The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About20051109 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) i Regional Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 05-25 REGULAR AND SPECIAL MEETING r BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 6:30 p.m. Wednesday,November 9, 2005 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos,California AGENDA* Please Note: 6:30 p.m. Closed Session Special Meeting Start Time 7:30 p.m. Regular Meeting Start Time 6:30 ROLL CALL j SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT—CLOSED SESSION The Closed Session will begin at 6:30 p.m. At the conclusion of the Closed Session,the Board will adjourn the Special Meeting Closed Session to the Regular Meeting,and, at the conclusion of the Regular Meeting, the Board may p g reconvene the Special Meeting Closed Session. 1. Conference with Real Property Negotiator iator—California Government Code § 54956.8 Real Property—San Mateo County APNs 078-270-010, -020, -030; 078-290-010, -020, -030, -060; 082-140-020; 082-170-010, -040; 900 Sears Ranch Road, 5701 La Honda Road, La Honda 94020 Agency Negotiator—Mike Williams, Real Property Manager Negotiating_Party_—Walter Moore,Vice President, POST Under Negotiation—Price and terms of payment 2. Conference with Legal Counsel—Existing Litigation,California Government Code § 54956.9(a) Name of Case—Citizens for Responsible Open Space v San Mateo County LAFCo Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. CIV442954 3. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation; Significant Exposure to Litigation under California Government Code § 549569(b): one potential case 7:30* REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ROLL CALL REPORT ON RETURN FROM CLOSED SESSION—California Government Code Section 54957.1(a). ORAL COMMUNICATIONS—Public ADOPTION OF AGENDA—L. Hassett ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR—L. Hassett *** APPROVAL OF MINUTES—September 28,2005 BOARD BUSINESS 7:40* 1 Presentation by San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Foundation; Adoption of Resolution Supporting Efforts to Draft a Measure for the 2006 San Mateo County Ballot to Increase Sales Tax by One-Eighth Cent as Dedicated Revenue for Parks and Open Space for Cities and Special Districts Within San Mateo County—C. Britton I Meeting 05-25 Page 2 8:10* 2 Approval for Removal of Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve; Determine Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from CEQA—J. Maciel 8:30* 3 Annual Seasonal Trail Closures Information Report—G. Baillie 4 Adoption of Resolution Approving the Addition of One Credit Card for Network Specialist with Credit Limit of$2,000 and Increase Credit Limit of Assistant General Manager to$5,000—S. Thielfoldt REVISED CLAIMS 8:45 INFORMATIONAL REPORTS—Brief reports or announcements concerning pertinent activities of District Directors and Staff-, opportunity to refer public or Board questions to Staff for factual information; request Staff to report back to the Board on a matter at a future meeting; or direct Staff to place a matter on a future agenda. CLOSED SESSION CONTINUED(If Necessary) REPORT ON RETURN FROM RECONVENED CLOSED SESSION(if necessary) —California Government Code Section 54957.1(a). 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 Chair 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. All items on the consent calendar may be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of the public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar. 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. Regional Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT I 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 Session at 6:40 p.m. and the Closed Session commenced at 6:40 p.m. The Board concluded the Closed Session at 7:30 p.m. 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, Adopt 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. 1 —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 phytophthora 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. o D. Little commented that it seemed that the program ro ram 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 1 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 II 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. Bri tton said they were planning Tannin to com e back to the Board within the next two months. He said he would like to bring al l of this back to the Use and Management ment Committee unless the Board disag rees. S. Schectman suggested ted that if th ey make a motion at g gg Y 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 1 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 workingon internships. She recommended a focused approach. p 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 Brome 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). i 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; 1 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 Thornewood Open Space Preserve, where such control is necessary for eradication on the preserve to be successful; determine that the recommended actions, numbers 1 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 brome, 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 r they did miss a spraying event when the slender false b ome 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 fail. 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. Money figures 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 amount. She said the spending could think about the amo y were p g 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 brome 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 Y the 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 hel pful ful to him as a Board member to Y r 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 bu dget.et. He ask ed the et Board to al low staff to g 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 g g 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 Y Grand Jury on October Y 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 i Regional Open Space MIDPENINSUtA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-05-25 Meeting 05-118 November 9, 2005 AGENDA ITEM 1 AGENDA ITEM Resolution Supporting Efforts to Draft a Measure for the 200 Mateo County Ballot to Increase Sales Tax by One-Eighth Cent as Dedicated Reven e for ks and Open Space GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDA ION Adopt the attached Resolution supporting efforts to draft a measure for the 2006 ballot to increase sales tax by one-eighth cent to support the parks and recreation-related activities of San Mateo County, the cities and special districts located within the County. DISCUSSION Parks and recreation programs throughout San Mateo County have not been funded at optimal levels for many years. As a non-mandated service, these programs are one of the few areas that can be and have been severely reduced during budget crises. The results are staffing reductions, reduced land purchases for critical parks and open space, deferred maintenance, reduced gardening and landscaping services, longer intervals between litter pick-up and bathroom cleaning, and removal or closure of facilities that need repair or do not meet safety standards. In response to these needs, Parks for the Future, a wide-ranging group including nonprofits, cities, the County of San Mateo and special districts, has been working on this issue for over two years. Their work has resulted in a bill, SB 203, recently signed into law by the Governor,that enables the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors to place a dedicated one-eighth cent increase to sales tax revenue source for parks and recreation activities before San Mateo County voters who would have to approve it by a two-thirds majority in order for it to take effect. Funds from this measure would help protect the natural environment and contribute to maintaining the county's high quality of life. Prepared by: Rudy Jurgensen, Public Affairs Manager Contact person: Craig Britton, General Manager i f RESOLUTION NO. 05- RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO SUPPORT EFFORTS TO DRAFT A MEASURE FOR THE 2006 BALLOT TO INCREASE SALES TAX BY ONE-EIGHTH CENT FOR PARKS AND OPEN SPACE I WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District considers the preservation, maintenance and enhancement of parks and open space to be vital to the quality of life of San Mateo County residents; and, WHEREAS, parklands in San Mateo County and park programs are essential in meeting park needs of County residents; and, WHEREAS, the details of the proposed measure are being prepared through a collaborative process; and, WHEREAS, the