs For Mt. Umunhum 16098 $1,439.57 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Excavator For Thornwood Trail Improvement Project 16099 $1,288.83 Pine Cone Lumber Puncheon Supplies/Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16100 $1,267.72 Sunnyvale Ford Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16101 $1,259.38 Sol's Mobile Service Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16102 $1,245.70 Jakaby Engineering Bridge Design&Engineering-Thornewood 16103 $1,220.31 Office Team Office Temp-Real Property Administrative Assistant 16104 $1,172.00 Communication&Control Radio Repeater Site Rent-Tomita Hill 16105 $1,164.83 Redwood General Tire Company Tires 16106 $1,051.01 New World Systems Integrated Accounting And Financial System Software& Implementation Services 16107 $1,000.00 *3 Pro-Installers Deposit For Wood Insert-Rental Residence 16108 $1,000.00 *4 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Land Acquisition 16109 $871.25 Bill's Towing Service Towing Services 16110 $840.00 *5 John Gilbert Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16111 $756.33 Lab Safety Supply Field Supplies/Out Of Service Tags/Ear Plugs/Hand Cleaner 16112 $718,56 Moffett Supply Company Janitorial Supplies 16113 $650.00 Diane West-Bourke Docent&Volunteer Enrichment Training 16114 $627.92 Del Woods Consulting Services-Bear Creek Stables Site Assessment, RFP &Lease Development Page 1 of 3 Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date 10/19/11 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16115 $583.73 Fitzsimons,Renee Reimbursement-Docent Training Supplies/National Association For Interpretation Workshop Expenses/Mileage 16116 $550.00 Aaron's Septic Tank Service Pumping Services-Rental Residence 16117 $539.47 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16118 $524.50 San Jose Water Company Water Service-RSA 16119 $496.46 Simms Plumbing&Water Equipment Pump Replacement&Recalibrated-Rental Residence 16120 $487.50 Normal Data Consulting Services-Citation Database Maintenance 16121 $477.49 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies/Flexible Liner For Pole Saw/Chainsaw Parts 16122 $460.13 Great Printing&Copies Printing Services-Spaces&Species Field Trip Passports 16123 $454.65 Interstate Traffic Control Products Sign Posts For Mount Umunhum Closure Signs 16124 $449.24 Reed&Graham Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16125 $397.50 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 16126 $370.56 Recology South Bay Dumpster Service-FFO 16127 $363.00 Ergovera Ergonomic Evaluations&Recommendations 16128 $350.00 '6 Jamie Kerr Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16129 $335.18 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO,Windy Hill&Rental Residence 16130 $327.48 Degree HVAC Water Heater Repair-Rental Residence 16131 $325.00 American Red Cross CPR Recertification Training 16132 $320.77 Costco Office&Break Room Supplies 16133 $305.00 County Of San Mateo Assessors Office Mailing Address Database For Public Notification 16134 $290.00 Able Septic Tank Service Sewer Line Video Inspection-Rental Residence 16135 $286.81 Metro Mobile Communications Installation Of New Mobile Radio In Maintenance Truck 16136 $257.87 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 16137 $246.55 ADT Security Services Alarm Service-SFO 16138 $233.60 Geo Options Erosion Blankets For Pulgas Ridge Restoration 16139 $199,88 G&K Services Shop Towel Service-SFO&FFO 16140 $180.64 Allied Waste Services Garbage Service-Rental Residences 16141 $145.49 R&B Company Plumbing Supplies For Rancho De Guadalupe 16142 $141.35 Sanguinetti,David Reimbursement-Mileage 16143 $138.92 San Jose Mercury News Annual Subscription 16144 $120.00 Glasser Kolly Labor Relations Consultant Services-Labor Negotiations&Labor Relations 16145 $109.30 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies/Supplies For Annex Repairs/SFO Shop Supplies 16146 $109.00 Coastal Sierra Internet Service-SFO 16147 $100.00 City Of Palo Alto Utilities Utility Fees-Black Mountain 16148 $100.00 Hoge, Fenton,Jones&Appel Legal Services-Chiocchi Litigation 16149 $92.71 Fleet Services Fuel 16150 $88.33 West Coast Aggregates Gabion Rock For Trail Repair At Bear Creek Redwoods 16151 $88.20 Waste Management Of Guadalupe Waste Disposal-Fence At SAO Disposal Company 16152 $86.60 Alexander,Zachary Reimbursement-Field Supplies 16153 $78.42 Lord&Sons Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16154 $71.00 Terminix Pest Control-AO 16155 $71.00 County Of Santa Clara-Office Of The Fingerprinting Services Sheriff 16156 $62.99 Tom McFall Refund-Web Store Merchandise 16157 $60.07 R. E. Borrmann's Steel Company Supplies For Mt. Umunhum Closure Signs 16158 $60.00 Newburn,Michael Reimbursement-Cell Phone 16159 $59.94 Andersen,Julie Reimbursement-Mileage 16160 $59.27 Gibson,Teresa Reimbursement-Mileage 16161 $57.75 Protection One Fire Inspection&Monitoring-AO 16162 $53.20 Recognition Specialties Name Badges For Staff Page 2 of 3 Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date 10/19/11 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16163 $51.23 Jurgensen,Rudy Reimbursement-Mileage 16164 $51.17 Eichhorn, Louise Reimbursement-Mileage 16165 $47.24 Gou,Vicky Reimbursement-Staff Photo Contest Expenses 16166 $46.70 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Replace Toggle Switch For Spotlight 16167 $43.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 16168 $29.04 State Board Of Equalization Diesel Fuel Tax 16169 $23.79 Orlandi Trailer Trailer Supplies-Tow Safety Hooks 16170 $23.79 O'Reilly Auto Parts Fuel Stabilizer 16171 $9.99 Grainger Pest Control Supplies Total $254,027.52 *1 Urgent check issued 10/3/11 *2 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *3 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *4 Urgent check issued 10/3/11 *5 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *6 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 Page 3 of 3 ` Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date October 19, 2011 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16075 $85,254.02 TRAK Microwave Corporation Equipment For District Radio Project 16076 $58,459.04 Product Source International Equipment For District Radio Project Datacomm 16077 $17,100.00 *1 Pacific Underground Services Water System Improvements-Folger Ranch House Project 16078 $5,455.00 Timothy C.Best,CEG Geotechnical Consultant For Construction Oversight,Testing And Final Reporting For The Big Dipper Ranch Roads Restoration Project 16079 $5,048.78 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Excavator And Dozer For Road Maintenance &Culvert Replacement At Various Preserves 16080 $5,000.00 Omega Coaching Preparation&Facilitation Of Board And Staff Retreat 16081 $5,000.00 *2 Catering By Dana Deposit-Catering For Volunteer Recognition Event 16082 $4,874.95 Videografix Video Services For Veteran Interviews At Mt.Umunhum Event 16083 $3,894.06 Ecological Concerns Native Revegetation Maintenance&Monitoring-Skyline Ridge Tree Farm 16084 $3,726.92 County Of Santa Clara Parks& District's Share Of Consultant Services To Develop Guadalupe Recreation Department River Watershed Mercury TMDL Coordinated Monitoring Plan 16085 $3,700.00 D&J Septic Risers&Plumbing Services-Rental Residences 16086 $3,684.93 The Ferguson Group Legislative Consultant-Lobbyist For Mt.Umunhum 16087 $3,230.00 Conscious Creative Web Development For Openspace.org 16088 $3,214.49 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services-Personnel 16089 $2,950.00 Minh Le Leadership Consulting Services 16090 $2,322.22 Ecological Concerns Native Revegetation Maintenance&Monitoring-Skyline Ridge Tree Farm Phase III 16091 $2,087.40 PT Armor Body Armor 16092 $1,616.64 Accountemps Accounting Temp 16093 $1,600.00 Rutherford&Chekene Structural&Geotechnical Assessment-Mt.Umunhum Radar Tower 16094 $1,600.00 Hazard Management Services Consulting Services-Safety Manual Revisions 16095 $1,540.00 Koff&Associates Classification&Compensation Study Expenses 16096 $1,519.41 Big Creek Lumber Puncheon-Purisima Creek Redwoods 16097 $1,483.75 The Sign Shop Additional Signs For Mt. Umunhum 16098 $1,439.57 Hertz Equipment Rental Equipment Rental-Excavator For Thornwood Trail Improvement Project 16099 $1,288.83 Pine Cone Lumber Puncheon Supplies/Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16100 $1,267.72 Sunnyvale Ford Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16101 $1,259.38 Sol's Mobile Service Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16102 $1,245.70 Jakaby Engineering Bridge Design&Engineering-Thornewood 16103 $1,220.31 Office Team Office Temp-Real Property Administrative Assistant 16104 $1,172.00 Communication&Control Radio Repeater Site Rent-Tomita Hill 16105 $1,164.83 Redwood General Tire Company Tires 16106 $1,051.01 New World Systems Integrated Accounting And Financial System Software& Implementation Services 16107 $1,000.00 *3 Pro-Installers Deposit For Wood Insert-Rental Residence 16108 $1,000.00 *4 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Land Acquisition 16109 $871.25 Bill's Towing Service Towing Services 16110 $840.00 *5 John Gilbert Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16111 $756.33 Lab Safety Supply Field Supplies/Out Of Service Tags/Ear Plugs/Hand Cleaner 16112 $718.56 Moffett Supply Company Janitorial Supplies 16113 $650.00 Diane West-Bourke Docent&Volunteer Enrichment Training 16114 $627.92 Del Woods Consulting Services-Bear Creek Stables Site Assessment,RFP &Lease Development Page 1 of 4 Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date October 19, 2011 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16115 $583.73 Fitzsimons,Renee Reimbursement-Docent Training Supplies/National Association For Interpretation Workshop Expenses/Mileage 16116 $550.00 Aaron's Septic Tank Service Pumping Services-Rental Residence 16117 $539.47 CMK Automotive Vehicle Maintenance&Repairs 16118 $524.50 San Jose Water Company Water Service-RSA 16119 $496.46 Simms Plumbing&Water Equipment Pump Replacement&Recalibrated-Rental Residence 16120 $487.50 Normal Data Consulting Services-Citation Database Maintenance 16121 $477.49 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies/Flexible Liner For Pole Saw/Chainsaw Parts 16122 $460.13 Great Printing&Copies Printing Services-Spaces&Species Field Trip Passports 16123 $454.65 Interstate Traffic Control Products Sign Posts For Mount Umunhum Closure Signs 16124 $449.24 Reed&Graham Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16125 $397.50 Del Rey Building Maintenance Janitorial Supplies-AO 16126 $370.56 Recology South Bay Dumpster Service-FFO 16127 $363.00 Ergovera Ergonomic Evaluations&Recommendations 16128 $350.00 '6 Jamie Kerr Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16129 $335.18 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO,Windy Hill&Rental Residence 16130 $327.48 Degree HVAC Water Heater Repair-Rental Residence 16131 $325.00 American Red Cross CPR Recertification Training 16132 $320.77 Costco Office&Break Room Supplies 16133 $305.00 County Of San Mateo Assessors Office Mailing Address Database For Public Notification 16134 $290.00 Able Septic Tank Service Sewer Line Video Inspection-Rental Residence 16135 $286.81 Metro Mobile Communications Installation Of New Mobile Radio In Maintenance Truck 16136 $257.87 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expenses 16137 $246.55 ADT Security Services Alarm Service-SFO 16138 $233.60 Geo Options Erosion Blankets For Pulgas Ridge Restoration 16139 $199.88 G&K Services Shop Towel Service-SFO&FFO 16140 $180.64 Allied Waste Services Garbage Service-Rental Residences 16141 $145.49 R&B Company Plumbing Supplies For Rancho De Guadalupe 16142 $141.35 Sanguinetti,David Reimbursement-Mileage 16143 $138.92 San Jose Mercury News Annual Subscription 16144 $120.00 Glasser Kolly Labor Relations Consultant Services-Labor Negotiations&Labor Relations 16145 $109.30 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies/Supplies For Annex Repairs/SFO Shop Supplies 16146 $109.00 Coastal Sierra Internet Service-SFO 16147 $100.00 City Of Palo Alto Utilities Utility Fees-Black Mountain 16148 $100.00 Hoge,Fenton,Jones&Appel Legal Services-Chiocchi Litigation 16149 $92.71 Fleet Services Fuel 16150 $88.33 West Coast Aggregates Gabion Rock For Trail Repair At Bear Creek Redwoods 16151 $88.20 Waste Management Of Guadalupe Waste Disposal-Fence At SAO Disposal Company 16152 $86.60 Alexander,Zachary Reimbursement-Field Supplies 16153 $78.42 Lord&Sons Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16154 $71.00 Terminix Pest Control-AO 16155 $71.00 County Of Santa Clara-Office Of The Fingerprinting Services Sheriff 16156 $62.99 Tom McFall Refund-Web Store Merchandise 16157 $60.07 R.E.Borrmann's Steel Company Supplies For Mt.Umunhum Closure Signs 16158 $60.00 Newburn,Michael Reimbursement-Cell Phone 16159 $59.94 Andersen,Julie Reimbursement-Mileage 16160 $59.27 Gibson,Teresa Reimbursement-Mileage 16161 $57.75 Protection One Fire Inspection&Monitoring-AO 16162 $53.20 Recognition Specialties Name Badges For Staff Page 2 of 4 Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date October 19, 2011 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 16163 $51.23 Jurgensen,Rudy Reimbursement-Mileage 16164 $51.17 Eichhorn, Louise Reimbursement-Mileage 16165 $47.24 Gou,Vicky Reimbursement-Staff Photo Contest Expenses 16166 $46.70 Priority 1 Public Safety Equipment Replace Toggle Switch For Spotlight 16167 $43.