HomeMy Public PortalAbout20050928 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Regional Open Space
I
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Meeting 05-21
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETINGS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
September 28, 2005
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
I. ROLL CALL
President Larry Hassett called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m.
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Mary Davey, Nonette Hanko, Deane Little, Ken Nitz,
Pete Siemens, and Larry Hassett.
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Craig Britton, Sue Schectman, Sally Thielfoldt, Mike Williams
II. CLOSED SESSION
L. Hassett stated that the Board would adjourn to Closed Session to discuss Closed
Session Agenda Items 1 and 2.
The Board recessed to Closed Ss P
Session at 6:40 p.m
. and the Closed Session commenced at
6:40 .m. The Board concluded the Closed Session at 7:30 .m.
P p
i
REGULAR MEETING
III. L. Hassett called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. He announced that the Board
had discussed Closed Session Agenda Items 1 and 2 in Closed Session and that no
reportable actions had taken place.
Additional Staff Present: Scott Cotterel, Stan Hooper, Rudy Jurgensen, Kirk
Lenington, John Maciel, Rick Parry, Cindy Roessler, Cathy Woodbury
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS—There were none.
Meeting 05-21 Page 2
V. INTRODUCTION
Rudy Jurgensen introduced Jennifer Williams, Community Programs Aide.
VI. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt the agenda. K. Nitz seconded and
the motion passed 7 to 0.
VII. ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt the Consent Calendar, including
minutes of the August 10, 2005, Special and Regular Meetings, and the
August 24, 2005 Special and Regular Meetings; Agenda Item 4, A42Z
Resolution Approving the Amendment to Communications Site Lease
with Mountain Union Telecom, LLC at Black Mountain, Rancho San
Antonio Open Space Preserve; Determine Recommended Action is Not a
Project Under CEQA, and Revised Claims 05-17. P. Siemens seconded
the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. N. Hanko abstained on Claims
#3503.
VIII. BOARD BUSINESS
A. Agenda Item No. I —Presentation by the California Oak Mortality Task Force on
their Ongoing Research Regarding Sudden Oak Death—(Report R-05-106).
Janice Alexander, Outreach Coordinator with the California Oak Mortality Task
Force, made a presentation on the pathogen causing Sudden Oak Death and
provided an update regarding ongoing research.
Ms. Alexander's presentation included the current status of Sudden Oak Death
(SOD) in California and described the pathogen and the trees' reaction. She
showed a list of susceptible plants which included more than 75 species. She
noted potential risk areas.
Ms. Alexander talked about how the pathogen spreads. The nursery industry is
one of the main groups they are working with to stop the spread of the pathogen.
The second part of the presentation was about management and research,
including treatment. Discussion followed regarding the use of mature
phytophthora to combat phytophihora ramorum, the pathogen that causes SOD.
Ms. Alexander said the pathogen was only found in 2002. She recommended
leaving the dead trees on-site as much as possible. She said not every tree needed
to be taken down and talked about a northern California area where trails had
been closed in infected areas. Studies are being done to find out whether hiking
boots and bicycle tires move the pathogen.
Meeting 05-21 Page 3
Ms. Alexander talked about funding for the program. In 2005, $1.5 million came
from the Federal Government, and nothing from the State of California.
D. Little commented that it seemed that the program is totally under funded and
said he did not understand why money is not being spent internationally to find
the source of the pathogen.
N. Hanko said the District is trying to fit into the effort as well as it can. They
have devoted lots of money to acquire land, and it is up to them to take care of the
land.
Ms. Alexander said there is a test kit researchers can take into the field which
quickly tells them if a sample contains phytophthora. She said the reason no
research is being done in this area is that they are working at the edges of
infestations to try to keep them from spreading.
D. Little said he would propose that the District create a challenge grant program
to challenge other agencies to work with them.
B. Agenda Item No. 2 - Consideration of Use & Management Committee
Recommendations Regarding Sudden Oak Death Management on District Lands;
Determine Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from CEQA
(Report R-05-104).
C. Roessler presented the staff report which included information on what is
going on at the District, such as staff training, educating the public, best
management practices, and monitoring. She said that this year's Action Plan
states that they will continue monitoring and mapping, implement precautions,
educate preserve visitors, and participate in symposiums.
Regarding Recommendation 2 of the Use and Management Committee, she said
they would try to determine from the samples whether the resistance is genetic or
environmental. She explained how that would be helpful. She talked about the
recommended future actions of treatment and control. Staff would need to come
back with a schedule and budget if the Board approved the recommendations at
this time.