proposed measure would provide funds for the County, special districts and city parks within San Mateo County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District supports efforts aimed at drafting a measure for the 2006 ballot to place a 1/8 cent sal es tax increase before the San Mateo County voters to secure dedicated revenues to support the parks, open space and recreation-related activities of San Mateo County. Parks for the Future Executive Summary Parks for the Future is an effort to secure dedicated tax-based revenues to support the parks and recreation related activities of San Mateo County, the cities located within the County, the Ladera and Highlands recreation districts and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by placing a measure to increase sales tax by I/8h cent on a future ballot. The legislative permission required to place a 1/8th cent increment on the ballot was secured in 2005 with the approval of SB 203. The revenue, projected to raise between $13-16 million per year, would be allocated to jurisdictions per a formula and may be used for park and recreation related functions such as maintenance, operations, activities and programs, capital improvements and acquisition. This report outlines: * the need for the measure; 0 the Parks for the Future process to date; a recommendations from the Parks for the Future participants, including the distribution of funds; * the possible timeline. The report also identifies items that still need to be addressed. This the first opportunity to receive feedback from elected and appointed officials and the public. Need Today's parks and associated recreation programs play a significant role in communities. Parks are where we gather with our family and friends. The open spaces offer us solitude, and their beauty and quiet nourish our soul. The wild places provide habitat for native plants and animals, and provide critical functions in water supply and flood control. Well maintained parks, urban tree programs and community landscaping improve neighborhood aesthetics and property values. Recreation programming supports healthy lifestyles and youth and senior programs, resulting in improved public safety. Teen after-school programs provide sports and healthy socializing. Senior programs prevent social isolation and support senior health through age-appropriate nutrition programs and physical exercises. Sports and other physical fitness programs now play a critical role in combating California's low rates of physical fitness and high rates of obesity—among youth and adults alike. While parks and recreation programs are important to our communities they have not been funded at an optimal level for many years. As a non-mandated service,they are one of the few areas that can be and have been reduced during budget crises. The results are staffing reductions,reduced gardening and landscaping services, longer intervals between litter pick-up and bathroom cleaning, deferred maintenance, and removal or closure of facilities that need repair or do not meet safety standards. San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Division alone has an unfunded deferred maintenance and capital improvement need of over $80 million and has had its budget reduced by approximately 40% since FY 02/03. Staffing levels have been reduced from 94.3 FTE in 1990 to 65 FTE in 2005. page I 10/19/05 rev 2 Meanwhile visits to the County Parks has increased by 250,000. The cuts in June 2004 resulted in staff reduction precipitating the closure of numerous facilities within the parks and the complete closure of 4 parks 3 days a week that summer. While closures of some facilities were lifted after the Board of Supervisors increased funding for the County Parks division the following September, budget related problems like staff shortages and safety issues created by deferred maintenance persist. Cities within the County have similar funding needs. Process Parks for the Future is a wide-ranging group of local leaders that includes representatives from nonprofits, cities, the County, special districts and park advocates. Over the past year,Parks for the Future participants have been discussing a variety of issues in a workshop format. A feasibility study and a voter survey (poll)were also conducted. The group has reached consensus on the following items so far during this process: • Pursue 1/8th-cent sales tax • Pursue the enabling legislation required to place the measure on the ballot • Do not form a special district, instead utilize an existing dependent board • Governance responsibilities of the managing board include distribution of funds, auditing and reporting functions • Funds can be used for a variety of park and recreation related needs including maintenance, operations, activities and programs, capital improvements and acquisition. • Use population and a base amount to cities as the method for distributing funds to cities (Determined we could not use other methods such as acreage, programs or budgets as there was no consistent measurement). • Use Department of Finance annual projections to adjust allocations. • The formula for distributing funds to County, cities & districts Items that have been discussed but still await a recommendation include: • What entity will have governance responsibilities? • How will maintenance of effort be handled? • What is the tax measure's sunset date and process for renewing? • Exactly when the item will be placed on the ballot. Why was a one-eight cent sales tax chosen? This approached was taken because of the strong level of support for a one-eight cent sales tax, the amount of revenue that would be raised though the tax and the desire to not create another special district or level of bureaucracy to administer the tax. 0 The information from the poll conducted in early January 2005 showed that 67/o of voters indicated that they would support or likely support a one-eighth cent increase in the sales tax compared to 56% would support or likely support one-quarter cent increase. The poll also showed that only a small parcel tax would garner 2/3rds support by voters and only yield $4 million verses the $13-16 million projected from the one-eight cent sales tax increases. 10/19/05 rev 2 page 2 _1 What will this cost per person and how does our tax rate compare? Estimated Revenue&Annual Cost Current saI es T �►n>a'at 1�in�rai n FlParspst Sales Tax Rate Comparison :z.�. County Sales Tax 0.125% $16,074,486 $18.10 Alameda 8.75% Assumes 25%of income is spent of taxable items Contra Costa 8.25% San Francisco 8.50% Based on 2002 median per capita income of$57,906 San Mateo 8.25% "Average personal spending multiplied by#of county residents Santa Clara 8.25% Santa Cruz 8.00% Why was special legislation required and what is the status of the legislation? Counties possess the authority for levying sales taxes in one-quarter cent increments under Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7285,the general provision for one-quarter or one-half cent sales tax increases. However, there is no general provision for counties—or cities—to impose a one-eight cent sales tax, other than for the purposes of funding libraries. SB 203 was introduced to provide San Mateo County with this authority. It received bipartisan support from the legislature and was signed by the Governor. While this law now gives San Mateo County the authority to place a measure on a ballot in 2006, if deemed appropriate, the authority is not limited to 2006 and carries over to future years. The authority in this law is limited to placing a measure on the ballot that raises funds for parks. Has a Governance Board been chosen? While the intention is to minimize bureaucracy by utilizing an existing dependent board for governance responsibilities such as distribution of funds, auditing and reporting functions, no specific entity has been chosen. Many have mentioned CCAG as the appropriate body. How can the revenue be spent? The revenue would be dedicated to supporting functions relating to the parks and recreation departments of the cities, county, and special districts. Revenues from the sales tax are flexible so it can be spent on operations, maintenance and recreation activities and programs, although local jurisdictions would have latitude to spend the funds on capital improvements and acquisition. The poll found the voters placed a high value on funding operations and maintenance. How will the sales tax revenues be distributed? The group looked at various criteria to allocate funds. It was determined that methods such as acreage, programs or budgets could not be used as there was no consistent measurement. An allocation to the County, allocations to the special districts and an allocation to the