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 16168 $29.04 State Board Of Equalization Diesel Fuel Tax 16169 $23.79 Orlandi Trailer Trailer Supplies-Tow Safety Hooks 16170 $23.79 O'Reilly Auto Parts Fuel Stabilizer 16171 $9.99 Grainger Pest Control Supplies 16172 R $5,500.00 Peckham&Mckenney Recruitment Expenses-General Counsel 16173 R $3,459.99 '7 Home Depot Field Supplies/Retaining Wall Material For A-Frame/Repairs& Supplies For Annex Remodel Project/Supplies For DHF/Pest Control Supplies/Supplies For Thornewood Trail Improvement Project 16174 R $3,185.00 Nic Denko Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16175 R $2,170.00 Don Langrock Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16176 R $1,330.00 Ray Weikal Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16177 R $1,302.63 Tadco Supply Janitorial Supplies 16178 R $1,295.00 Heath Lukatch Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16179 R $1,120.00 Tim Johnson Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16180 R $1,050.00 Gordon Von Richter Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16181 R $875.00 David Reichling Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16182 R $770.00 Ron Haddix Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16183 R $770.00 Wayne Davison Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16184 R $630.00 Susan Kahn Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16185 R $630.00 Al LaPierre Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16186 R $547.16 United Site Services Sanitation Services-Sierra Azul&Fremont Older 16187 R $420.00 Bonita Twombly Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16188 R $350,00 Peter Kasenchak Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16189 R $350.00 Linda Schweizer Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16190 R $350.00 Nancy Serrurier Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16191 R $350.00 Keith Besten Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16192 R $280.42 Stevens Creek Quarry Road&Trail Repairs At Picchetti Ranch 16193 R $210.00 Pam Stratton Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16194 R $210.00 Patrick Dillane Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16195 R $210.00 Steve Peterson Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16196 R $186.00 Jed Cyr Reimbursement-Travel Expenses For Special Park Districts Forum 16197 R $175.00 Michael Rosenthal Reimbursement-Slender False Brome Treatment 16198 R $68.64 West Valley Collection&Recycling Garbage Service-SAO 16199 R $68.18 Robert's Hardware Plumbing Supplies-Rental Residence 16200 R $40.59 United Parcel Service Parcel Shipping 16201 R $26.25 Rayne Of San Jose Water Service-Fremont Older Page 3 of 4 Claims No. 11-17 Meeting 11-28 Date October 19, 2011 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description Total $281,957.38 *1 Urgent check issued 10/3/11 *2 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *3 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *4 Urgent check issued 10/3/11 *5 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *6 Urgent check issued 10/5/11 *7 Urgent check issued 10/14/11 Page 4 of 4 For S.E& hEN Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District A R-1 1-107 Meeting 11-28 October 19, 2011 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM Approve the Proposed General Counsel Recruitment Process, Timeline, Candidate Profile and Transition Plan; Authorize the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee to Work with Recruiter on Next Steps in the Recruitment Process; Approve Transition Plan for Temporary Services until Appointment of General Counsel BOARD APPOINTEE EVALUATION AD HOC COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION 1. Discuss and approve the Proposed General Counsel Recruitment Process, Timeline, and Candidate Profile. 2. Assign the Board Appointee Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee to work with the recruitment firm of Peckham and McKenney to: initiate advertisement for the General Counsel position, to solicit applications, to review and screen applications and recommend the first group of top qualified applicants, and return to the Board for review and approval. 3. Approve the transition plan for temporary services in the General Counsel position until appointment of new General Counsel. SUMMARY The Board of Directors tasked the Board Appointee Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee with the initial steps of a recruitment process for a successor to the District's General Counsel as a result of her retirement announcement. The Ad Hoc Committee completed these tasks, and at your meeting of September 28, 2011, you authorized retention of the recruitment firm of Peckham and McKenney to conduct the search. You also authorized the Committee to work with the recruitment firm and return to the Board with a proposed recruitment process, timeline, and candidate profile. The Committee recommends that the Board discuss and approve the recruitment process, timeline and candidate profile attached to this report. The Committee also recommends approval of the transition process as set out in this report until appointment of a new General Counsel and requests that it be authorized to work with the recruiter on the next steps in the recruitment process. i R-11-107 Page 2 DISCUSSION At the Board's meeting of August 24, 2011,the Board assigned the task of developing and recommending a General Counsel recruitment plan to the Board Appointee Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee including recommending an executive search firm (see Report R-11-90). At the Board's meeting of September 28, 2011, you approved the selection of the recruitment firm Peckham and McKenney(Peckham)to assist the District with this search. You also directed the Board Appointee Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee(Committee)to work with Peckham on a proposed recruitment process, timeline, and candidate profile(see Report R-11-99). p p � On October 5, 2011, the Committee met with Bobbi Peckham, the firm's Principal who will be the lead recruiter for this search, to review her draft search process, timeline and candidate profile. The Committee discussed and refined these materials with Ms. Peckham to reflect what the Committee believes will result in the best search outcome. The General Counsel and General Manager also provided input. The proposed process, timeline, and candidate profile are attached to this report for the Board's discussion and approval. Ms. Peckham will attend the Board meeting to receive the Board's input and direction regarding these documents. After receiving the Board's input and direction, the Committee also requests that it be directed to work with Ms. Peckham on the necessary next steps in the search process. Ms. Peckham will review these steps in further detail at the Board meeting. Recruitment Process The recommended recruitment process and timeline is summarized in Attachment 1 to this report. Ms. Peckham will review this process with the Board on October 19th to receive Board comment, answer any questions, and receive Board direction. Timeline As the timeline set out in Attachment 1 indicates, a robust search will require interviews in January. Once the Board has conducted interviews and identified its top candidate, time will be required to negotiate a contract, conduct a thorough reference and background check, and allow the selected finalist time to provide notice to his or her current employer and prepare to begin District employment. This requires a transition plan to insure that there is not a gap between the vacancy in the General Counsel position which will begin on Dec. 31", 2011 and the appointment of the new counsel. The Committee discussed the optimum transition plan and recommends that the current General Counsel continue to serve until the appointment of her successor. The incumbent would serve as a post-retirement employee for the short transition period. This plan would result in net cost savings of $4,749.00 per month to the District since the Board would not be employing a regular District employee with associated benefit costs. R-11-107 Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT The Board approved the following recruitment costs at its meeting of September 28, 2011: A recruitment cost of$16,500 plus a not-to-exceed figure of$7,000 for expenses, such as brochure preparation. These funds were not included in the FY2011-12 budget. The Board will be requested to authorize additional funds for this purpose at the time of midyear budget adjustment. The fiscal impact of the transition plan, if approved, will result in a cost savings of$4,749 per month of service. PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice of this Agenda item was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) and no environmental review is required. NEXT STEPS If the Board approves the Committee's recommendations, the Committee will work with the firm throughout the process and return to the Board with leading candidates for full Board interviews, senior management input, further interviews of finalists if desired, and final selection. Attachments: 1. Recruitment Process and Timeline 2. Candidate Profile 3. Detailed Description of Recruitment Process Prepared by: Board Appointee Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee: Directors Cyr, Hassett, and Riffle Contact person: Curt Riffle, Chair i T1mellne !Recruitment Plan October 5, 2011 Ms. Peckham meets with BAE Ad Hoc Committee (BAE) to discuss recruitment plan, timeline, and draft candidate profile. October 6, 2011 Ms. Peckham drafts recruitment plan, timeline, draft candidate profile, and ad text for BAE review by October 10. October 19, 2011 BAE provides proposed recruitment plan, timeline, brochure, and draft profile for full Board review and comment. October 20 — 28, 2011 Draft profile is finalized ■ Marketing brochure is designed, printed, and distributed throughout industry ■ Ads are placed ■ Position is listed on web sites of P&M and District October 31 — December 2, 2011 ■ Ms. Peckham conducts aggressive outreach campaign to identify outstanding candidates for position. ■ Regular status updates are provided to BAE Committee. December 2, 2011 Final Filing Deadline — date upon which all resumes must be submitted to P&M. December 2-5, 2011 ■ Ms. Peckham reviews all resumes received and identifies top 12 (+/-) candidates. ■ Ms. Peckham electronically sends December 5 full list of all applicants (names/titles/agencies) as well as cover letters & resumes of top 12 (+/-) candidates to BAE. December 7, 2011 - 2:30 p.m. ■ Ms. Peckham/BAE Conference Call to review all information received. ■ Leading candidates are identified for further consideration. • Full list of applicants with leading candidates denoted is provided to full Board electronically for consideration and comment. December 12, 2011 Board provides comment (if any) to Ms. Peckham by 3:00 p.m. December 13-16, 2011 E Ms. Peckham send final list of leading candidates to BAE N Ms. Peckham sends supplemental questionnaires to leading candidates; due to P&M by December 16 a P&M advises all candidates of their status in the recruitment process. December 19-30, 2011 a Ms. Peckham send results of questionnaires to BAE 0 Ms. Peckham conducts preliminary interviews with leading candidates. January 2, 2012 — 11:00 a.m. a Ms. Peckham meets with BAE to review results of supplemental questionnaires & preliminary interviews. 0 Subcommittee selects leading 5-7 candidates for full Board interviews. January 9-13, 2012 (date and time - Board interviews leading 5-7 candidates. General to be determined) Manager observes. 0 Leading 2-3 candidates are determined. 