C. Roessler said they are proposing testing on coast live oaks, canyon oaks, and
tanoaks. They have identified dead trees in all three of those types of oaks. She
said that once a tree is dead, they cannot determine if it was SOD that killed it.
She added that the pathogen is consumed by fire. More false negatives come
from trees other than bay trees.
D. Little thought the Committee meeting a month ago was a productive one and
he appreciated staff s work in getting ready for the agenda items tonight. He
Meeting 05-21 Page 4
thought they were way behind the curve as were other agencies, and stated that it
was time the District stepped forward as an agency and dedicate themselves to
finding a real solution to the crisis. He said collecting and testing samples at this
time would not necessarily be cost effective. He thought detecting them and
tagging them and following them over the next few years to try to figure out
which are the top percentages of the trees in terms of resistance would be a really
good idea. If they find a tree that appears to be resistant, that tree should be tested
with tissue culture or cuttings. He proposed that the District put forward a budget
item that would fund research to work on effective bio-controls or possibly
resistant trees and that they put that in the form of a matching proposal to
encourage other agencies to get on board.
K. Nitz said he liked D. Little's idea of a matching fund program, but not right
now before it is well thought out. Regarding recommendation No. 2, he thought
they should hold off on collecting tissue samples, but should look into it.
Motion: K. Nitz moved that the Board direct District staff to initiate a
program to identify, flag, tag and map trees on District lands that
appear resistant to Sudden Oak Death (SOD); investigate the
effectiveness of collecting tissues samples from resistant trees, if
feasible; initiate a program to protect heritage trees on District
lands from SOD infection by application of an appropriate and
effective fungicide or other approved SOD treatment as determined
by staff; determine that recommended action number I is
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act for the reasons set out in the staff report; and add
Recommendation 5 to direct staff to report back to the Board by
the first meeting in December. N. Hanko seconded the motion.
Discussion: J. Cyr asked if the GPS was sophisticated enough to map the
resistant trees within a couple of yards. C. Roessler said yes.
However, the satellite signals do not go through in some of the
deep forest areas. She said they could get close enough and then
mark the individual tree. J. Cyr suggested that they take digital
photos at the time they tag the trees.
P. Siemens agreed with K. Nitz about the idea of mapping the
trees. C. Roessler said the number of trees would be in the many,
many thousands. When they come back they will have a study
method that they have developed with some costs and schedules
associated with it and hopefully get some assistance from the Task
Force in their study method.
P. Siemens agreed that collecting tissue samples now was probably
premature. He thought they needed to pursue the idea of coming
Meeting 05-21 Page 5
up with a challenge grant toward coming up with a biologic
control.
S. Schectman said it would be important that any District funding
program be a permissible expenditure of District funds.
D. Little said he thought they should challenge the legislature to
match the combined agency funding. He thought that moving
forward on a two-part program to try to identify and tag potentially
resistant trees and also to tag and survey and describe a variety of
trees that are in various stages of the disease or perhaps resistant
was something they needed to do. In addition, he thought it was
important to identify heritage trees and determine whether they can
effectively prevent those trees from becoming infected. He asked
what kind of budget staff would need to move forward with those
relatively modest steps.
C. Roessler said they would need to hire someone new. She said
she did not have a budget at this time, and it would take quite a bit
of work to figure that out. She thought their approach should be
based on priorities. Instead of trying to protect every possible tree,
they should develop a study design where they are setting priorities
of what they think are the highest value heritage trees that they
want to protect and frame it that way, come up with some cost
estimates, and come back and say we can protect this many trees
for this amount of money.
C. Britton said they were planning to come back to the Board
within the next two months. He said he would like to bring all of
this back to the Use and Management Committee unless the Board
disagrees. S. Schectman suggested that if they make a motion at
this meeting instead of a "challenge grant," the Board move to
establish a "funding mechanism" so they can explore all of those
and find one that works and avoid duplication of what the Task
Force is doing. Perhaps an MOU similar to what the District has
for feral pigs, or a direct research program, might be an option.
P. Siemens said he thought the District should focus on contacting
agencies and creating a fund to be used for research on specific
issues, perhaps use the words "investigate a funding program in
conjunction with other agencies."
J. Cyr said that perhaps a step before the funding program would
be to help other sister agencies that have trees figure out that this is
a problem and let them know what we are doing.
Meeting 05-21 Page 6
L. Hassett said they must make things happen, and he would
support the committee's recommendations.