cities, divided through a formula that included a base amount to smaller cities and population was chosen as the approach to distributing funds Through a negotiated process that involved the representatives from the City Managers' group, the County and the San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Foundation, a distribution formula was determined. The table below assumes that administration is taken off the top. Note that the State ° o administer the tax and the amount for the governing agency's charg es g g Board of Equalization g activities has not been determined. page 3 10/19/05 rev 2 Amount of annual Percentage Recipient allocation $8,008,309 52% cities $6,497, 307 42% county $755,501 6% special districts $15,110,017 100% 1 Annual growth of sales tax revenues equal to or less than 4% will be distributed on a pro-rata basis. Cities and special districts only will benefit from annual growth in excess of 4%. The base annual distribution for MROSD is $ 683,628. The distribution charts for all cities is attached at end of document. Time Line Note: This schedule assumes a November 2006 election. That date had not been determined It is just the earliest the measure would go to the ballot. The measure may be delayed if sufficient progress towards the ballot language has not been made or ifpolling and other factors determine that November 2006 is not a good ballot for the measure. • March 2004—Idea of collaborating on a dedicated funding source first presented. • March 2004-May 2004—First legislative effort focused on formation of special district. Effort dropped in favor of more process first • November 2004 —Workshop#1 • December 2004— Survey of likely voters to evaluate support levels for benefit assessment, parcel tax and sales tax • January 2005 —Workshop#2. Presentation of survey results. • February 2005 —Workshop #3 • March 2005 —Workshop#4 • August 2005 —Workshop#5 • September 2005 — SB 203 receives legislative approval • October 2005 —Governor approves SB 203 • Fall 2005—Reports to City Councils and Park Commissions • February 2006— Workshop#6 • February 2006—Take the comments of Parks Commissions/City Councils and Workshops #5 and#6 to CCAG. • March-April 2006—Preparation of ballot language by subcommittee • June-July 2006—Opportunity to take positions on ballot measure • August 8, 2006—County Board of Supervisors places measure on ballot • November 7, 2006—Election 10/19/05 rev 2 page 4 Items that still need to be addressed While many key elements of a parks and recreation funding structure have been sketched out, additional input from city leaders and the public is desired. In particular, comments are sought on a proposed sunset date for the measure and how the public can be assured that funds dedicated to parks will be used to improve park programs rather than simply supplanting city funds (maintenance of effort). Sunset and Process for Renewal The duration of the tax and the renewal process has not been determined. Many have suggested 25 or 30 years while others have suggested 15 years. The use of these funds to pay bond debt by cities with major capital or acquisition needs is one consideration for length. It was suggested that a report be provided to the public every two years for both accountability and to build support for renewal. This would be included in the Governance Responsibilities services covered by that administrative fee. A citizen oversight committee should also be considered. Proposed Maintenance of Effort Concept Discussions in the workshops identified that cities may be reluctant to tie their hands, particularly as it relates to potential future reductions in funding for their parks and recreation departments. On the other hand, it was agreed that no maintenance of effort would probably doom the measure as the voters want accountability and want this money to supplement park and recreation budgets. Proposed language at the workshop: Cities and the County must maintain current spending levels for Parks and Recreation, except in case of budget reductions then cuts to parks could be no greater than cuts to other non-safety departments Comments on the specific maintenance of effort wording included: • The phrase non-public safety was an issue for some participants as park and recreation activities are known to reduce juvenile crime. Several people recommended removing the term non-public safety. Others felt we should keep it in as public safety is a core issue for cities and this language will make it easier to sell to voters. • Add that in no circumstances will these funds be spent for non-park/recreation purposes. • Maintenance of effort should also include "Increasing" budgets in good years. • Language needs to be generic Next Steps As noted in the timeline an additional workshop will be held and the specific language of the ballot measure will be prepared and brought back for review. A community based campaign committee will be formed to champion the ballot measure. As part of their effort,they will conduct additional polls and focus groups,prepare campaign literature and engage in a grassroots effort to pass the measure. 10/19/05 rev 2 page 5 Base year distribution assuming sales tax at 2002 level and with administrative costs deducted Base Amount County $6,497,307 Special Districts $755,501 Atherton $205,000 Belmont $268,272 Brisbane $205,000 Burlingame $300,681 Colma $205,000 Daly City $1,106,502 East Palo Alto $315,076 Foster City $307,569 Half Moon Bay $205,000 Hillsborough $205,000 Menlo Park $328,733 Millbrae $221,234 Pacifica $409,942 Portola Valley $205,000 Redwood City $805,169 San Bruno $428,896 San Carlos $295,983 San Mateo $987,556 South San Francisco $646,596 Woodside $205,000 Total $15,110,017 10/19/05 rev 2 page 6 it PARKS FOR THE FUTURE Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District November 9,2005 WHAT IS PARKS FOR THE FUTURE? Parks for the Future is an effort to secure dedicated tax-based revenues to support the parks and recreation related activities of San Mateo County,the cities located within the County,the Ladera and Highlands recreation districts and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District though a future ballot measure to increase sales tax by 1/8th cent, Purpose of Presentation This presentation will cover j I the need for the measure the Parks for the Future process to date recommendations from the Parks for the Future participants, including the distribution of funds the possible timeline items that still need to be addressed. This is our first opportunity to receive feedback from elected and appointed officials and the public. 1 i Benefits of Parks OEM NEED SAN MATEO COUNTY PARKS DIVISION • Deferred maintenance and capital improvement -- over$100 million • Operating budget reduced by 40%since FY 02/03. • Staffing levels have been reduced from 94.3 FTE in 1990 to 65 FTE in 2005. FL Y CONSENSUS DECISIONS • Pursue 1/81h-cent sales tax • Pursue the enabling legislation required for ballot measure • Do not form a special district,utilize an existing dependent entity • Governance responsibilities of the managing board include distribution of funds,auditing and reporting functions • Funds are for park and recreation--maintenance,operations, rams activities and programs, 9 ,capital improvements and acquisition - -. • The formula for distributi ng funds to count cities 9 Y, &districts .. • Use population and a base amount to cities as the method for distributing funds to cities(Determined we could not use other methods such as a. creme,programs or budgets) 2 s Why choose a 1i8th cent sales tax? This approached was taken because strong level of support for a one-eighth cent sales tax increase the amount of revenue that would be raised though the tax the desire not to create another special district or level of bureaucracy to administer the tax. What will this cost per person and how does our tax rate compare? AnnualRevanue $16,074,486 Annual CosUPerson $18.10 Sales County Sales Tax Rate Comparison Alameda 8.75% Contra Costa 8,26% San Francisco 8.50% San Mateo 8.26% '.. Santa Clara 8,25% Santa Cruz 8.00% ALLOCATION OF FUNDS $8,006,309 52% Cities $6,497,307 42% County $755,501 6% Special Districts ....._................._............. Annual growth equal to or less than 4%distributed per this formula. Only cities and special districts receive growth revenue above 4%. 