0 Board discusses next steps (2nd interviews, Sr. Management Team interviews, etc.) January 16-27, 2012 0 2nd interview process with full Board; decision made • Background/reference checks conducted. • Offer/negotiation with finalist candidate. • Announcement of selection. February 27, 2012 Anticipated start date for new General Counsel General Counsel Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Los Altos, C The District Open space lands offer a respite from everyday life, a source of clean air and water and local agriculture, and an opportunity to experience and learn about the diverse natural environment that contributes to our quality of life. The late 1960's was a time of rapid growth in the Bay Area. As tract housing and commercial development began to dominate the "Valley of Heart's Delight," concern for the preservation of irreplaceable foothill and bayland natural resources mounted among open space advocates. Through the determined and heartfelt efforts of local conservationists, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District was created by successfully placing an initial voter initiative on the ballot in 1972. Thirty-nine years later, the District has permanently preserved nearly 60,000 acres of mountainous, foothill, and bayland open space, creating 26 open space preserves. The District covers an area of 550 square miles and includes 17 cities and adjoining unincorporated areas in San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties. The District is working to form a continuous greenbelt of permanently protected open space by linking its lands with other public parklands. In addition, the District participates in cooperative efforts such as the Bay Trail, Ridge Trail, and Coastal Trail which are regional trail systems that include and/or connect to District lands. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's Mission is: "'to acquire and preserve a regional greenbelt of open space land in perpetuity; protect and restore the natural environment; and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education". The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District invites you to visit its web site at www.openspace.org. The Organization Headquartered in Los Altos, California, the District is divided into seven geographic wards, each containing approximately 100,000 constituents and represented by an elected Board member for a four-year term. Appointed by the Board of Directors, the General Manager oversees a staff of 97 permanent and a dozen seasonal employees as well as a FY 2011/12 budget of $43.4M. The approximately 25 permanent staff at each of two field offices provides patrol, maintenance, and visitor services. Rangers are primarily responsible for the day-to-day patrol and visitor contact on the District's preserves. All Rangers are sworn law enforcement officers and unarmed but trained in defensive tactics, and trained in fire suppression, emergency medical response, and resource management techniques. The field staff includes permanent and seasonal Open Space Technicians and Equipment Mechanic-Operators, all of whom are responsible for maintaining the District's land and facilities, building and maintaining the trail system, and performing resource management activities within the preserves. Located at the District's headquarters, administrative staff includes professionals in open space planning, resource management, real property, public affairs (including volunteer and docent programs), and environmental analysis, in addition to legal, human resources, administration, and accounting staff. The District's Legal Department currently includes the General Counsel, Assistant General Counsel, and part-time administrative assistant, The District's primary revenue source is a share of the annual total property tax collected within the District. Other revenue sources may include federal and state grants, interest and rental income, donations, land gifts, and bond and note issues. The overall financial health of the District is strong and stable, although adequate funding to allow a balanced approach to land acquisition, resource management, and public access is expected to become a challenge. The District continues to focus on its future. The staff and Board of Directors recently completed a Strategic Plan with the vision of accomplishing all elements of its mission in a balanced, fiscally prudent, and sustainable manner. The District's goal is to strategically acquire and preserve open space, meet its natural resource management challenges, and provide compatible public access in the context of changing demographics and increasing costs of land, land management, and maintenance and resource management. Key programs currently under way at the District include the following: Open Space Planning— Opportunities for public recreation are balanced with natural resource protection through a comprehensive planning approach in partnership with the community. New trails and staging areas are built with state-of-the-art environmentally sound construction techniques. Natural resource restoration is a key component of project development. Resource Management—The District has a long and proud history of responsible stewardship of open space lands and a high level of responsiveness to community needs. The District works to address critical resource management issues by working with its neighbors, partnering agencies, and resource professionals to restore the diversity and integrity of the area's natural resources. Land Acquisition Program—The District's land acquisition goals focus on preserving a regional greenbelt providing opportunities to protect natural resources, provide for compatible public access, and address environmental challenges. The District seeks to work with public and non-profit partners to accomplish these goals. Due to the threat of development and sprawl in coastal San Mateo County, the District has partnered with coastsiders to share the important responsibility of protecting coastal land. The goal of the District's Coastside Protection Program is to protect important open space and agricultural land. The Position This opportunity is available due to the upcoming retirement of Sue Schectman, who has served as the District's highly effective and respected General Counsel since 1994. Appointed by and reporting to the District's Board of Directors, the new General Counsel will enjoy the benefits of a politically stable environment; a collegial, well- functioning Board; and an outstanding organization of extremely competent, educated, and dedicated staff in a highly collaborative work environment. Under policy direction from the District's Board of Directors, the General Counsel provides a wide range of legal services to the Board, Board Committees, the General Manager, and District Departments. To fulfill this key role, the candidate must have demonstrated expertise in public agency law including contracting, environmental law and specifically CEQA, elections law, public record and open meeting laws, conflict of interest law, risk management, employment and labor law, real property law, and litigation. The General Counsel will be respectful of their and others' roles within the organization and will be sensitive in overseeing legal issues rather than setting policy. The selected candidate will be a person of unquestionable ethics and integrity. He or she will be open, fair, impartial, transparent, collaborative and committed to working as an integral part of the District's senior management team. The candidate will be accessible to the Board, the General Manager and staff, responsive to deadlines, and demonstrate professional and respectful behavior in all circumstances. As a member of the team, the candidate must be able to work closely and well with the District's General Manager to advance the District's mission and goals. At the same time, the General Counsel must remain an independent Board appointee, willing to express differing opinions from a legal perspective as necessary, always keeping the best interests of the District and its mission paramount. The candidate selected will have a strong work ethic and be responsive and decisive. He or she will be results-oriented and a creative problem-solver. Outstanding communications skills and the ability to explain complex legal issues in a clear and understandable manner, both in written materials and verbally, are required. The individual selected will have the ability to professionally represent the District and develop effective working relationships with constituents, outside agencies, District partners, and the public. The General Counsel will be proactive in protecting the District's interests, alert to emerging legal issues, and able to identify such issues so that they can be addressed and potential liability avoided. When necessary, the General Counsel must be able to provide strong management, oversight and coordination with outside counsel while being fiscally conscious and sensitive to associated costs. In addition, it is expected that the General Counsel will bring their own network of industry contacts in order to share information and confer on issues. At least five years of increasingly responsible experience, including two years' supervisory experience, in the practice of public agency law directly advising an elected legislative body is required. The equivalent of a Juris Doctorate degree from an accredited law school as well as membership in the State Bar of California is required. Most importantly, the candidate selected will be dedicated to public service and to the mission of the District. The Compensation The District is offering an attractive annual salary depending upon the qualifications of the selected candidate. In addition, the District provides an exceptional benefits package that includes California PERS retirement (2.5% at 55 plan). Search Schedule Resume filing deadline December 2, 2011 Preliminary Interviews December 19-30, 2011 Recommendation of Candidates January 2, 2012 Final Interview Process January 10, 2012 Proposed Start Date February 2012 These dates have been confirmed, and it is recommended that you plan your calendar accordingly. The Recruitment Process To apply for this outstanding career opportunity, please send your resume and cover letter electronically to: Peckham & McKenney apply0peckhamandmckenney.com Please do not hesitate to call Bobbi Peckham toll-free at (866) 912-1919 if you have any questions regarding this position or recruitment process. Recruitment Process Project Organization —This phase provides for the development of a detailed Candidate Profile. First, I would meet collectively with the BAE Ad Hoc Committee to discuss the proposed recruitment process and timeline in order to identify any specific ideas, requests, or concerns the District might have relating to the recruitment. We will then discuss the issues and challenges currently facing the District, as well as opportunities for the future. The desired background and experience, leadership style and personality traits, skills and abilities will be discussed. Information obtained from this meeting will be prepared in a draft position profile for review and comment by the full Board. Once approved, the position profile will be designed as an attractive recruitment brochure to market the opportunity and serve as the profile by which candidates are evaluated and screened. Recruitment — Advertisements will be placed in the appropriate industry publications and websites, and full information on the position will be posted on our firm's web site as well as the site of the District. The marketing brochure will be mailed to industry professionals primarily in the Bay area but throughout California, and it will also be available on our firm's web site. Copies of the brochure will also be made available to the District. The main focus of our outreach, however, will be direct phone contact with quality potential candidates. With nearly 30 years of executive search experience, we have developed an extensive candidate database that is continuously utilized and updated. Our recruiting efforts will focus on direct and aggressive recruiting of individuals within the search parameters established during the Project Organization phase. We believe direct recruiting produces the most qualified candidates. We know how to identify the"hidden"candidates, including those passive candidates who may be resistant to considering an employment change. Throughout this active search process, we will regularly notify the BAE Ad Hoc Committee of the status and share questions, concerns, and comments received from potential candidates as they consider the opportunity. By doing so, we will "team" with the BAE to ensure that all issues and concerns of candidates are discussed and understood thereby eliminating"surprises"once the resume filing deadline has occurred. Preliminary Interviews/Recommendation — As resumes are received, they will be promptly acknowledged, and we will personally respond to all inquiries. Once the resume filing deadline has passed, all resumes received will be reviewed and the leading 12 (+/-) candidates will be identified. A full list of applicants (names/titles/agencies) as well as cover letters & resumes of top 12 (+/-) candidates will be sent electronically to BAE for review. We will then hold a conference call with the BAE to review the information and identify the leading candidates for further consideration. The Board will then receive the full list o f applicants with the leading candidates denoted in order to provide comment to Peckham & McKenney. Once the leading candidates are confirmed by the BAE and full Board, all candidates will be notified of their status in the