Clarification of amended motion: K. Nitz said his motion included an
additional recommendation to include D. Little's idea of
investigating funding mechanisms for collaborating with other
agencies, both on education and bio-control, resistance and other
topics, this recommendation should be sent to the Use and
Management Committee for fleshing out before it returns to the
full Board. D. Little said he thought Recommendation I should be
that the District staff needs to make a recommendation to the
Board as soon as possible, preferably well before December, to
hire a consultant or to begin an in-house study to identify and tag
trees for a future study for resistance. He thought the Board should
make a decision at this meeting that they are ready to make a
commitment, and that staff would come back to the Board with a
recommendation for a consultant and put out an RFP to hire that
consultant or do it in-house.
C. Britton asked for clarification as to whether the Board wanted
staff to put out the RFP and come back with a consultant contract,
no matter what the amount of money is. He said he did not think
they could do it with existing staff.
C. Roessler said her advice was to have a consultant to the do the
work. She knew of the interest of some college students who were
working on internships. She recommended a focused approach.
C. Britton asked her what she would need to get started. C.
Roessler said that if the Board was asking what they need to do the
initial focus survey, they would need $15,000420,000.
Amendment: D. Little proposed that the motion include Recommendation 6 to
budget $20,000 as emergency funding for Resource Management
to move forward on all of the recommendations and to hire the
people they need to make this happen as quickly and effectively as
possible. K. Nitz and N. Hanko agreed to the addition.
Vote: The motion passed 7 to 0.
C. Agenda Item No. 3 - Consideration of Use & Management Committee
Recommendations Regarding Removal of Slender False Brame in Thornewood,
La Honda Creek and El Corte de Madera Open Space Preserves; Determine
Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt From CEQA — (Report R-05-
105).
Meeting 05-21 Page 7
C. Roessler reviewed what is in the current action plan. She talked about what
had been learned about the invasive plant. The current status is that 65 acres have
been mapped. She talked about what had already been done including removal
and education, and outlined staff s recommendations.
Motion: D. Little moved that the Board authorize the District to fully fund a
resource management program with the goal of successfully
eradicating slender false brome in three years from Thornewood,
La Honda and El Corte de Madera Open Space Preserves; conduct
semi-annual treatment of slender false brome in the District's
preserves with an herbicide deemed effective and appropriate in
the professional opinion of resource management staff, review,test
and implement other control methods, as appropriate, in the
professional opinion of resource management staff; apply for
grants to assist in the funding control of slender false brome;
petition the State of California to reclassify slender false brome as
a Category A or B noxious weed; coordinate eradication efforts
with Caltrans, the Town of Woodside, the San Mateo County
Weed Management Area and other agencies to achieve successful
eradication; implement a pilot program to control slender false
brome on private lands immediately adjacent to Thomewood Open
Space Preserve, where such control is necessary for eradication on
the preserve to be successful; determine that the recommended
actions, numbers I through 6, are categorically exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act for the reasons set out in the
staff report; and authorize and appropriate $10,000 from the land
acquisition budget category to fund work on recommended actions
5-7, with that amount to be returned to the Board at mid year
budget. K. Nitz assessed what had happened in the past, seconded
the motion and proposed a written plan to assess past actions and
their effectiveness, and to undertake future actions and an
evaluation of those actions.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the recommendations be sent to staff for
consideration. M. Davey seconded the motion.
Discussion: C. Britton asked for more direction. He thought next meeting
would be too soon. He said he thought C. Roessler was hearing
that staff had failed. K. Nitz said he wanted them to look at what
has been done and what went right and what went wrong and do an
assessment for last year and this year, and develop a removal
roadmap. He thought the wording for the plan needed to be more
definite.
C. Roessler said they could hire an integrated pest control
management specialist who is used to setting up these types of
Meeting 05-21 Page 8
programs. They would also be on the learning curve as the District
is, but it would be an objective party that could come in and
investigate what appears to be of concern and come up with a road
map, She said the staff could do it but what she was hearing was
that the road map they were using was not satisfactory.
D. Little said he thought the Board was expressing frustration that
the mandate given to staff in 2004 might have gotten implemented
in 2004 but nothing happened on slender false brume, at least that
was visible to the Board, until the Board and Use and Management
Committee brought it up in August. Staff had told the Board that
the opportunity for spraying had been missed. He thought it was a
District-wide missed opportunity and thought they needed to move
forward. He thought K. Nitz had raised a very specific plan. He
said this is a problem that they realistically can do something
about. He said that it is their responsibility and California forests
are at a significant risk from this problem. He said they need to act
now. He said he would propose putting $50,000 into K. Nitz's
plan. He proposed saying $20,000 now and come back in a month.