3 s Projected Base Year Distribution assumes sales tax at 2002 level and with administrative costa deducted MROSD $683,628 TIMELINE f.rch rch 2004-Idea of collaborating on funding source first presented 2004-May 2004-First legislative effort focused on formation pecial district.Effort dropped in favor of more process first vember 2004 Workshop#1 cember 2004-Survey of likely voters to asses support levels benefit assessment,parcel tax and sales taxuary 2005-Workshop#2 Presentation of survey results ruary 2006-Workshop#3ch 2005-Workshop#4ust 2005-Workshop#5 TIMELINE • September 2005-SB 203 receives legislative approval • October 2005-Governor's approves SB 203 • Fall 2006—Reports to Cities and Special Districts • February 2006-Workshop#6 • February 2006-Take the comments of Park Commissions/Park Councils and Workshops#5 and#6 to CCAG • March-April 20D6-Preparation of ballot language by subcommittee • June-July 2006-Opportunity to take positions on ballot measure • August 8,2006-Board of Supervisors place measure on ballot • November 7,2006-Election 4 ITEMS STILL TO BE ADDRESSED • What entity to use for governance • Proposed sunset date for the measure • How the public can be assured that funds dedicated to parks will be used to improve park programs rather than simply supplanting city funds(maintenance of effort), NEXT STEPS rnoted in the previous timeline additional workshops be held and the specific language of the ballot asure will be prepared and brought back for review. ommunity based campaign committee will be ed to champion the ballot measure. As part of r effort,they will conduct additional polls and focus ups,prepare campaign literature and engage in a sroots effort to pass the measure, 5 i I Regional Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-05-116 Meeting 05-25 November 9, 2005 AGENDA ITEM 2 AGENDA ITEM Approval for Removal of Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridg Open Si)ace Preserve GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) based on the findings contained in this report; 2. Authorize the General Manager to direct staff to remove specified eucalyptus trees. BACKGROUND As part of our ongoing restoration effort at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve, we will be removing six large eucalyptus trees from the north side of Hassler Loop this winter. Pursuant to the 1994 Restoration Plan for Pulgas Ridge, we have been removing target non-native species in phases. Since 1997, we have removed a total of 57 eucalyptus trees. The first phases of the project removed eucalyptus trees from the canyon area north of the Hassler Loop (below the ridgeline) and smaller trees along the ridge top. At this time, all the remaining 45 eucalyptus trees are along the ridgeline and all have trunk diameters greater than 12 inches. In the next 5 years, we will gradually remove the eucalyptus trees north of the Hassler Loop and inside of the Hassler Loop. In the subsequent five years, we will gradually remove the eucalyptus trees along the ridgeline near the water tank. Other invasive plants that are being removed from the preserve include broom, acacia, Monterey pine, and prickly pear cactus. This approach of gradual tree removal with revegetation(and leaving removal of the visible trees on the ridgeline until later phases) is consistent with the 1994 Restoration Plan and commitments made by the Board and staff during previous meetings and correspondence in 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001. As invasive plants are removed, we are replanting and reseeding sites with native chaparral and oak woodland plants. Revegetation efforts include the planting of oak acorns, native grasses and chaparral shrubs (chamise, coyote brush, manzanita, and sticky monkey flower). Replanting so far has taken place in the canyon area where all the acacia and eucalyptus trees have been removed. Replanting along the ridgeline will need to wait until enough trees have been removed from each section so that native shrub plantings are not damaged while subsequently removing large eucalyptus trees. i R-05-116 2 DISCUSSION The six eucalyptus trees selected for removal this year have trunks that range in diameter from 22 to 35 inches and are located on the north side of the Hassler Loop Trail (map attached). Foothills Field Office staff will cut the trees down and treat the stumps with herbicide to prevent resprouting. Branches will be chipped onsite; larger trunks will be used as firewood, if possible, or otherwise disposed offsite. Staff has submitted a permit application to San Mateo County for removal of large trees. Notices will be posted at the preserve prior to the tree cutting. We are returning to the Board regarding this item per the Board's 2001 request to be notified whenever we are removing eucalyptus trees of significant size from the preserve. All of the remaining trees have a trunk diameter larger than 12 inches, therefore we will continue to return to the Board on an annual basis with this notification, unless the Board decides this activity is routine and no longer requires Board notification. CEOA COMPLIANCE The project consists of cutting down six large eucalyptus trees and application of herbicide to the stumps to prevent resprouting. This removal is part of a phased program to remove invasive plants from the Pulgas Creek Open Space Preserve and restore it to natural conditions as wildlife habitat and for low intensity recreational use. The use of herbicide will be consistent with all label requirements for the approved herbicides, such as not spraying in sensitive areas, avoiding weather conditions that might result in drift, and avoiding native plant species, thus this action will not result in any significant effects. No rare animal or plants species are known to occur within or near the proposed work area. Removal of these trees in the wintertime will not disturb any nesting birds, and with the ongoing restoration, will restore native wildlife habitat over the long term. The District concludes that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Section 15301 exempts the maintenance and minor alteration of existing public facilities, with no expansion of existing use. Section 15301 (i) allows the maintenance of wildlife habitat areas to protect wildlife resources. The tree removal, which is a component of the restoration plan for the preserve, is designed to restore the native communities to the preserve to protect and restore wildlife resources. There are no special conditions at the site such as hazardous materials or rare species. Because the tree removal is being gradually implemented over 15 years, and the work areas are subsequently seeded and planted with native plants, no significant cumulative effects will occur. CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.4 provides that the public agencies shall list specific activities which fall within each exempt class and which are consistent with the intent of the classes as described in the state guidelines. Under the District's Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, the District has determined R-05-116 3 that certain day-to-day projects qualify for categorical exemptions from CEQA, including minor resource management projects (e.g., removal of exotic species and revegetation). Therefore, this program is consistent both with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 and the District's CEQA Guidelines. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION An agenda of this board meeting was mailed to adjoining and neighboring property owners of Pulgas Ridge and persons requesting notification of resource management items. Prepared by: Noelle Antolin,Natural Resources Intern Cindy Roessler, Resource Management Specialist Contact person: Cindy Roessler, Resource Management Specialist Revegetation Plan for Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve- 2005 _ a _4 yy Via i P' 4 e r R t n . i FM Revegetated sites 7 Eucalyptus to be removed in 2005 wo Oak plantings 0 Eucalyptus remaining I Future restoration sites Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Gloria Ison Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 8:21 AM To: Sally Thielfoldt Subject: FW: FW: Eucalyptus Tree Removal -----Original Message----- From: Nancy Morrissette [mailto:n_morrissette@hotmail.com] 2 0 1:12 PM Fri November 11 0 5 Sent. Friday, To: Gloria Ison Subject: RE: FW: Eucalyptus Tree Removal Thank you very much for the information. We appreciate the Board's amending the proposal to more pro-actively address replanting issues. Nancy Morrissette From: 'Gloria Ison"<gison@openspace.org> To: 'Gloria Ison"<gison@openspace.org> Subject: FW.,Eucalyptus Tree Removal Date: Thu, 10 Nov 200516.50.00-0800 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sally Thielfoldt > > Sent:Thursday, November 10, 2005 4:11 PM > >To: > > Subject: Eucalyptus Tree Removal > >This is a follow-up to your communication to the Board regarding the removal of six eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Board of Directors met last night, having received and read your e-mail and public testimony and