recruitment. The leading candidates will be asked to complete a supplemental questionnaire. Once received, these supplemental questionnaires will be provided to the BAE, and preliminary interviews will be scheduled with Bobbi Peckham. We will then meet with the BAE to review results of the supplemental questionnaires and preliminary interviews. The BAE will select the leading 5-7 candidates to be scheduled to interview with the full Board. Final Interviews/Selection — During this phase, the leading 5-7 finalists will be interviewed by the full Board. We will provide on-site advice and facilitation assistance during the final interview process. Interview materials, including suggested interview questions, evaluation and ranking sheets will be provided for the District's convenience. An orientation session will be held with the Board prior to the finalist interviews, and we will work with the Panel through a ranking process and discussion of the finalists at the end of the day. We would recommend that the General Manager observe the interview process. We will assist the Board in coming to consensus on the leading two to three finalists for further consideration. Second interviews with the Board as well as an opportunity to meet with the Management Team will be scheduled with the leading (2-3) finalists. We will facilitate providing feedback from the Management Team to the full Board following interviews. Qualification — Once the final candidate has been selected, our firm will verify, at your discretion, professional work experience, educational histories, criminal, civil, credit, motor vehicle records, and second "tier" references. This comprehensive process ensures that only the most thoroughly screened candidate is hired. In addition, negotiation assistance will be provided as requested by the District. i t ri Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District R-11-104 Meeting 11-28 October 19, 2011 AGENDA ITEM 5 AGENDAITEM Consideration of District Ward Boundary Re-Alignment(Redistricting) GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS ,Z 1. Approve the revised redistricting criteria. 2. Approve the attached resolution altering existing ward boundaries based upon 2010 census data. SUMMARY At the public August 24, 2011 Special Board meeting, a Redistricting Study Session was held where draft redistricting criteria and three potential redistricting scenarios were presented to the Board for feedback. Staff has incorporated the Board's feedback into a revised set of criteria, which were then used to guide the development of a new, proposed redistricting plan. Staff will resent the revised redistrictingcriteria and the proposed redistricting plan to the Board for P P P g approval. DISCUSSION The District is required by California Elections Code Section 22000 and the federal Voting Rights Act to adjust its ward boundaries prior to the next biennial general election following each federal decennial census. The purpose of these statutes is to ensure that the wards, to the extent practical, are equal in population. With the recent availability of the 2010 Census data, the District has calculated the population variance between wards at+/- 3.6 percent. Staff is proposing to adjust the ward boundaries,using the following revised criteria, to mitigate this variance to better balance the population between wards and ensure compliance with the redistricting statutes. Background At the August 24, 2011 Special Public Board meeting, the Board provided feedback on the draft redistricting criteria and the three potential redistricting scenarios. The following is a brief summary of the Board's feedback and an explanation on how staff incorporated the feedback into the revised criteria and proposed redistricting plan: e i R-11-104 Page 2 1) Board feedback: Increase the maximum variance to 2.5% from 2% in the criteria; however, keep variance as low as possible in redistricting plans. Staffs action: The revised criteria now states, `Equalize the population count in each Ward to +/- 2.5%,but strive to minimize the variance as much as possible". The proposed redistricting plan minimizes the variance to 2%. The higher 2.5% variance was not needed to meet the redistricting goals of community cohesiveness in this redistricting plan. 2) Board feedback: Include the importance of minority voting strength to the criteria. Staff's action: To address this feedback an additional item was added to the criteria that states, `Ensure that minority voting strength does not diminish as a result of redistricting". 3) Board feedback: The Board unanimously preferred Scenario 2 of the three scenarios presented. However, the Board requested a number of modifications to this scenario. Staff's action: The proposed redistricting plan consists of Scenario 2 with the following requested modifications: L Board feedback.• Unite Skylonda and Kings Mountain Communities in proposed redistricting plan. Staffs action: Staff unified Kings Mountain Community in Ward 7 by moving a portion of it from Ward 6 to Ward 7. Staff found that Skylonda is currently united within Ward 6, so no action was taken. II. Board feedback: Prevent loss of population in Ward 7. Staffs action: In the proposed redistricting plan, Kings Mountain Community was unified in Ward 7, which added close to 100 people to Ward 7. j III. Board feedback:A proposal to add a section of Palo Alto to Los Altos Hills from Ward 5 to Ward 2 was presented at the last meeting. The Board asked that this section not be added to Ward 2 and should remain in Ward 5 in the proposed redistricting plan. Staffs action:In the proposed redistricting plan this section remains in Ward 5 and is not added to Ward 2. This feedback has been incorporated into the overall revised redistricting criteria and the proposed redistricting plan, which is explained in detail below. Revised Redistricting Criteria To formulate the criteria, staff considered the principles established during the District's last redistricting, reviewed the criteria of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, Santa Clara Valley Water District, East Bay Regional Park District, and local counties and municipalities, and confirmed adherence to all applicable laws. The following is a list of the recommended criteria and an explanation of how these criteria were incorporated into proposed p YP p P redistricting plan. This list is not meant to represent any order of priority. 1 with all li laws (required)1 Comply a s cable a s e u ed p y pp q The District is required to comply with Chapter 8 of the Election Code (Special Districts q pY p p 22000, Reapportionment of Special Districts after Federal Census). This statute states that: "Each district required by its authorizing act to adjust division boundaries pursuant to this section shall,by resolution, after each federal decennial census, and using that census as a I R-11-104 Page 3 basis, adjust the boundaries of any divisions so that the divisions are, as far as practicable, equal in population and in compliance with Section 1973 of Title 42 of the United States Code, as amended, to the extent those provisions are applicable. In adjusting the boundaries of the district, the board may give consideration to the following factors: (1)topography, (2) geography, (3) cohesiveness, contiguity, integrity and compactness of territory, and(4) community of interests of the district." As indicated in Elections Code Section 22000, the District must also comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act(Section 1973 of Title 42 of the United States Code, as amended), which"prohibits electoral systems, including redistrictings, which dilute minority voting rights by denying minorities an equal opportunity to nominate and elect candidates of their choice." 2) Keep cit�rgpresentation intact and maintain cohesive neighborhoods and communities, where possible(required) To the greatest extent possible,the redistricting plan was drawn to respect local government boundaries, neighborhood association boundaries, and communities. Maintaining community cohesiveness is essential both in complying with the Election Code and preserving community voting strength. If communities are dissected, the voting strength of that area may be diluted. In order to comply with this criterion, the following data were analyzed to inform the ward boundary adjustments: • Aerial Imagery Aerial imagery was used to analyze developed infrastructure and natural environmental features to help determine neighborhood boundaries. Aspects of a neighborhood such as tree canopy density, street patterns, roof types, density of land use,building types, property size, and location of buildings on properties are easily identified using aerial imagery. When determining potential ward boundary changes, analyzing visible neighborhood features helps to determine the extent of established neighborhoods, ensuring that communities do not get dissected by proposed ward boundary changes. • City and County Boundaries City and County boundaries can provide hard community, political, and land use barriers. These barriers, especially within the urban environment, are useful to follow when determining ward boundaries because they can provide steadfast barriers that are rarely altered. City and County boundaries were used to keep city and county representation intact as much as possible. All boundary realignments took place in areas where city representation was already shared. No additional cities were dissected in the proposed redistricting plan. • Major Roads and Highways Major roads and highways tend to bound and shape residential neighborhoods and often form the outer edges of neighborhood boundaries. Highways and freeways provide hard land use boundaries because they limit opportunities for connection between neighborhoods on either side. R-11-104 Page 4 • Neighborhood Association Maps Neighborhood association maps showing neighborhood boundaries are often available from local governments. These boundaries are often created based on input from neighborhood residents, community leaders, and public officials. Utilizing neighborhood association boundaries when determining potential new ward boundaries is beneficial because it ensures that an established neighborhood is kept intact, which strengthens the voting strength and public involvement voice of communities. Neighborhood association maps were obtained for all areas that contained potential changes. The proposed redistricting plan unites many neighborhood associations resulting in intact neighborhood representation. • Environmental Features Environmental features such as creeks and streams can be used to mark potential ward boundaries. An analysis of waterways in the urban regions of the Peninsula has revealed that waterways often form strong neighborhood and political boundaries. Other environmental features such as hills can help determine the physical extent of neighboring communities. Hilltop communities have different land use characteristics, street patterns, and densities compared with neighborhoods on flat ground. The physical change in an area's landscape determines the differences in land use patterns in the built environment, which leads to hard physical boundaries between communities built in different geographic areas. 3) Equalize the population count in each Ward to +/- 2.5%,but strive to minimize the variance as much as possible(population equalization is required, but the+/- 2.5% variance value is not required) The Election Code requires each ward within the District to have equal populations, as far as practicable, to respect the principle of one person-one vote so that each person has equal representation. The ideal ward size is the population that each ward would have if the total population within the District was divided exactly equally among wards. The deviation refers to the percentage that a ward's population is allowed to vary above or below the population of the ideal ward. As the deviation is decreased, the potential to negatively impact neighborhood and community cohesiveness is increased due to the larger number of fine-grained adjustments needed to meet the lower deviation threshold. As a point of reference, the State standard of population equalization is set at+/- 2.5 0 e s s /o p p q Past District redistricting scenarios have used a deviation of+/-1%. At the August 24, 2011 Study Session, the Board requested, and staff concurs, to allow for a maximum deviation of +/- 2.5% when equalizing the population counts between District wards. This proposed increase in the maximum deviation allows for improved neighborhood and community cohesiveness as required by the Election Code. Although+/-2.5% is the proposed target, staff aimed to minimize the variance as much as possible without impacting community cohesiveness. Staff was able to keep the standard of deviation to +/-2.0% when developing the proposed redistricting plan that is before the Board for approval, which is slightly under the proposed target maximum of+/-2.5%. R-11-104 Page 5 4) Strive to keep wards as similar to the current configuration(not required) As a common practice, realigned districts should reassign the minimum number of residents to new wards to avoid confusion among voters. The proposed redistricting plan reassigns the least amount of people to new wards as much as possible while still keeping communities intact. 