C. Britton responded that if there was a failure, it was his failure.
He acknowledged that C. Roessler had done a great job. He said
they did miss a spraying event when the slender false brume went
to seed, which had to do with trying to get an outside contractor to
do the job and ending up with no bids and missing the window for
spraying. He said he would like to fold K. Nitz's
recommendations with Recommendation 7. He said he would
suggest going to U&M Committee prior to bringing it back to the
Board. He thought one of the problems with K. Nitz's
recommendations was that there were specific scientific things he
wanted done and that was never a proposal before. He said he
would like them to take a look at it and say what are we trying to
accomplish here and what is the value of this.
K. Nitz said the scientific aspect was actually part of
Recommendation 3, and if they were going to do that, they should
have a scientific method or at least pseudo-scientific one.
C. Britton continued that he thought the bigger problem was the
extent of this contamination on private land and how they will get
access to deal with that. He agreed with D. Little that the
District's publicity has to be "hazard plant alert" or something
similar. He said they need to get people excited about this, or they
will never be able to get on their property. He said he would rather
focus on that to the extent they can, to get that rolling at least. He
Meeting 05-21 Page 9
said he would hate to get sidetracked. He said he thought the
Board had to make some choices.
D. Little said he could understand waiting until December on
SOD, but this is something where a month could make a
difference. He would like to see it brought back the U&M within a
month.
C. Roessler said brome seems to seed primarily in the summer, and
there are opportunities to spray in the spring and fall.
M. Davey expressed confidence in staff. She thought the Board
was trying to help staff do an even better job, even though some
Board Members' way of expressing it was different from hers.
N. Hanko said she was becoming alarmed that they had been
brought recommendations from the U&M Committee without a
financial figure until tonight. Mone ures were not in the report
or the recommendations. She said she thought it was important
that if committees were going to be recommending funding, they
put a figure in their recommendations so that the Board and staff
could think about the amount. She said they were spending a lot of
money tonight that was not in the budget and did not go to the
budget committee and would have an effect on all the other things
they do. It is important funding, but it is important that the
Committee recommends the amounts and explains why they
thought the amounts were the right amounts.
C. Britton responded that it was not the Committee's fault. Staff
did not bring any numbers to the Committee. The numbers really
only came up tonight. He apologized to the Board.
N. Hanko said she thought it was up to the Committee to come
back with thorough reports including the amount.
P. Siemens followed up that he thought they should add
Recommendation 9. He thought the Committee's intent was not to
do anything until staff came back with a cost and schedule
estimate.
N. Hanko asked if they would be willing to strike the word "fully"
from Recommendation 1, because they do not know how much
fully would be.
Meeting 05-21 Page 10
C. Roessler said the slender false brume in La Honda and El Corte
de Madera had been sprayed except for the newest location that
was spotted last week. That will be sprayed soon.
C. Britton asked C. Roessler what kind of preparation she would
need if they were going to come back to U&M before they
committed to some money on this. C. Roessler said that when she
looked at the first 8 recommendations, she thought they could
come back to the Board with a very well fleshed out schedule and
budget by the end of the year. She thought the assessment and
investigation items would take a lot of time. She said she was
feeling confused about where she should focus her time and when
she could get back to the Board on them, and whether dollars are
going to make any difference. K. Nitz responded that his
recommendations were incorporated into Recommendation 7
which will go to U&M, so she did not have to be concerned about
that.
P. Siemens said they have a plan in the budget to eradicate the
weed on Thornewood. What they are talking about is additional
actions. He said he did not think they would gain a lot without
coming up with a plan and schedule and budget which is part of
what is in the staff report. He thought the recommendations in the
staff report were fine as they were, but they needed to add item 9
which is to prepare a cost and schedule and come back by the end
of the year.
C. Britton said he agreed with D. Little that it was within his
spending authority. The question was, is there money left that
could be directed in the way they need to get the support to
develop the recommendations.
M. Davey said what they were trying to do is eradicate the weed.
It seemed to her that the Committee came forward with this series
of recommendations 1-8 and they would add 9. If they were going
to make changes to the recommendations, it should go back to the
Committee for a change in the recommendations. She said she saw
what D. Little had just said encapsulated in Recommendation 1.
Second to Motion: M. Davey seconded the motion made by D. Little earlier in
the meeting to approve Recommendations 1-8 with 9 added for a
specific budget to accomplish 1-8.