voted to continue the restoration program,which includes removal of the six trees. There was considerable discussion regarding this program,as the Board considered all public input, balanced with the need to continue the District's mission of restoration of the natural environment on this preserve. Therefore,the Board amended the recommendation to require staff to more pro-actively promote the growth of native species and suppress the growth of non-native species in and around the eucalyptus trees. > >The Board also requested that staff add removal of the water tank to the next year's work plan. > > Input from constituents is always appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to submit your comments. > > Sally Thielfoldt,Assistant General Manager > > Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District > > (650)691-1200-tel (650)691-0485-fax > > www.openspace.org I 11/16/2005 Sally Thielfoldt � � From: Sally Thielfoldt Sent Thursday, November 1O. 2OO54:27PyW � To: umnu /uun � Subject: Eucalyptus Tree Removal � � This is a follow-up to your communicationto the Board regarding the removal of six eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Board cf Directors met last night, nswnOnscemooenonaeo e-mail and public testimony � and voted ~continue the restoration program, which includes removal _ the six trees. There was considerable disnuyoion regarding this nm as the Board considered all public input, balanced with the need to continue the � District's mission of restoration of the natural environment on this preserve. Therefore, the Board amended the recommendation to require staff to more pro-actively promote the growth of native species and suppress the growth of non-native species in and around the eucalyptus trees. The Board also requested that staff add removal of the water tank to the next year's work plan. � � Input from constituents ie always appreciated. Thank you for taking the time hn submit your comments. Sally Thioko/dt, Assistant General Manager MiJncu/nou/u Regional Open Space District � (650) 69I-I200 tel (65069l-0485-fax umm..opcu space.oq| z �� Sally Thielfoldt From: Kathleen Hart Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 2:27 PM To: Cindy Roessler; Sally Thielfoldt Subject: Update Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridge [Kathleen Hart] Here is what I sent to the 16 email people. Does anything get sent to anyone else, the petition circulator, for instance? kat The Board approved removal of the six trees, as part of the ongoing restoration plan for Pulgas Ridge, with a vote of 6 in favor to I against. The recommended action was amended to assure that staff will more pro-actively manage the site to promote natural species growth and suppress non-native growth. Sally Thielfoldt, Assistant General Manager Over 300 native shrubs and hundreds of acorns have been planted by District staff and volunteers over the past three years,below the ridge top where eucalyptus trees were previously removed. Revegetation is an ongoing staff activity. Planting on the ridge top will be undertaken in later phases of the project- we cannot plant directly underneath remaining eucalyptus as these plantings would just be damaged in the future with the equipment that will be necessary to remove the large eucalyptus trees. The Board of Directors voted last night to plant more native shrubs and oak acorns in the next few years at safe locations as more eucalyptus trees are removed. Native oak trees are steady, slow growers. Cintly Roessler, Resource Management Specialist Sincerely, Kathleen Operations Administrative Assistant Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (650) 691-1200 (650) 691-0485fax khartCa,openspace.org Thank you for your e-mail with comments about Agenda Item #2 for tonight's public Board meeting regarding Removal of Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. I have attached a copy of the report and map on this item, which is also available on the District Web site at www.openspace.org. The report outlines the scope of the project, which involves removal of six (6) trees, out of the remaining 25 trees on the site, the restoration plan, and the revegetation efforts which are part of the overall plan. The Board of Directors has received your e-mail, and will take all correspondence into consideration before voting on this agenda item. Sincerely, Sally Thielfoldt Asst. General Manager 'michaelgould2@comcast.net n_morrissette@hotmail.com' 'j ean_to lchard@ yahoo.com' 'alex.mccormick@stanfordalumni.org' 'jogwald@aol.com' bdmc24@yahoo.com 'NancyColet@aol.com' 'shabnam@stanfordalumni.org' 'lizbrittan@yahoo.com' 'JadeMCK@aol.com' 'hughgraham@gmail.com' 'OGitin@OGitin.com' 'fisheye 8 @c omc ast.net' 'DNP48@aol.com' 'sherrycking@comcast.net' 'marketpoin@aol.com' i Kathleen Hart From: Kathleen Hart Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 2:01 PM To: 'michaelgould2@comcast.net' Subject: FW: Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridge Dear Mr. Gould, Thank you for your e-mail with comments about Agenda Item #2 for tonight's public Board meeting regarding Removal of Eucalyptus Trees at Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. I have attached a copy of the report and map on this item, which is also available on the District Web site at<htti)://Nvww.openspace.gEg,�. The report outlines the scope of the project, which involves removal of six (6) trees, out of the remaining 25 trees on the site, the restoration plan, and the revegetation efforts which are part of the overall plan. The Board of Directors has received your e-mail, and will take all correspondence into consideration before voting on this agenda item. Sincerely, Sally Thielfoldt Asst. General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (650)691-1200 (650)691-0485 fax 110905-b-Pul 110905-b-Pul 3asEuc_Map.pd1 gasEuc.doc 11/08/05 16: 14 --- MROSD Carolyn Chaney, Ed. D. 313 Lakeview Way Redwood City,CA 94062 November 8, 2005 Board of Directors of the Midpenin sula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los.Altos, CA 94022-1404 Dear Directors, Since becoming a trail patrol volunteer in. 1.997' I have hiked 4 to 6 hours per week in Pulgas Ridge Open Space Preserve. This amounts to approximately 2000 hours greeting visitors, kicking' dog poop, trimming poison oak from trails, restocking maps, emptying trash receptacles (which I provide). I love Pulgas Ridge! I especially love tile magnif icent colunui.of large eucalyptus trees along the ridgeline,beside the road up to the Polly Geraci Trail. It grieves me that this stand is gap-toothed, due to the cutting of 30 trees in 2001, and. it grieves me even more that the district plans to continue cutting down these fine old trees. Why is the removal of the trees in the "preservation plan" for Pulgas Ridge? Wby does the District believe that cutting down huge trees that serve as habitat for birds of prey will "protect and restore wildlife resources" (from Resource Management Specialist's recommendations, 11/9/05)? Why is the removal of significant trees (San Mateo County designation for trees of this size) considered to be a "day-to-day project" ect" that qualifies for categorical exemption from CEQA rules? Under CEQA, asignificant effect on the environment means a substantial,or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project iter, minerals, flora a , fauna, ambient noise, and.objects of 1-Historicincluding land, air, w� or aesthetic significance(CEQA Guidelines Section 15382). 1 can't find anything in the CEQA guidelines that says that destruction of large trees that provide- habitat for birds and the primary food for bees, in the winter is exempt. In the next section of this letter I would like to examine why the district thinks that the removal of these fine old trees will have a positive effect on. the environment. In his recent book Doti think of an elenharat: Know -our values and frame the ddzdg, linguist George Tak(.)ff points out that to be accepted, truth must fit into people's beliefs;if the facts do not fif in the frame of beliefs,the beliefs stay and the facts bounce off. In the case of the eucalyptus trees, we have been indoctrinated with the belief that eucalyptus trees,are BAD trees. What beliefs are held by policymakers that are strong enough to over-ride the evidence at Pulgas Ridge that the eucalyptus trees are important parts of the eco-system? Belief #1: Eucalyptus trees are invasive, tending to spread. This belief is at the core of the"restoration" plan. Truth: There is NO evidence that the eucalyptus trees are spreading at Pulgas Ridge. In the 8 years I have nuked in Pulgas I have seen NO eucalyptus seedlings. The trees are growing in straight columns,just as they were planted many years ago. Eucalyptus trees spread when they are cut, thus necessitating use of poisons to kW the stumps after cutting. If the trees were not cut, then we could engage in organic and natural forestry practices that do not require the use of herbicides. 