5) Avoid altering ward boundaries in the Coastal Protection Area(not required) In 2004, the District underwent a significant public process to determine ward boundary locations in the coastal protection area. As a result, staff is not recommending any changes to ward boundaries within the coastal protection area. The proposed redistricting plan contains no changes to the ward boundaries in the coastal protection area. 6) Keep incumbents in their current ward(not required) Keeping incumbents in their current ward is common practice and helps avoid confusion among voters. The proposed redistricting plan keeps all incumbents in their current ward. 7) Ensure that minority voting strength does not diminish as a result of redistricting(required) Percentage of minority populations per ward will not significantly decrease as a result of the redistricting. This ensures that minority voting strength is kept intact. Census data was used to calculate percentages of minority population within current and proposed wards. The minority population percentages do not significantly decrease as a result of the proposed redistricting. The largest decrease was .258%. In summary, these criteria preserve community voting strength to the greatest extent possible, and are consistent with the Election Code requirement of population equalization. Proposed Redistricting Plan Current District Population Based upon the 2010 Census data, the population within the boundaries of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) is 705,528 (see Table 1 below). This is an increase of 25,854,or 3.8%, from the 2004 population of 679,674, which was calculated using 2000 census data. The population in each of the District's existing seven wards range from a low of 97,097 in Ward 7 to a high of 104,194 in Ward 2, which represents a variance of 7.3%. Based on the 2010 Census data, the ideal ward population is 100,790. A maximum variance of+/-2.5% would allow for wards to range in population from 98,270 to 103,310. R-11-104 Page 6 Table 1: District population in 2004, 2010 and population in proposed redistricting plan. WARD 2004 2010 PROPOSED POPULATION* POPULATION REDISTRICTING PLAN POPULATION 1 —97,096 ** 101,181 102,385 2 —97,096 104,194 102,838 3 —97,096 103,344 102,786 4 —97,096 100,616 100,676 5 —97,096 100,839 99,090 6 —97,096 98,257 98,780 7 —97,096 97,097 98,976 TOTAL 679,674 705,528 705,528 *Population based on 2000 Census Data **This is the approximate population per ward. Summary of Proposed Redistricting Plan The revised criteria, as described in this document, were used to create the proposed ward boundaries (see Attachment 1). This plan meets the proposed population equalization maximum deviation of+/- 2.5%per ward and in fact comes under this amount to approximately+/-2.0%. Populations within each ward range from 98,780 to 102,838 (see Table 1). A primary goal of this redistricting plan is to achieve community cohesiveness and equalize population between wards. A total of 16,309 people are reassigned to new wards in this plan. This was the minimum amount of people that needed to be reassigned in order to achieve these goals. The current ward boundaries dissect many neighborhood associations especially in Redwood City. The proposed redistricting plan successfully brings these communities back together. Minority populations per ward do not significantly decrease as a result of this redistricting plan, ensuring that the minority voting strength is kept intact. The largest decrease in minority populations as a result of this redistricting plan is -0.258% (see Attachment 2). City and county representation are kept intact as much as possible. All boundary realignments take place in areas where city representation was already shared. No additional cities are dissected in the proposed redistricting plan. Description of Proposed Adjustments by Ward (see Attachment 3 for an overview of all changes) Ward 1 See Attachment 4 for final proposed Ward 1 Map; see Area A on Attachment 5 for zoomed area of proposed change. • Area A: Cupertino is currently shared between Ward 1 and Ward 2. Due to an increase in population in Ward 2, Ward 1 would receive population from Ward 2 in the area southeast of j the intersection of Highways 85 and 280, consisting of the Glenbrook Apartment Home community. i R-11-104 Page 7 Ward 2 See Attachment 6 for final proposed Ward 2 Map; see Areas A and B on Attachment 5, and Areas C, D, and E on Attachment 7,for zoomed areas of proposed changes. • Area A: Cupertino is currently shared between Ward 1 and Ward 2. Due to an increase in p � population in Ward 2, Ward 2 would transfer population to Ward 1 in the area southeast of the intersection of Highways 85 and 280, consisting of the Glenbrook Apartment Home community. • Area B: due to growth in Ward 3, an area of Sunnyvale southeast of the intersection between Sheraton Drive and Pome Avenue would move from Ward 3 to Ward 2. Due to the population density in this area of Sunnyvale, minor roads versus major roads were used as the boundary between Ward 3 and Ward 2. • Area C: to unify the City of Los Altos and keep city representation intact, a small area of Los Altos would move from Ward 2 to Ward 4. • Area D: the College Terrace Neighborhood, which is currently divided between Ward 2 and Ward 5, is unified within Ward 5. • Area E: an unincorporated pocket of Santa Clara County that is most similar to an adjacent area in Ward 5 is moved from Ward 2 to Ward 5. Ward 3 See Attachment 8 for final proposed Ward 3 Map; see Area B on Attachment 5 for zoomed area of proposed change. • Area B: due to growth in Ward 3, an area of Sunnyvale southeast of the intersection between Sheraton Drive and Pome Avenue would move from Ward 3 to Ward 2. Due to the population density in this area of Sunnyvale, minor roads versus major roads were used as the boundary between Wards 3 and 2. Ward 4 See Attachment 9 for final proposed Ward 4 Map; see Area C on Attachment 7 for zoomed area of proposed change. • Area C: to unify the City of Los Altos and keep city representation intact, a small area of Los Altos would move from Ward 2 to Ward 4. Ward 5 See Attachment 10 for final proposed Ward 5 Map; See Areas D and E on Attachment 7, and Area F on Attachment I 1 for zoomed areas of proposed changes. • Area D: the College Terrace Neighborhood, which is currently divided between Ward 2 and Ward 5, would be unified within Ward 5. • Area E: an unincorporated pocket of Santa Clara County that is most similar to an adjacent area in Ward 5 would move from Ward 2 to Ward 5. • Area F: downtown Menlo Park, which is currently divided between Ward 5 and Ward 6, would be unified within Ward 6. Ward 6 See Attachment 12 for final proposed Ward 6 Map; see Areas F, G, H, I, J, and K on Attachment 11, and Areas L and M on Attachment 13 for zoomed areas of proposed changes. • Area F: downtown Menlo Park, which is currently divided between Ward 5 and Ward 6, would be unified within Ward 6. I R-11-104 Page 8 • Area G: Redwood City waterfront communities (Marina and Bair Island), which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area H: the Centennial Neighborhood, which is divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area I: the Oak Knoll/Edgewood Park neighborhood and Sequoia/Eagle Hill neighborhoods, which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 7. • Area J: the Palm Park and Central neighborhoods, which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area K: an unincorporated pocket of San Mateo County that lies within Redwood City's Sphere of Influence, and is more similar to adjacent Redwood City neighborhoods in Ward 7 than it is to Atherton in Ward 6, would be moved out of Ward 6 and into Ward 7. • Area L: a portion of Woodside that lies west of Highway 280 would be moved from Ward 7 to Ward 6 to unify the Town of Woodside west of Highway 280. • Area M: Kings Mountain community would be unified by moving a portion of it from Ward 6 and adding it to Ward 7. Ward 7 See Attachment 14 for final proposed Ward 7 Map; see Areas G, H, I, J, and K on Attachment 11, and Areas L and M on Attachment 13 for zoomed areas of proposed changes. • Area G: Redwood City waterfront communities (Marina and Bair Island), which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area H: the Centennial Neighborhood,which is divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area I: the Oak Knoll/Edgewood Park neighborhood and Sequoia/Eagle Hill neighborhoods, which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 7. • Area J: the Palm Park and Central neighborhoods, which are currently divided between Ward 6 and Ward 7, would be unified within Ward 6. • Area K: an unincorporated pocket of San Mateo County that lies within Redwood City's Sphere of Influence, and is more similar to adjacent Redwood City neighborhoods in Ward 7 than it is to Atherton in Ward 6, would be moved out of Ward 6 and into Ward 7. • Area L: a portion of Woodside that lies west of Highway 280 would be moved from Ward 7 to Ward 6 to unify the Town of Woodside west of Highway 280. • Area M: Kings Mountain community would be unified by moving a portion of it from Ward 6 and adding it to Ward 7. Conclusion The proposed redistricting plan preserves community and minority voting strength to the greatest extent possible, enhances neighborhood cohesiveness, keeps city representation intact, reassigns the minimum amount of people to new wards, keeps incumbents in their current ward, equalizes population variance between wards to +/-2%, and complies with all applicable laws. See Attachment 15 for a draft resolution altering ward boundaries based upon 2010 census data. FISCAL IMPACT Board action to approve the proposed redistricting criteria and redistricting plan would result in a minor fiscal impact to revise ward maps, website content, and to notify affected property owners of ward changes. R-11-104 Page 9 PUBLIC NOTICE Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required. CEQA COMPLIANCE This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and no environmental review is required. NEXT STEPS If adopted, staff will transmit the redistricted ward boundaries to the Election Officers in the counties of San Mateo, Santa Cruz and Santa Clara and work with the Officers to ensure the ward boundaries are accurate for the 2014 General Election. Staff will also update its District maps and brochures to show boundary changes. Attachment(s) 1. Proposed Ward Boundary Map 2. Minority Population Percentages Before and After Redistricting 3. Overview Map of Proposed Changes 4. Proposed Ward I Boundary Map 5. Proposed Changes: Areas A & B 6. Proposed Ward 2 Boundary Map 7. Proposed Changes: Areas C, D, & E 8. Proposed Ward 3 Boundary Map 9. Proposed Ward 4 Boundary Map 10. Proposed Ward 5 Boundary Map 11. Proposed Changes: Areas F, G, H, 1, J, & K 12. Proposed Ward 6 Boundary Map 13. Change Areas L & M 14. Proposed Ward 7 Boundary Map 15. Resolution Prepared by: Casey Cleve-Hiatt, GIS Coordinator Zach Alexander, Planning Technician Alex Roa, GIS Intern/Technician Contact person: Michelle Radcliffe, District Clerk San Oakland Francisco • •• San Jose PACIFICA 0,eJn SAIA 1ATE ALF MOON BAY BELMONT 7 92 REDWOOD CI FY ENLO PARK 101 WOODSIDE ALOALTO 280 82 MOUNTAIN AEW LOSALTOS SUNNYVALE SANJOSE SANTP.CLARA 84 35 V .:UP E R TI', SAN GREGORIO LA HONDA L CAMPBELL o SS Ila c / � PESCAOERO c 6 �. 