Discussion: J. Cyr said it would be helpful to him as a Board member to
understand as the process goes forward how staff is doing what
they previously directed them to do. He said that on both agenda
Meeting 05-21 Page 11
items 2 and 3, there seemed to have come before the Board an
urgency to act immediately. He said he was uncomfortable with
that kind of thrust. He said he would support the
recommendations, but maybe what they could learn from this that
the Board needed to know how what staff is doing is being
accomplished. He said he personally felt a little resistant about
suddenly everything being an emergency.
Motion: N. Hanko moved to amend the motion to strike the word "fully"
from Recommendation 1. J. Cyr seconded the motion. D. Little
and M. Davey agreed to the amended motion.
Discussion: D. Little asked staff if they had the resources they need to continue
their eradication efforts in the next month or two until they bring it
back and make a formal decision.
C. Britton commented that they have a resource management
program, and none of the items discussed tonight were in the
program for this year. C. Roessler has been working hard and
successfully on the approved action plan and budget. He asked the
Board to allow staff to get back to the Board to let them know
when they can report back. He said they understand the urgency.
They have some legal, budget, and logistical questions they have to
deal with. He said staff is doing the best possible job they can, and
Board should let him know if they feel they are not.
L. Hassett said he thought the District was fortunate to have one of
the best resource management programs in the state, if not the
whole country. He thought the real issue was a global issue. He
thought the Board struggle was how fast do we grow the Resource
Management program, which comes back to how the Board deals
with it. He said maybe the Board should have done more in
hiring additional folks, because it is clear that what they are asking
the limited number of people that are in this department to do is
astronomical. His second concern was that they have always had
issues related to the Thornewood boundaries. He would like to
know where the boundaries are. He added that he has worked with
what he considers to be one of the finest homeowners association
he had ever encountered, the Old La Honda Road Association. He
said if they ever wanted a group of folks that would cooperate and
participate in a pilot program or some way of getting something
happening, it is that association. They are active, organized and
connected, and he thought they had a high probability of being
successful in that area if they work with the neighbors. That is part
of the good neighbor policy and being a bureaucracy that can work
with their neighbors.
Meeting 05-21 Page 12
Vote: The motions carried 7 to 0.
IX. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
J. Cyr: 1. The State Parks Commission meeting was wonderful. 2. He enjoyed the
volunteer event. 3. He attended the Presentation Center ribbon-cutting event. 4. He was
going to the Deer Hollow event on Sunday.
D. Little: 1. He also enjoyed the volunteer event. 2. He talked about the art auction to
be held the following Sunday at which one of his photos would be auctioned.
M. Davey: 1. Ridgeline had an article about the District. 2. She said Saturday's
volunteer event was great day. 3. The POST dinner a smashing success.
K. Nitz said the volunteer event was fabulous and staff is great.
N. Hanko: 1. She had toured Bear Creek Stables. 2. The POST event was outstanding.
3. The volunteer docent event was outstanding, 4. LFPAC is working on rules and
procedures.
D. Little presented a slide show of his images that will be on exhibit Sunday.
C. Britton: 1. P. Siemens and he went to the Santa Clara County Special District
meeting put on by the Santa Clara Valley Water District. 2. Staff will participate in
sexual harassment training on October 5. 3. He will have an interview with the Santa
Clara County Grand Jury on October 7. 4. C. Woodbury and he met with San Mateo
County Environmental Health Agency's Marcia Raines, San Mateo County Parks and
Recreation Department's new Director, David Holland and new Planning Director, Lisa
Grote. 5. There will be an Art O'Neal Influencing Skills workshop for new staff on
October 25 and 26. 6. Bettina Ring has been hired as the new director of the Bay Area
Open Space Council. 7. Nadine Hitchcock, Coastal Conservancy, reported an award of a
$500,000 grant toward the purchase of Stevens Canyon Ranch. 8. He referred to the
memo from S. Thielfoldt in the FYIs regarding her presentation the San Mateo County
LAFCo which was very well received. 9. They got a call from FEMA regarding the
$170,000 bridge at Skyline Ridge. FEMA had given the District $20,000 and indicated
that they might give them the rest. This was from the storms in 1991. 10. He was
invited to a breakfast that will take place at the NRPA conference in San Antonio. The
breakfast is for those who are considering attending the event next year which the District
will co-host.
X. ADJOURNMENT
At 11:23 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.
Roberta Wolfe, Recording Secretary