1, r �i 4- �`'` s o i i a 17 G. 0 r r�►rrrl) v %ftN v w 9 G S i V W t✓ u u m T A V ATTACHMENT 1 : PROPOSED WARD BOUNDARIES Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) - Ward 1 Ward 4 Ward 7 o Highway October, 2011 Ward 2 Ward 5 County Boundary Major Highway Ward 3 Ward 6 Sphere of Influence Miles 0 2 4 While the District striyes to use the best available dialtat data,this datnd is mee Attachment 2: Minority Population Percentages Before and After Redistricting Population of"Hispanic Alone" Population of"African American or Black Alone" Current Percent of VotingDifference In Current Percent of Percent of Percent of Voting Age Difference In Voting Age Age Population Proposed from Percent Age Population after Proposed from Populationgafter Redistricting Current Voting g Redistricting Current Wards Population 1 4.32% 4.28% -0.0438% 0.51% 0.51% -0.0007/o 2 6.55% 6.59% 0.0322% 1.71% 1.72% 0.0034% 3 19.56% 19.65% 0.0870% 2.04% 2.04% 0.0065/o 4 15.39% 15.38% -0.0081% 1.81% 1.82% 0.0065/° 5 23.49% 23.80% 0.3025% 7.42% 7.52% ° 0.1048/o 6 34.84% 34.58% -0.2580% 1.84% 1.83% -0.0013/° 7 14.64% 14.63% -0.0127% 0.95% 0.98% 0.0237/° Population of"Pacific Islander or Population of"Asian Alone" Native Hawaiian Alone" Current Percent of Percent of Voting Difference In Current Percent of Voting Age Difference In Voting Age Population after Proposed from Percent of population after Proposed from Age Redistricting Current Voting Age g g Population Redistricting Current Wards Population 1 31.64% 32.18% 0.54% 0.10% 0.10% 0.00% 2 39.62% 39.59% -0.03% 0.15% 0.15% 0.00% 3 40.24% 40.25% 0.00% 0.49% 0.49% 0.00% 4 25.69% 25.67% -0.01% 0.42% 0.42% 0.00% 5 17.97% 18.09% 0.12% 2.38% 2.41% 0.03% 6 7.60% 7.66% 0.06% 0.87% 0.88% 0.00% 7 11.23% 11.22% -0.01% 0.30% 0.30% 0.00% Population of"American Indian or Alaska Native Alone" Current Percent of Percent of Voting Difference In Voting Age Population after Proposed from Age Redistricting Current Wards Population 1 0.14% 0.15% 0.0031% 2 0.16% 0.15% -0.0061% 3 0.20% 0.20% 0.0010% 4 0.14% 0.14% -0.0001% 5 0.13% 0.13% -0.0016% 6 0.19% 0.20% 0.0072% 7 0.16% 0.16% -0.0048% ATTACHMENT 3 : Fi 84 OVERVIEW OF ^� G PROPOSED CHANGES San Proposed Ward Jose Boundary J Ward 1 Ward 2 K F 101 Ward 2 Transfer Out Ward 3 M Ward 3 Transfer Out I_ Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 5 Transfer Out 9 �O Ward 6 Ward 6 Transfer Out 280 - � � Ward 7 z Ward 7 Transfer Out 35 82 237 U F G C aw � O 85 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 84 (MROSD) .� g� October, 201 t lak Aw0 A While the District strives to use the best available • - digital data.this data does not represent legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features. I ( fi a 1E A o 3 � 5 4 Sa Ofic Z n L t r Ckteo n Jose Rancho Son Antonio oStevens�rl E l; 85 If µ pro ,t t t :�, el � ✓"`� t l � � �l, H �c Cax .,. a CY " b / .. 1cCoy Saratoga Gap Stevens Creek Park �<� 86 5 P 00 n 7 L% I sl, Carlton \ lax; � Q�r} wa Los- G h1s Ahmaden tiossom Hill 35 Sanborn-Skyline Park S)) d)7I)Uf) r♦ � (Santa Clara County) Castle Rock State Park ,7 e eay )01n � .'I ` ) •.;:l ��,u _ Nicks >� r ryy � 36 d' tit E 3 t1t ,1„ac:0;;s p t _j 17 r Bier: � w 35OP) 6 c x Cathedral Oaks Area ,,e o - �ac 0t N snfiW+ C C I r "kw o a4' it s City+,I ,. Santa CIuz i7 a m A m ATTACHMENT 4 : PROPOSED WARD 1 BOUNDARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 1 Boundary Other Public Agency Non MROSD Conservation C City Limit (MROSD) in or Agricultural Easement L_. MROSD Open Space October,2011 p p C MROSD Boundary Count Boundary Preserves Watershed Land Y Y Y Other Protected Open Private Property MROSD Sphere of Influence , Space or Park Lands MROSD Conservation e A Land Trust or Agricultural Easement Miles o 1 z While the District strives to use the best available digital data,this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features. n11 tKJ Vtl Ufa t w Sheraton Dr a 3 82 E : 0 a' a g S c - E Fremont St .. N ... ... _ Y� C � y E _ 5 Sunnyvale 41 16 E �a Z 0 g x b , 85 a Ho c Cupertino C .0 n ..'... 280 1. L t5 � umfard Dr "' a CD i� C 'm Cupertino f A •, m W U U ATTACHMENT 5: Proposed Changes, Area A &t B Midpeninsula Regional Ward 1 Ward 3 Open Space District Proposed Ward Boundary (MROSD) Ward 2 Ward 3 Transfer Out e City Boundary October, 2011 Ward 2 Transfer Out Ward 4 Miles — _� a 05 While the District strives to use the best available digital data,this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic featuies. 8241sr 7 r 31 y' PntSan � I ''` ✓ ���y detp., 6r Jose 0 �par� �tl � s�G1LT1C.j > � M,oq/PAP/a o Stanfor � University c�nd Nttl FCC "„�` `•,� GRI=*7tU4C] �l �„r� �• 2 I 82 o -- Arastradero a ° Preserve a ce .r Foothills 6t lnJt a U V � 51� � a Park - 8 Fremont W 82 Hidden Villa (Duveneck Ranch) o R n C h O Homestea t T d 35 � I 85 op o CgOC9�Cl ��� `f ger ----- # cy 1ky(inr' � i clBMW "-- elt i Y Upper StevensPICChettl i. r' sR-dnch Creek Park it (Santa Clara Co) 3 a 35 - °c % _ Stevens Creek Park '! G31a5?dG� S a► O t g a (Santa Clara County) r:�gta4C�taani�` G a P r ° Long s Ridg - r l � F t cc]r0 R)7J 5-r `t7 ✓ k 9 i7 F: Sanborn-Skyline Park Castle Rock :a State Park a ATTACHMENT 6 : PROPOSED WARD 2 BOUNDARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 2 Boundary Land Trust Other Public Agency City Limit (MROSD) October, 2011 MROSD Open Watershed Land VA MROSD Conservation County Boundary Space Preserve or Agricultural Easement Other Protected Open Private Property MROSD Boundary , Space or Park Lands Miles 0 2 While the Districtstrives use the best available digital data.this data does not represent a legal surveyn rely a eraphic illustration of geograghic f at. r s. II is a mpus Dr W o�C p UNQ�NGORPORATE�D .¢� S NTA CIARA COUNTY - '� �p"� . ._, UN TNCORPO RAT ED SAN.MAT,tO l.OUNTv 82 6 5 qCC 280 & d9e Ake �� LOS ALTOS OUP I Ili M - VAI i i.Y w r. 3 LUS ALTOS oG s NULL L S .,.. E Fremont St .4 a $•W Edith Rd a .r d .. a q Q? ATTACHMENT 7: Proposed Changes, Area C, D and E Midpeninsula Regional - Ward 2 Ward 5 Q Open Space District Proposed Ward Boundary (MROSD) Ward 2 Transfer Out Ward 5 Transfer Out ......•• City Boundary October, 2011 Ward 4 Ward b Miles 0 0.5 While the District strives to use the best available digital data,this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features, Y. c 7 � San ii f z9 €I°'t 6 2 Jose i } Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature Study Area NASA Moffett Field Ames Golf Course Research \ Center Moffett Air Field fir carrbbean -Iava 3 •T, J ^ an "I �,. r r ��{r1� ryrn1cv7�1�7 r� E / 4►e# Duane <..>.,. 3 Central 0 1 �* ro a �.•3 Klfer E F c c m 0 Id San Fran sco Ree le 0 85 v ; Remington Sheraton Fremont cn rs? v v V I V 4 _ N N U ATTACHMENT 8 : PROPOSED WARD 3 BOUNDARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 3 Boundary Other Pubtic Agency City Limit (MROSD) __...H= October, 2011 MROSD Open Watershed Land County Boundary Space Preserves • Other Protected Open Private Property MROSD Boundary • Space or Park Lands Miles 0 0.5 t White the Districti o use.the best avaitahte dipital data this data does not renresent a legal surveyn is merely a granhici(lustration of eeogra2hic fe.ti r , Safi rpic Jose ^gin t Stevens Creek Shoreline 01 Nature Study Area Shoreline Shoreline at Lake Mountain View Park ' Garcia NASA rnphitl�eatre Ames Research,' v Center v s 0 1 d Mi 1iEfield CM9CI(4()MPGOMug ID �7 4 Q@N8W CWO(V7 g �r � �` dple�Nld 82 ���trdJ Ib .2 a c S E Ecilth V S {csar a. v i N L C N Q s W 6 85 0 c v e, oa.� o c a � i � 3 ci a i � y a Rancho San Antonio a` 1 k i m V U m d V ATTACHMENT 9 : PROPOSED WARD 4 BOUNDARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 4 Boundary Other Public Agency City Limit (MROSD) October, Z011 MROSD Open Private Property County Boundary Space Preserve Other Protected Open MROSD Boundary , Space or Park Lands Miles 0 0.5 White the District strives to use the best available di ital data this data does not represent a legal smvey and is merely a eraphk illustration of geopraphiC feat r s. c (ROmdvw t nmraVlu t- 4 i 2 Jae jry ) Y 1 � �/ h\ Haml kuvrn`swnad AR(N < 8s � ao deC0 f � t�1'Gd.s Em r Bea Cul,•Jr Reservoir 01 Stanfofd- ! University o .41 V14"iIII 3 2 Stanford a ! dr..vilJe!a61• 's� Lands 82 F it DO,Wow TMAM Arastradero Reserve Paw 3 QMV0. Windy ° flirt / ! 0 86 Foothills * . Park .. (Palo Alto) Foothills ; ti q Audobon v Society Hidden Villa 4 i il (Duveneck Ranch) " r ° a Cr co Coal Rancho Los San Antonio _._. ._. b Trancos ►-� . an � 36 c , 86 " Russian Ridge ' Monte Skyline Skyline It J,„, Ridge f g u Ih r Fremont SXxG1 `�� 36 2 Older U ATTACHMENT 14 : PROPOSED WARD 5 BOUNDARY Midpeninsuta Regional Open Space District Ward 5 Boundary Other Public Agency C City Limit (MROSD) I October, 2O11 MROSD Open Private Property County Boundary iW ,V" Space Preserves Other Protected Open MROSD Conservation Space or Park Lands z or Agricultural Easement MROSD Boundary , Land Trust e B L Miles 0 1 2 W e District a o use I i •t a t re t o legal sane l o e 1 t San Francisco Bay �a ft y F... a� c A C R l A O S 84 veterans BI a Spy 101 sr �ci o REDWOOD C•YTY S �� s\ 84 82 �� a a x - WOODSIDE � a� ?� Q P ` 280 ote s ., 6 _ . ATTACHMENT 11 : Proposed Changes, Areas F, G, H, 1, J and K Midpeninsuta Regional Space District 5 Ward 2 Ward 6 � Ward 7 Proposed Open P Ward Boundary (MROSD) Ward 5 Ward 6 Transfer Out Ward 7 Transfer Out City Boundary October, 2011 Ward 5 Transfer Out County Boundary Miles 0 0.5 fete District strives to use the best available digital data,this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features. J ... ��l L 5 Y W L7 ^S lMi l.:a L... Mt7mG9 82 2 San U� yq Jose Pocifit ` Or e,(Ju 1 C'rystal S{>iiriKs y� 01 92 Watershe ape �u. o �n y i 82 Yo � 4 _ -44aa w y rt) " i 84 , reugue 8 .k Purisima CA Water '.....1rf '+. /` 1 ..... Farms a + w'4 W E( Corte Jasper ri e M a era Ridge Creek 1Nunderlich Park 35 / - rr Windy 84 _..-l__ M :_ Toto Ranch POST Audpifort " Lj.,Lo, _ 82 1 L a Honda Society a 84 r.( ar7cho Sd*n Ann ton f •, r- , 38 85 sa Russian _ Ridge �.� � Skyline •� �.✓�. p. Ridge . ,;. , . : .,,.r,.,.,,,s, Long f Ridge 35 -t Stevens Creek Park g (Santa Clara County 85 S1� Pescaderd.Creek Park o - (San Mateo Co) > SQ meek r -� j o _ / 0 a Castle Rock Slate Park Cloverdale Ranch ` ^y POST v � , f'AG''i51i1 RZ MF v o N o R a i r� 35 c t 6 a 0 0 lJ d ATTACHMENT 12: PROPOSED WARD 6 BOUNDARY Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 6 Boundary Other Public Agency Non MROSD Conservation City Limit (MROSD) or Agricultural Easement October, 201 t MROSD Open Space Watershed Land r�/' MROSD Conservation Preserves or Agricultural Easement County Boundary Other Protected Open Private Property C MROSD Boundary Space or Park Lands e Land Trust Miles 0 2 4 While ist c strives rise the best available d1eitat data.this data does not reDresent a to at suryev and is merely el a graphic Mustratign Qt geograghic features. 280 a L ' Jam• i, 1 . b ^ O v j C UN IN(0It POPAlk tt "AN MA I-C7 i'.OUN 1-1 v v C tl td Etf i.(7 ti I'i7 It AI't D f: 5AN MdAI'I_O (UUt1T: a �a .J ATTACHMENT 13: Proposed Changes, Areas L &t M Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Ward 6 Ward 7 Q Proposed Ward Boundary (MROSD) Ward 6 Transfer Out Ward 7 Transfer Out city Boundary October, 2o1 i • Miles 0 05 While the Disuict strives to use the best available digital data,this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic featmes. - ATTACHMENT 14: PROPOSED WARD 7 BOUNDARY Ii,a 1�-j fll Lk Ward 7 Boundary r ' MROSD Open s '\ Space Preserve Montara tatePar t Other Protected Open 1 .State Part, -� � � _- - `� P 1 t Space or Park Lands t! • , ] t: Land Trust Other Public Agency Watershed Land f a ch Etacra! 82 �' r Private Property ,i de Tierra POST IF Management Agreement MROSD Conservation or Agricultural Easement \ Y City Limit - 92 County Boundary fd MROSD Boundary •T 92 «1+, - AufgOs r ic+t.a Madonna Creek Ranch POST r. 35 p Burleigh H.Murray � ^. 82 ` �t1 Johnston Ranch Ranch State Park \ j POST �:�,,: �• ,P j, Huddart Park LJ lxl J Puri ima (San.Mateo County) _ Creek � Midpeninsula Regional Redw o s \�'� Open Space District _ ____ - ^ j�rdc•h � 35 P (MROSD) �. sa October, 2011 ,J ' a � r jr l.n�urrila r a � _. 4 1 v 2 San : 1 Jose �-' `i Wundencch 6 J Pfarmsa ��L Park Jasper (; ., Stanford While the Distnct � � i1S-i Ridge ° Lands staves ai use the .t y best available digital data,this data does not a represent a legal �. ., ,✓�� t`-�,.... �•!r/rh survey and is merely a hic illustration ra of "��77 �• -. JJJ j geographicSPACE features. f +astradero Miles Pt CServe ; • 0 t 2 RESOLUTION NO. 11-XX RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ALTERING EXISTING WARD BOUNDARIES BASED ON THE 2010 UNITED STATES CENSUS The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: WHEREAS,the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has reviewed population figures provided by the 2010 United States Census for the District's seven wards; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that ward boundary adjustments are in order to achieve equal population,as far as practicable,per ward based on the 2010 United States Census data; and WHEREAS,it has been determined that the District ward boundary adjustments are based on the following criteria: 1)Compliance with all applicable laws; 2)Keeping city representation intact and maintaining cohesive neighborhoods and communities,where possible; 3)Equalizing the population count in each Ward to a target maximum variance of+/-2.5%,but aiming to minimize the variance as much as possible; 4)Keeping wards as similar to current configuration as possible; 5)Avoid altering ward boundaries in the Coastal Protection Area; 6)Keeping incumbents in their current ward; and 7) Ensuring that minority voting strength does not diminish as a result of redistricting. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as follows: Section One. Pursuant to Elections Code Section 22000 and Public Resources Code Section 5534,ward boundaries are hereby adjusted for wards of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as described schematically in Exhibit A affixed hereto and made a part hereof and as delineated in detail n file e with the Distric t Clerk in the District Administration Office, which documents are incorporated herein by reference: <to be attached upon approval of ward boundaries Exhibit A: Ward 1 Map Exhibit B: Ward 2 Map Exhibit C: Ward 3 Map Exhibit D: Ward 4 Map Exhibit E: Ward 5 Map Exhibit F: Ward 6 Map Exhibit G: Ward 7 Map Section Two. The ward boundaries as established by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District on November 9, 2004,with respect to the wards in Santa Clara County County and San Mateo County by Resolution No.0440 are superseded by this resolution. Section Three. Pursuant to Election Code Section 10522,the following statement indicates in which wards a director is to be elected at the next biennial general election to be held on November 6, 2012(Ward 2,Ward 3,Ward 4, and Ward 7), and in which wards a director is to be elected on the succeeding general election to be held on November 4,2014(Ward 1,Ward 2,and Ward 5,and Ward 6). Midpeninsula Regional ' Open Space District To: Board of Directors From: Stephen E. Abbors Date: October 19, 2011 Re: Late FYIs I Midpeninsula Regional Memorandum Open Space District To: MROSD Board of Directors Through: Mike Williams Acting General Manager From: Julie Andersen, Resource Planner Date: October 18,2011 Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the District's Resource Management Policies and public review. At the April 27, 2011 meeting, the Board reviewed and tentatively adopted the District's revised Resource Management Policies(RMPs). Staff has worked with a consultant to prepare a full CEQA evaluation of environmental impacts from adoption and implementation of the RMPs. A mitigated negative declaration (MND) has been prepared and is available for public review from Friday October 14,2011 to Monday November 14, 2011. A newspaper advertisement has been published in three local papers, notice has been posted on the District's webpage and a mailing of the Notice of Intent has been sent to all District Resource Management interested parties to inform the public. If you would like to view a copy of the full initial study, MND,or revised RMPs,these documents are available online at: httpJ/www.openspace.oro_,/news/public notices.asp Paper copies are also available for review at the front desk, or an individual copy can be made for you upon request. Next Step: Staff will review and prepare a response to comments received during the public review period and then return to the Board at the December 14, 2011 meeting to ask for certification of the CEQA document and formal adoption of the District's RMPs. Attachment: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration INTRODUCTION BY S I BELLA K R A U S Urban Farms to O Range f Putting BayArea Food Landscapes on the Map a d �;.E�,- i�3h 1@9oiibXYi+ . . ,;:' _ ,w*,�+ ' �•�;.t__x•_s,. _ STEPHEN JOSEPH,STEPHENwOSEPHPHOTO.ci I'.^. r• =Yx—• + Picture the geography Of the BayArea:the sweep ofthe Bayfrom the Delta to the Golden Gate;the rolling hills,rugged moun- tains,and intimate valleys;all the open spaces that frame our communities.The urban landscapes of iconic bridges and landmark buildings, the cities and towns where we live and work,densely packed around the Bay and then radiating into a suburban patchwork beyond. Now try to put farmland into this picture.That might not be so of the conservation movement,and for several decades it has been a easy.Many people think of farmlands primarily as passive land- leader in the local food movement.Now these movements are com- scapes—part of non-urban open space—rather than as active work- ing together,with conservationists including agriculture in their ing landscapes that contribute directly to local economies,healthful vision of regional sustainability and farm advocates adding habitat diets,and sense of place.But BayArea farms and rangelands cover value and farm tourism to their vision of agriculture's economic 1.87 million acres,comprising around 4o percent of the region's vitality. total land area,and produce almost enough food to feed all BayArea "Bay Area Food Landscapes"is born of that evolving alliance residents.In farmers'markets now spread throughout the region, and reveals local agriculture as integral to both building healthy dazzling arrays of farm products bring a taste of the countryside communities and protecting our environment.The familiar vistas right into our communities.But the standard measure of"local- ness"in food is more often a conceptual mileage number than a real (top)Cattle graze in the connection with the places and people at the core of our incredibly foothills near productive local foodshed. Mount Diablo, For more than a century,the BayArea has been at the forefront where range- land forms the „ r bulk of food- c producing N landscapes. �, o (right)Muang '� ° Saechao picks a strawberries '.` that she and ++ herhusband farm at lu-Mien Village Farms AgPark. 11 in the Sunol a w (left)Free- 1 range chickens 111 at Pie Ranch l�h v, on the San . z ;=. Mateo Coast. i STE PH EN JOSEPH,STE PI I IN IQ SE PH PHOTO.EOM Ii 1. I l IL Bay Area crops by season:Animals and animal products:produced year-round.Storage/processed crops:harvested seasonally,available year-round. Seasonal crops:harvested and available seasonally. of oak-dotted hills are revealed as part of a million-plus acres of appealing,than agriculture dependent solelyon commodity prices. land—both private and public—grazed by beef cattle,dairy cows, Entrepreneurial producers are diversifying with on-farm activi- and sheep,yielding food products valued at approximately$300 ties,integrated animal-crop systems,renewable energy projects, million annually.These lands also provide habitat protection,water and value-added processing.And urban agriculture is once again conservation,and carbon sequestration critical for confronting cli- expanding farming opportunities in cities.Urban gardens are pro- mate change. ducing food—and inspiring new food growers—at multiple scales, In a few large expanses and many smaller properties,BayArea from backyard bean plots and rooftop bee hives to blossoming ag farmers tend almost half a million acres of irrigated row crops, zones in Richmond,Oakland,and San Jose. orchards,vineyards,and pasture,producing fruits,nuts,vegetables, Bay Area food landscapes have a long history:from bountiful wine grapes,forage,and field crops worth around$1.6 billion annu- foodshed for the indigenous people,to the nation's fruit basket only ally.Some of these areas are well known:the Napa Valley's vine- a century ago,to battlefields between development and agriculture. yards,West Marin's dairies,Brentwood's intensively farmed Delta Today,our farms and ranches face ongoing threats—speculative soils.Dozens of others are less familiar:the cool valleys along the land values,low financial returns,increased costs,pressure from San Mateo coast,or hidden gems such as Solano's Wooden Valley,or agricultural consolidation,dismantled infrastructure,and cumber- the extensive wheat-safflower-tomato crop rotations of the Dixon some regulations,not to mention climate-change-induced weather plain masked by commercial development along the Interstate 8o extremes.Yet manypeople at all levels,from neighborhood groups corridor. to regional nonprofits and agencies,are promoting reinvestment in After decades of losing ground to such development,local agri- agriculture as a key connection between resilient human and natu- culture is persisting,shedding its hidden-in-plain-sightvulnerabil- ral communities and are forging the relationships that are at the ity,and reemerging as more people discover its places and flavors heart of healthy local foodsheds. and as more farmers reach out to engage the public.Place-based The farms and farmers profiled on the following pages are a small agriculture—where the community at large values the landmark sample ofthe peoplewho are nurturing these foodsheds,sustaining features,unique culture,and even the characteristic taste("ter- them as a livelihood for many and a source of food for millions— roir")of a particular place—is proving more resilient,and more including us. I* Find Your Food Landscape! Funding for"Urban Farms to Open CONTRIBUTORS : Find a comprehensive listing of Bay Area farmers'markets Range"was provided by Science writerJacoba Charles grew up at baynature.org/foodlandseapes, tending sheep on her family's Sonoma f County ranch.Her work has been published i The California Agricultural Almanac(calagalmanac.com), : ( The Coastal Conservancy : in the Now York Times,on Salon.com,and oastal developed by SAGE with GreenInfo Network,lets users find Conservancy is a state agency that pro- elsewhere. where crops are produced and highlights farms,markets, tects and restores the natural environ- Sibella Kraus founded SAGE in 2001 agricultural events,and agritourism destinations in the Bay ment,invests in communities,and helps and directed UC Berkeley's Agriculture in Area and throughout California. : people get to and enjoy the California ; Metropolitan Regions program from 2oo6 . . . coast and the natural lands around San to 2009.Kraus was also founding director Francisco Bay.(scc.ca.gov) of the Center for Urban Education about ; Sustainable Agriculture(CUESA). "Urban Farms to Open Range"was produced by Photographer Stephen Joseph is currently BAYNATuRE Bay Nature magazine.Dedicated to exploring the /�...�� Since 1958,Greenbelt working on a book of panoramic photos of natural world of the San Francisco Bay Area,Bay Nature is a GREENBELT ALLIANCE Alliance has been pro- agriculture throughout the Bay Area.Learn project of the nonprofit Bay Nature Institute(BayNature.org). tecting the region's working farms and more at http://bit.ly/josephAg. Subscribe to Bay Nature at baynature.org/subscribe,or call natural areas and making the Bay Area's Cartographer Louis Jaffe has worked with r-888-4BAYNAT.To purchase bulk copies of"Urban Farms cities better places to live by direct- GreenInfo Network(greeninfo.org)since to Open Range,"contact Beth at beth@baynature.org or ing growth to create vibrant,walkable 1996 with a focus on developing maps for (SIo)528-8550 x2o7• neighborhoods surrounded by a green- : print publication,including numerous maps —;Z — belt of open space.(greenbelt.org) for Bay Nature. • S AG:E This publication was created in collaboration EDITORIAL/ART DIRECTION: ' with Sustainable Agriculture Education(SAGE, Union Bank Founda- Dan Rademacher sagecenter.org),a nonprofit dedicated to supporting multi- V UnionBank- tion proactively invests PROJECT TEAM:Bianca Kaprielian,Sibella functional agriculture at the metropolitan edge.SAGE plans in the communities in which the bank Kraus,David Loeb and develops agricultural parks,which include farming,public : and its businesses operate,targeting ; CARTOGRAPHY:Louis Jaffe/GreenInfo education,and natural resources stewardship;and helps lead resources to benefit low-to moderate- Network,Ben Pease/peasepress.com , efforts to make agriculture an integral element in regional income populations and serving as an DESIGN:David Bullen sustainability.SAGE thanks The San Francisco Foundation innovator of partnerships that help to SPECIAL THANKS To:Sharon Donovan, (sff.org)for supporting its work on this publication. create and sustain healthy communities. Kelsey Fenn,Judith Katz,John Kelly ❑� PHOTOS ALONG BOTTOM OF MAP COURTESY CENTER FOR URBAN EDUCATION ABOUT SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE,KEITH CUDOEBACK(ESSENCEINPHOTOGRAPHY.COM), BAY NATURE Ql O C T O B E R-DEC EMBER 20 1 1 JOHN JOH,STEPHEN JOSEPH,RICHARD KAY,MARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST,SAGE,SANTA CIARA COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY,AND RACHEL TOWNE. BY JACOBA CHARLES Keeping it in the Family in Rio Vista Aged fence posts lean comfortably toward the golden decades,the couple developed a vibrant business combining her field ofwheat beside the McCormack Ranch's dirt driveway.The family's farming traditions with their own commitment to land road passes barns,grain silos,and an old farmhouse that Jeanne stewardship."We are carrying on completely in spirit and par- McCormack's grandfather lived in over a century ago.Then it tially in letterthe way the ranch has been operated for izo years," winds past a handful of walnut trees and another aged barn and McCormack says. along the banks of the Sacramento River. Though her father would have scoffed at the term"sustain- And on both sides,the wheat fields stand in various stages of a able,"that's really how he operated,she adds.He rotated his pas- three-year rotation:plowed,planted,and fallow. tures through a three-year cycle,alternating grazing and wheat But the 3,70o-acre ranch on the outskirts of Rio Vista grows cultivation,which protected the soils and kept down the weeds. more than just wheat.Jeanne and her husband,Al Medvitz, He believed in bringing as little into the farm from outside as he believe in variety.Here in the rolling Montezuma Hills of rural could,so he didn't use chemical fertilizers or much purchased Solano County,theyalso farm alfalfa and have a new50-acrevine- feed. yard overlooking the river.And they raise pasture-fed sheep and And that's the way that McCormack and Medvitz operate Boer goats;in the early 199os theywere the first ranch to provide today."One of the things we brought with us was a very strong lamb to Niman Ranch. commitment to the ranch as an important piece of the environ- "The more diversity we have,the more securitywe have,"says ment,and we had been given custody of the place,"Medvitz says. "At the time,the idea of sustainability was just com- ing out.By coincidence we kind of met the market." sIn their early years on the ranch,prices were low. One year McCormack took her mother's Christmas card list and mailed everyone an invitation to buy boxed lamb.They sold 5 o animals that year,and even- tually a cousin introduced them to Bill Niman,who 0 began selling their lamb.Within five years demand was so high they brought their neighbors in on the business. Today they still market their lamb to Niman Ranch.They also sell pasture-raised goat to high-end restaurants such as Cafe Rouge in Berkeley and Pros- (above)The open fields of McCormack Ranch,near Rio Vista in Solano Coun- ty,border the Sacramento River and lookout on Mount Diablo in the distance. (right)Al Medvitz with some ofthe Boer goats he raises with his wife,Jeanne McCormack,whose family has owned this land for more than a century. Medvitz."This place has to be sustainable into the future,and L_. diversity is a big part of that." Though the two have deep roots here,they don't have typical ranch biographies.As a teenager,McCormack gladly left Rio Vista for UC Berkeley,later spending two years in Malawi with the Peace Corps.She met Medvitz while theywere in grad school ! at Harvard. Both got involved in international aid work often related to agriculture:Medvitz wrote for a New Guinea farming guide,and McCormack worked with women's microenterprise in Kenya.Then,as McCormack's parents grew older,she and Med- pect in San Francisco.Their wheat and wool go to wholesalers. vitz considered returning to the ranch. And soon theirvineyard will produce wine grapes to sell to Gallo. "For me it was a personal experiment,"Medvitz says."Here "We're trying to produce great food and maintain the health I was writing a curriculum based on agriculture,and I couldn't of the animals and the land at the same time,"says McCormack. grow a tomato." "I feel that what we do is noble,I really do.It's an unbelievable Learning to run a ranch that covers nearly six square miles opportunity to do this work." was both daunting and exhilarating.And over the last three 0 - ,j + 40 • f_ ARBAY EA Ya11e , U-'LAN- DSCAP- 00 � ES t c 1�e w gv i s �, �`�,o e-: • ,,�.I��°�� � all _ Clara Lek r M,ad% town y7/ .. mt.Sf. x . Lakeport z , ® r F/�, �. �► : ` ander Val ac`-� ,fA— c���' tt \e� ``` a e V t 9en°,�,f' � Sonoma .. _ yr• taAldsburg • • ; Santa Rosa 46 • _ toma R�Cjie -V. . . t / Pet: } r SONOMA 1196 1' low .s r ' 1 vomales Bay { i Bodega Bay 1'uru�rlc'c Ra7r' t h � I f 4' 3 � C O won � :Ilarill Sonoma a'cgxr Sulalw ■ J, ,� J 4M BY JACOBA CHARLES Getting to Market in Sunol I On a typical early summer day at the Sunol Water nonprofit organization,and private businesses.Hempel's Baia TempleAgPark,Fred Hempel is multitasking.After advising two Nicchia is the largest of the four farms on the property.Others of his workers who are having trouble filling a restaurant order include Terra Bella,which grows produce for its community- for edible radish pods,the wiry farmer fields phone calls as he supported agriculture business;Iu-Mien Village Farms,a collec- walks between hunched rows of tomato plants,inspecting his tive of Laotian immigrants whose organic strawberries are sold most prized crop. "Even with the cool weather the last couple of days these - things are growing like crazy,"he says."We really need to get them trellised up.Is that a ripening tomato over there? That's amazing!" He pulls out a pocketknife and the tomato—a muddy greenish-red—is sliced, tasted, and dismissed as too watery.To an untrained palate,the barely ripe fruit is bet- `. ter than any at the grocery store.But Hempel is a biotech research scientist turned tomato breeder turned farmer, and his preferences are exacting.He says they need to be. 'r The tomatoes make the most money by far,"he says. "The first thing we think about every day is,`how are the tomatoes doing."' Fred Hempel runs Baia Nicchia Farms at the Sunol AgPark,where he grows dozens of Yet diversity and creativity are essential to survival and varieties of tomatoes and other crops specially adapted to the local climate. success as a small commercial organic farmer, Hempel adds. In addition to the heirloom tomatoes,his io-acre farm at places like Monterey Market in Berkeley-,and Fico,a small at the AgPark east of Fremont also grows unusual varieties of heirloom fig enterprise. squash,peppers,exotic herbs,and edible flowers. The AgPark is the brainchild of the nonprofit organization "We do a lot of testing of crops from other places,"he says, SAGE,or Sustainable Agriculture Education.The goal of the proj- explaining that finding seeds that thrive in this particular place ect is to support community-benefit farming,natural resource can be a time-consuming process.But the effort has been worth stewardship,and public education.SAGE leases the land from it,letting him build up a business working with high-end whole- the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission(SFPUC),then salers,plus direct relationships with BayArea restaurants that ask subleases parcels to farmers who get infrastructure,community, him to grow varieties they can't get anywhere else."The chef at and support in exchange for participating in public education Oliveto was in Italy a few months ago,and he brought back some programs that SAGE conducts on the farm. stuff for us to grow,"Hempel says,pointing out some red-stalked "It would've been really hard to do what we're doing in any corn seedlings in his greenhouse as an example. otherplace,"says Hempel,who started Baia Nicchia with partner Diversity and creativity are likewise hallmarks of the 18-acre Jill Shepherd in 2oo6."[SAGE]provided mentoring—how to AgPark in general.Though it looks like any other small farm—a put in irrigation,when to weed,what kind of tractor to buy. patchwork of neatly tilled rows ribboned with dirt roads—this And ifyou're selling things in the BayArea,you can't beat the loca- is in fact an innovative collaboration between a public agency,a tion here." All that was part of the plan,says AgPark education manager Roger 01 Kubalek of SAGE.Today,the group Na x is developing a new curriculum and _ working with SFPUC on plans for a visitor center."Now that the farm- "` ing and the stewardship aspects of the program are on their way,we've started to focus in on education,"he ` s explains."It's a great place to learn. The is-acreAgPark includes diverse farming operations andeducaG Many of the students have never onprogramsont8acresoflandatthe5unol Water Temple,owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. visited areal working farm." i. 0 Lodi llavi� o 'I Stockto' % Dixon Ridge o Winters "Ye�,�s j o nu,n �dpd Si�i lomjuin Elmira&Maine �t�alley Prairie Delta Ite o Jepson Prairie Tracy' �aca`1akkeY o A",Ii.rville Lagoon Valley ' 4,? I A i () 'e�\Sma Brentwood Mo� Antioch ° ley N A l'A0 Suisun Valley ° P\tamont t Atlas Peak e\ayton Valley teva\\e. Green Valley o ``�- Aft. l9ic�blo i �et� rd Nap.: °° Wild Horse • CON 'I' R A COSTA - �'� • { Valley� feeder Mountain :, Concord ID o / • 0 a o Carneros Vallejo Pia r ® Walnut Pleasanton Valley ° Creek o - 0 �onom. lley;, / o o /,� S 4. f o A.I.AMEllA 0 A11n. i .-m en-r p �e od °�Y o 0 0 0 .r �- s���•c�� 0 ° 0 c0aklallc�o 0 0 ° Ioav��ariio o FrCII-ionr) ° I,K (utni� s River _ 0 0 0 0 .luma i�`�-�r .t° Richmond ° • 0 0 ° ° • o i 0 M A R I N ° 0 0 o San Francisco Bay topim o •San Rafael 0 ° 0 • e'l • ° 0 0 0 • •A • �. o v' l Sankraonci0 s4f> • • • ��. • San Mateo I v' lea l 0 • • c � NtcaS\O � �t� ' o 0 } Pt.Ryes olema Stgtion SAN MATEO Bolinas ' i;,cirr;i Mtri. ° i �4 Moon Bay p,aCIFIC OCEAN o purisima Cr } m I y lS S f 1 Contra Cu.wu Alameda } U h o Eastside Eastside Merced; I � ` f ]V[odcsti • 4. i - . ., ,A .m., <. �,�,.. u... •.....,_ gym. - f Westside Stanislaus i West° Lo,i;::nos side Merced eek � aaL� , an Antonio Valley �a�e web_ 5 JQQe �a Isabel Valley � _. A/1. llnmillon Y- `��,' SANTA CLARA �, o aro Valley ® ® 11eY© gan Martin Zil � ® iL.11ieter ey ® �`j L°y°te Morgan I fill GllfOy _ �aAZ J ;z San Jose ® Ma�1� t'ixmont e Uvas--Mount °0 Peak e MI. Umunl4pm e ilo 'to o ©, ; z r 1 i Monterey B7 Santa Cruz y e sun0l Growing areas e ' Croplands 11 00 ® Private rangelands ti Public rangelands e Urban Other(public & private) 0 Q�ti 6?ta ® Bay wetlands o 0 o piuevo ® Farmers' markets the Mesa Pn - - County lines 0 Bay Area boundary Santa Clara Sun �Walco Sun I,Ivflcisco �. { �ysy�A ilk,^,r,M• BY JACOBA CHARLES Cultivating Community in Santa Rosa Late afternoon sunlight was brilliant on the leaves to the sunflower patch."Second-graders saved the seeds last year of corn,tomato,and tomatillo plants. Sunflowers planted by and started them in the greenhouse." schoolchildren were growing in a tight spiral.Squash and beans Even on a quiet afternoon,Bayer Farm is a meeting place. were wrapping eager tendrils around teepees of bamboo. A gate has been cut in the fence of the apartment building next The Mexican national soccer team was playing Peru that day, door;a small boy comes through it to play,and later a man steps in so only a few gardeners were weeding and watering their garden carrying a wire cage holding four chickens.He releases the birds beds at Bayer Farm in Roseland,a working-class Latino section of into a coop built along the fence. Santa Rosa.But on most afternoons,20 or 30 people come to this "This place is very pretty;it brings life,"says the man,Javier organic farm and community garden surrounded by apartment Pichardo,who first came here when he brought his daughter to buildings and small,closely built houses.Founded fouryears ago, a bilingual story-time for children.He's now an active volunteer } and has a garden plot."You get to be in contact with nature,see your neighbors,relax the body." + Besides providing healthy food,creating common space is a ti main goal of Bayer Farm."It's really important for our commu- nity to have a place to come together in general,because we don't have public spaces,"says Ridley.Several of the gardeners echo this sentiment."If we didn't have this plot we'd just watch TV,"says 4,° Reyna Arreola as she headed home with a big bunch of radishes. o .:r Ernesto Lomeli,a quiet,mustachioed man,also comes to the garden for company."Otherwise life is boring,because I don't .'� smoke and I don't drink,"he says with a laugh.But then he turns . ill ice , r u P " , w somber:His wife,fighting cancer,has gone back to Mexico with I ' W►+ ,"; I�t� . r their children,and he lost his right pinkie in a mill accident.Other f gardeners helped him plant this year's corn and tomatoes. (above)Bayer Farm has become a community center for local chil- dren and families in the Roseland district of Santa Rosa.(right)The farm'swelcoming hand-painted sign is a beacon in a neighborhood with very few accessible outdoor public spaces. f e the farm transformed part of a six-acre vacant lot into a 3k community hub in an area badly lacking in public green spaces.The nearby main street is lined with strip malls where the Dollar Store and Mendoza's Super Mercado 0 alternate with empty storefronts. ,{ 3 "It is avery low-income neighborhood,"says Magda- r. lena Ridley,who lives a block away and runs the farm for the local nonprofit LandPaths."We have a lot of health s problems like obesity and diabetes. Organic food is expensive,a lot of people don't drive.So the ability to grow food is something our gardeners really treasure." There are 36 private plots tended by individuals and families;more people are on the waiting list.And there's a pub- Today,Bayer Farm is about to expand,using a$5 million grant lic garden where anyone can volunteer and go home with fresh from a state fund for parks in underserved areas.Soon the rest of vegetables.But the farm offers more than a place to grow things. the six-acre lot surrounding the gardens will become a commu- Each summer,about 70 children come for a free lunch program; nity park,planned largely by people in the neighborhood. the rest of the year the farm is an outdoor classroom where kids "People are excited,"Ridley says."Theyreallywant this park to learn about food,nature,and science. be a model of sustainability and respect for the earth." 'Vil "We have students come from local schools to work in this On Saturday,October 8,3:3o-6:30 p.m.,join Bay Nature and LandPaths for a area,"explains Jonathan Bravo,who oversees the gardens."For farm tour,community festival,and harvest dinner.Tour.free;dinner:$12. example,this is called the`Garden of Giants,"'he says,gesturing RSVP:hikes@baynature.org or(5to)528-855o x2o5. L