11/08/05 16: 14 MROSD [a 002 Belief #2, Eucalyptus trees poison the.ground, so that other natives cannot grow. Truth: The eucalyphus trees shelter numerous native plants. A brief examination of the stand of eucalyptus trees sbows many natives huddled under their drip lines. Removal of the eucalyptus means- changing the, water source for these natives. The grove of eucalyptus trees is a thriving community of plants. In September of 20001 wrote to the Board; We measured two similar plots of adjacent land near the water tank at Pulgas,one plot with two large oaks and one plot with.two large eucalyptus trees. After measuring the plots, we counted the oak seedlings growing on each. Under and around the oaks, 9 baby oaks were growing. T%-"I--Ld%^r xid around the eucalyptus, 1.7 small oaks werc-growing. Under the oaks, the ground seemed bare,but under the eucalypt-us were also additional native shrubs. Belief #3: Eucalyptus trees crowd out other natives and are incompatible with wildlife. Truth: The eucalyptus trees grow in close proximity to native trees. Iliey provide the only tall perches and nesting grounds for birds of prey that require height- Removal of trees in winter may not disturb nesting birds, but the birds will be mightily surprised when they return to nest in spririg . Eucalyptus trees are the primary food source for native bees and honeybees Juring the winter months. Asanorganic beekeeper I rely on natural food sources such as eucalyptus to see the bees into the spring nectar flow. Belief *4-. Eucalyptus trees are messy. Truth: Good forestry practices include some removal of dead or scraggly branches. A much bigger mess was rnade when trees were removed and the sites abandoned to weeds. It is very hard to give up beliefs, especially when they seem like facts that everybody knows. But if you examine the evidence provided by Lbe trees themselves, you will Dave to conclude that the Pulgas Ridge eucalyptus trees are NOT invasive and that they are important parts, of the ecosystem. Let's take them out of the preservation plan and refocus our attention on the acacia,broom, star thistle and other truly invasive plants. Let's get out and.plant blue oaks in the community of trees at Pulgas Ridge and know that they will be helped, not harmed, by their big brother and sister eucalyptus trees. Let's acknowledge the pleasure that these trees provide to hikers and to the residents of Britton Heights across the canyon. Let's, celebrate that we saved this great bird and bee habitat before it is too late. Sincerely, Carolyn Chaney, NVROSD Volunteer cc Cindy Roessler Nov 08 05 04:13p Community Financial Sery P-n4740800 PA November 8,2005 Re: Eucalyptus Tree Removal Dear Board Members: I am asking that you reconsider the plan to remove the remaining eucalyptus trees in the Pulgas Ridge Open Space area. I walk 5 —6 mornings a week in that area and am quite familiar with the trees and plants that grow there. The eucalyptus in question are mature trees,close to 80 years in age. They are not invasive, in fact,there are many natives growing directly under these trees, which will likely be lost during the removal process. If you look at the areas where the trees were removed a few years ago,there is in one area a pile of mulch from the chippings that is totally barren,there are fields of weeds and the pathway used by the bulldozers is still barren. There is little regrowth of natives in these areas. These trees are the tallest in the park and serve as shelter for many birds and animals. We see raptors in the trees often- The trees create a barrier from the view of the nearby housing,giving one the feeling of being away from civilization. There are many other more invasive plants, especially broom and thistle that are in dire need of attention due to damage being done. The eucalyptus trees may need some pruning,but are wonderful and statuesque—something we should be proud of—not be ready to throw away. Geri Kennedy 263 Alameda de lasZgias Redwood City,CA 650-361-8146 a Help Save the Lar e Eucalyptus Trees! Hom e to t birds, food source for bees, shade for -hikers and dogs. Thes e trees are NOT inva sive pests. They shelter natives in their drip lines. 6flheWPROSD-Board: Wed., 11/9, 7:30 pm 330 Distel Circle, Los AItos -orrall: -691-1200-- for email, go to: http:/ /www.openspace.org/ about—us/ ? = _ t_us/con#act.asp.s board r r r r ✓' e c1uw �` /-r C, ell ° rocs a7e �r � 1^ ,G? L' Le e7 � Peuclofl- ��- u/ � � Kathleen Hart � Subject: FVV: PulgomRidge � � ----- Original From: MARKETPOIN@aol.com � To: � Sent: Tuesday, November 88. 2OO512:5OPIVI � Subject: PulgamRidge � In year200. over 200 signatures were collected from park goers at Pulgas Ridge who want to keep the largo � Eucalyptus trees.. These signatures were presented to IVIROSID offices but were never, to my knowledge, even acknowledged ata Board meeting except in our public oommante!! � The Board has ignored what the public wants and continue to hold a narrow and limited perspective on a goal of � changing the park into what they consider tobe native habitat. A tree doesn't need tobewhat MRGOOoonoiders tubw''native^tobe beautiful and enjoyed by people who use the park. On your webo|te. it says that these are"Your Pnaoervee.^ |m that true? Orimit really the Board's Preserves tnbo unilaterally dealt with the way they see fit? On the vvoboibe. it says that the preserves are for public enjoyment. Then why isn't the public listened towhen they say that they enjoy the beauty of the Eucalyptus trees and want to keep the trees there. VVo went bothe � trouble todo the research for you and collected the signatures bo prove it. � Listen to the public and save the largest and the most beautiful Eucalyptus trees on the mound and along the road. The Board has succeeded in taking out the smaller Eucalyptus trees. Why can't o compromise bemade � and save the most beautiful and largest Eucalyptus trees? � Please confirm that you have received this e-mail and it along with other e-mails and calls will be distributed to the � board. Judy Baker 27544 � CanyonLos Altos, CA 94022 650948'1003 ll/4/20O5 � 1 V/ Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 4:02 PM To: BOARD Cc: sherrycking@comcast.net Subject: 11/07/2005 -sherrycking@comcast.net-Contact Board First Name: sherry Last Name: king Phone Number: 650 -596 -0444 Email Address: sherrycking@comcast.net Ward / Location: san carlos Comments: Just saw a notice about cutting more of the eucalyptus trees at Pulqas Ridge. I don't know if I can make the meeting but wanted to comment. The part of the trail where the remaining eucalyptus trees are. . . will be blazing hot if they trees are cut down. That part of the trail is next to a cement road and gets very hot when it is sunny. ITs a steep uphill and shade is welcome. As far as the cosmetics of the trail go, the eucalyptus trees are the only thing that screens out signs of civilization, without them you have to look at houses from the opposing hillside, it will look bare and will loose the nature feeling it still has. The purpose of these trails in my opinion, is to let you escape from civilization and immerse yourself in nature. Looking at houses really detracts from that experience. I use this trail several times a week since I live in San Carlos. Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 8:53 PM To: BOARD Cc: DNP48@aol.com Subject: 11/07/2005- DNP48@aol.com -Contact Board First Name: Darwin Last Name: Patnode Email Address: DNP48@aol.com Ward / Location: Ward 7 Comments: Dear Directors: Please do not cut down the eucalyptus trees on Pulgas Ridge. Your staff met with local residents several years ago and told us that the cutting then would not be visible from our homes and that the area would be filled in with trees. Instead, the hillside has a big ugly scar of weeds, highly visible, with no new plants and a lovely view of a metal fence. I did not believe that staff then, and I do not believe the staff now. Before you vote, please get some pictures of your staff's "accomplishment" from a few years ago and ask if you want to replicate that. I am sure you do not. Be informed directors! Thank you. Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 9:46 PM To: BOARD Cc: fisheye8@comcast.net Subject: 11/07/2005 -fisheye8@comcast.net-Contact Board First Name: Lisa Last Name: Sanguinetti Phone Number: (650) 637-0407 Email Address: fisheye8@comcast.net Ward / Location: San Carlos, CA Comments: The Eucalyptus trees on the Pulgas Ridge line have been a part of the Ridge for many years. They may not be natural or indigenous to the area, but neither are our neighborhood houses, buildings and landscaping. These trees may not be indigenous, but since they have been planted, they have become home to the indigenous animals that use them for food and shelter. Cutting them down would not only be an eyesore, but you would be taking away homes and food for some of the wildlife that have become dependent on them over the years. Let's stop cutting and destroying. Thank you. Lisa & Joel Sanguinetti Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 2:50 AM To: BOARD Cc: OGitin@OGitin.com Subject: 11/08/2005 -OGitin@OGitin.com -Contact Board First Name: Oleg Last Name: Gitin Phone Number: 650-654-3193 Email Address: OGitin@OGitin.com Ward / Location: Ward 7 Comments: I oppose cutting down eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge. 11/08/2005 - hughgraham(a,gm-'' com - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 10:16 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 - hughgraham@gmail.com-Contact Board -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent: Tue 11/8/2005 10:02 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc: hughgraham@gmail.com Subject: 11/08/2005 -hughgraham@gmail.com -Contact Board First Name: Hugh Last Name: Graham Email Address:hughgraham@gmail.com Ward/Location: 3374 Brittan Ave, San Carlos Comments: Eucalyptus removal on Pulgas Ridge: I understand there is to be a vote regarding removal of these trees. I infer from your website that this may be due to a desire to restore habitat. However this process will harm our view(and so we're concerned about any impact on our lifestyle as well property prices!). I'm generally in favor of habitat restoration processes so I'd like to know if there is a plan to re-plant natve trees of a substantial nature along the ridge line to preserve the view and hide the water tower. If not,please vote against this proposal until such plans are made. Thanks Hugh Graham 11/8/2005 11/01/2001 - 1a1eMCK@ao1.c( - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 10:16 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 -JadeMCK@aol.com-Contact Board -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mai Ito:pub]ic@openspace.org] Sent: Tue 11/8/2005 10:22 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc:JadeMCK@aol.com Subject: 1 1/08/2005 -JadeMCK@aol.com-Contact Board First Name: JILL Last Name: McKeegan Phone Number: 650-714-4051 Email Address: JadeMCK@aol.com Ward/Location: Ward 7 Comments: Hello, Just a quick word to make my opposing mark,on the removal of the ramaining eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge. Would you like to look at a water tank?????!!!????I think Not. I'am oppose to the idea. Sincerely, Jill McKeegan La Mesa Dr. 11/8/2005 Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 10:19 AM To: BOARD Cc: lizbrittan@yahoo.com Subject: 11/09/2005-lizbrittan@yahoo.com -Contact Board First Name: Sheldon Last Name: Smith Phone Number: 551-0351 Email Address: lizbrittan@yahoo.com Ward / Location: Ward 7 Comments: Regarding item#2 on Wednesday's meeting agenda: The Brittan Heights Homeowners Assn. contributed about 1/3 MILLION DOLLARS to Midpen in the early 1980's to assist in acquiring the Hassler property of which Pulgas Ridge is an important part. We incurred a bonded indebtedness for this purpose which was not retired until 1993, according to the bronze plaque signed by then San Carlos mayor Tom Snively, and which hangs on our clubhouse wall. Hence we have a strong interest in the appearance of Pulgas Ridge. As a homeowner, I urge you to NOT remove any more eucalyptus trees from that Ridge because they are the only trees sufficiently tall to break up the monotonous run of chaparral and Coast live oak along the ridges west of our homes at Brittan Heights. I hope you will respect our interest in this matter. Sheldon Smith 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 10:27 AM To: BOARD Cc: shabnam@stanfordalumni.org Subject: 11/09/2005 -shabnam@stanfordalumni.org-Contact Board First Name: Shabnam Last Name: Moon Email Address: shabnam@stanfordalumni.org Ward / Location: Ward 7 Comments: Hello, I live in Brittan Heights and just learned that the Midpeninsula Open Space District will vote tonight to cut down the remaining eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge. What is the reason for this? I wanted all of you to know that I oppose this proposition. We have a lovely view and beautiful trails that would be affected by the cutting down of these trees, hence my opposition. I hope you will represent my views during the vote tonight. Gratefully, Shabnam Sally Thielfoldt From: public@openspace.org Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 8:07 AM To: BOARD Cc: NancyColet@aol.com Subject: 11/08/2005- NancyColet@aol.com -Contact Board First Name: Nancy Last Name: Letourneau Phone Number: 650 593 6746 Email Address: NancyColet@aol.com Ward / Location: District Ward 7 Comments: Since living in Brittan Heights in San Carlos, we have enjoyed our view of the western hills. We understand that the trees will be removed from the hill near Interstate 280. This will leave a bare and unattractive hillside with a large water tower for the public and homeowners to view. Why is this necessary? I hope you reconsider this decision. Respectfully, Nancy Letourneau 11/08/2005 - bdmc24(ayahoo.r , - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 4:30 PM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 -bdmc24@yahoo.com -Contact Board -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent: Tue 11/8/2005 4:38 PM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc: bdmc24@yahoo.com Subject: 11/08/2005 -bdmc24@yahoo.com-Contact Board First Name: Brian Last Name: McNally Email Address: bdmc24@yahoo.com Ward/Location: Ward 7 Comments: Please,do not cut down the remaining eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge,thus changing your view to an ugly unplanted scar and a water tank. 11/8/2005 11/09/2005 -jogwaldgaol.corr ('ontact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:53 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/09/2005 -jogwald@aol.com-Contact Board -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent: Wed 11/9/2005 9:00 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc:jogwald@aol.com Subject: 11/09/2005 -jogwald@aol.com -Contact Board First Name: Joanne Last Name: Greenwald Email Address:jogwald@aol.com Ward/Location: Ward 7 Comments: Dear Mr.Nitz, I am a resident at Brittan Heights and am very upset to learn that you will be cutting trees across from our condominium complex leaving our view seriously impaired.This is one of the main reasons I bought here and particularly Y Y Y going " articular) on the canyon. I'm not sure why you are om to clear cut all these trees;but it certainly can't be as important as maintaining the wonderful scenic beauty of our area.Please reconsider your plan...... Sincerely yours, Joanne Greenwald 11/9/2005 I 11/08/2005 - alex.mccormicke--nfordalumni.org - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:28 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 -alex.mccormick@stanfordalumni.org -Contact Board -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent: Tue 11/8/2005 7:11 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc: alex.mccormick@stanfordalumni.org Subject: 11/08/2005 -alex.mccormick@stanfordalumni.org-Contact Board First Name: Alex Last Name: McCormick Phone Number: 650-595-2271 Email Address: alex.mcconnick@stanfordalumni.org Ward/Location: San Carlos Comments: Hi Ken. I'm writing about the Pulgas Ridge plan that will be discussed at Wednesday's meeting because I don't think IT be able to attend. As I think we have discussed in the past, I support the removal of eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge with one exception. For reasons related to the view of the ridge from where I live,I oppose the removal of trees east of the large water tank on Hassler Road,becauue they screen the tank from view. If the tank is not in use, I would urge the district to first remove the tank. Thanks for your work on the board. Alex 11/9/2005 11/08/2005 -jean_tolchard@,y,-' n.com - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 10:44 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 -jean_tolchard@yahoo.com-Contact Board I don't know if others are getting these since they are directed directly to me and not the board, but I am forwarding them to the entire board for their review. --ken -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent:Tue 11/8/2005 10:51 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc:jean_tolchard@yahoo.com Subject: 11/08/2005 -jean_tolchard@yahoo.com-Contact Board First Name:jean Last Name: clarke Phone Number: 650-593-23531 Email Address:jean_tolchard@yahoo.com Ward/Location: Ward 7 Comments: I have been informed that there is a plan to cut down the Eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge. I am definitely"opposed"to this plan. One of the reasons that we moved into this area is for the view so"please"do not take it away from us. Many thanks. jean clarke 11/8/2005 11/08/2005 - n_morrissette(a-),hc,*—ail.corn - Contact Board Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: Kenneth C. Nitz Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 10:49 AM To: BOARD Subject: FW: 11/08/2005 - n_morrissette@hotmail.com-Contact Board FYI -----Original Message----- From: public@openspace.org[mailto:public@openspace.org] Sent: Tue 11/8/2005 10:58 AM To: Kenneth C.Nitz Cc: Subject: 11/08/2005 -n_morrissette@hotmail.com-Contact Board First Name:Nancy Last Name: Morrissette Phone Number: Email Address: n morrissette@hotmail.com Comments: We have just learned that tall trees at Pulgas Ridge may be cut down,exposing a baren ridge and water tank. As Brittan Heights homeowners,we ask that whatever action you feel compelled to take will not result in the views from our complex being destroyed. Surely there must be some compromise that will accomplish your goals while not ruining the beauty of this area for Brittan Heights residents. 11/8/2005 Page 1 of 1 Sally Thielfoldt From: General Information Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 9:38 AM To: Matt Freeman; Sally Thielfoldt; Cathy Woodbury Subject: Fw: eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge I', ----Original Message ----- From: michaelgould2 To: info(a openspace.org Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 7:52 AM Subject: eucalyptus trees a top Pulgas Ridge The Midpeninsula Open Space District will vote Weds night to cut down the remaining eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge, thus changing the view to an ugly unplanted scar and a water tank. I wish to state that I oppose the cutting of the eucalyptus trees atop Pulgas Ridge. Thank you, Michael Gould Nov 08 05 12: 55p Judy B. Baker 6`-948-5503 P. 1 Subj: 1?u4q"-R-WW Date,. 14*&�G%125G-50-PNI-Pacift Standard:flin From: MARKETPOIN -To: JnfQQ_Qpenspape,org ln.Vear_2=_over_2W_signatures Were-collected from parUoersat Pulgas ftio who want to keep the large Eueatyptus-trees;. These signatures-were presented to MROSD offices but were never,to my knowledge, even acknowledged at a Board meeting except in our-p4blic comments!! The Board-has ignored what the-"ic wants and continue to hold a narrow and liqCiled perspective on a goal of changing,the-park into what they-consider to be native habitat. A tree doesn't-need4q be what MRSOD considers to be"native"to be beautiful and enjoyed by people who use the park. On your websiteit-says-that these-are "Your Preserves." Is that true? Oris.it.really.the Board's Preserves to be unilaterally dealt with the way they see fit? On the website, it says that the. resew for public enjoyment. Then why."I the public listened to when they-say-that they en]Gy-the beauty of the-Eucalyptus trees and want to keep the trees there. We went to the trouble to do the research for you and collected the signatures to prove it. Listen to the public and save the largest and the most beautiful Eucalyptus trees ran the mound and along the road. The Board has succeeded in taking out the smaller-Eucalyptus trees--Vft.janl a compromise be made and save the most beautiful and largest Eucalyptus trees? Please confirm that you have received this e-mail and it along with-other e-mailsarid;alls will be distributed to the board. Judy Baker 27544 Canyon Road -Los Altos,CA 94022 650 948-1003 ZV 77Y/Co �17 A4 C/11ille Tuesday,November 0'9,ZW5,-Amwica Online: MARKETPOIN 4I imp • J p • l , ' lFo- -"401 7 J rAw ,J r ' i CiATi;' • 1 t �x�' � _� t• �r s e t t • • t • t f f � .dM ,jdl...+ ,I,.+..�fl tr r �✓� i1r' f., a �/. . .i Wli . 1 • � nit ,� � � r 11 , - � y r IIIIkT OM RMW ItM Rorer •.r /,'_ .�1 s. _ - Ill;��•C�ri •� .�.' • ��,A ,• � ';y • � , 1 ' �, ' .... < • '25 .. PET'ITION x 0 SAVE THE E ALYPTUS a TREES AT PULGAS RIDGE e the and rsigne�reqtiesth�atth OSD Board of Directors reconsider and reverse their decision to remove th�r,eucalyptus trees at Ptdgas Ridge. ,c V—A'J?V(: 't t l,q ( AK lAVt, G 5v gNJr-F 3 12 vs Z �nJ -21 g0 lCvW tt L> U, '3 b —( 3 3 z Z t,u r' .✓ JVC- 4-t S �J C11C Gof Sf/ - "3 6 f T `7S 9 6a,n w. q v 1 1 k 7 51 Camw,. (ok, C CA I Ob2 A lh �l a C, Mri Aj N LA 4 two 2 y <t/ (( ✓. o al M—,o yo z. ( ► -'109 tax i'-jao %024' �-tflo Ev( �Co Alt 6' Q �I D <'" 3 Please o r,27544 on Road,Los Altos, CA 94022 when complete and call 650 - 003. A , Full MWAAMA �1,jam-t 1 i ,,►;,r'f:r i► i �' J i -i��l�l i. w'-�( r►�:�`N� ':+��.r ��..✓��s:� 1�{i�;:�� +5.,�..ri/.�..rslr� �lti/ur WOW— WNWrAK,Ld IV > Ini t ' MI / �►.11twwI M ►'.1/, r al PETITION ') SAFE THE EL -,ALYPTUS TREES AT PULGAS RIDGE We the undersigned request that the MRQSD Board of Directors reconsider and reverse their decision to remove the eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge51 .,e. GZ�i�'�'s''s'" ,+`!,p/� /?' �'i�'xi'/'L` .Sf l--•G. #k t H l . ` , <r N SZ 1 u,- 23' .rv�rlo 41i`ir /t, r ° o W 13 Z-z>La 5 M IVtaty i Q h 2 �Gc,c�R-- 2- O I i vc. U, �a v�►'Ltl -t t7 /f d3c rr iC I 4'�,)177 .5-19Nj -s 1 (� l"�411k cT t LJ / a.. C7q00 D _ k Qa f /L 4' 9Yo 63 Rw c_ ,r s 6 1 3 ad �-�� 6 �} ' S ys c� UCt� l a � C�. i All l a . FF lv,4iv d; .c,� Al ' b Please mail to Judy Baker,27544 Canyon Road,Los Altos, CA 94022 when com ete and call 650 948-1003, Oct 21 00 01 : 28p 7udy B. Baker 350-948-5503 p. 1 PETITION T4 SAVE THE EUCALYPTUS TREES AT PULGAS RIDGE We the undersigned t D Board of Directors reconsider and � request that the MROS rev rse their decision to remove the eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge. sL+v� r s a rr Y G o �- - p l i D ►• 46-3t— _ _ 4 � ) et., 1 5Od )AdAC4 9 .z5- 3 -0234 ke�T. -Fhacx-' G/'CtxLo �v 11?e411?/ is e t. -a sc3fi 3 �� Please mail to Judy Baker,27544 Canyon Road,Los Altos,CA 94022 when complete and call 650 948-1003. '-idy B. Haker 650-948-5503 P• 1 V JCL '�C HE EUCALYPTUS PETITION TO . TREES PULGAS RIDGE We the unders, igned request the MROSD Board of Directors reconsider an reverse their decisic to re `;eucalyptus trees at Palgas Ridge. 3- 55� Z O vLb •e. 9 b U e _ l � oLS r mail to judy Baker,27544 Canyon Road,LOs Altos,CA 94022 when com 948'tQ�}3. � Please 4 • r QVA LA ► r ♦ /t L 11/�rR:r • J � r ,�^ ♦ ' r A►L+t u u C.N • 1c x __ Alls � ifNAM, . lIF + • .i r � Sol rml�, w� r w:_� �:, • PA t •.• • • i r• • • w. ImMaTTINDs PETITI& TO SAVE THE 'PUCALYPTUS TREES AT PULGAS RIDGE We the undersigned request that the MROSD Board of Directors reconsider and reverse their decision to remove the eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge. Name Signature Address E-maiVrel hone# - cKc — ?1 U � Please mail to J Baker,27544 on Los Altos,CA 94022 when complete and call 650 948-1003, L-` PETITI& TO SAVE THE ,UCALYPTUS : TREES AT PULGAS RIDGE , We the undersigned request that the MROSD Board of Directors reconsider and reverse their decision to remove the eucalyptus trees at Pulgas Ridge. Name A Sisw4lre Address E-maiUTel hone# Nit lux (df 6,�— v Please mail to J co Bader,27544 Caa on Road,Los Altos,CA 94022 when fete and call 650 948-1003. T � V---VVJI •Vr PETITION TO SRUE THE EUCRLYPTUS TREES RT PULGRS RIDGE 111W Ilecille IsfulM&MMUMMIMMU10prame. ignat ire Print Name Phone/e-mail 1� tJ 4tG�0�2,. vhba�.ried�l ursd,ca cunrk .+F 0 ,7 ts M t .. Cox le- Slide 1. Eucalyptus trees in a stately column. Noninvasive; no spreading. All vegetation under the trees is native; no eucalyptus seedlings. 1 S t J R w O IIA 16 rl .I f i 1 w 4• . T � rr 4 i .1 - � ,. :. 7.`+ - __tt _ sir-. _ •r: �,,`_ �.-� wNs`. `. Slide . A community of native trees gr ows 1 " eucalyptus, benefiting from the moistureof the drip. 1 oaks. r a rye �� Y �y -�. � .� •�j�� w +�� •��( F�� '"�*�••�, r L - �•�ss.;� .�.I..L�i.�•� did.. w. r Slide drop 1 bark, they are not At 1y rate, the 10 foot oak under11 on ' picture seems 1 like the mulch. TOP 4 Slide 4. In the area where a grove of eucalyptus was removed, many truly invasive non-native plants have moved in. Left picture shows acacia. Right shows 5'6" woman standing on a eucalyptus stump with invasive weeds that have taken over the area. TOP IP it y. aT •4 � Y r• 1j. dy i .1M ;p, rr _I� is I'i7a1 is Y + •5 �:i flfl ic♦ 1 1Ai7 } 4K" I, .r 4i •� � f. 1 Q� v • 1 �� # } � �•#y �f t � �t�,; d��R b"'ter"+�~`'r a , I� I i Regional Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-05-119 Meeting 05-25 November 9, 2005 AGENDA ITEM 3 AGENDA ITEM Annual Seasonal Trail Closures Informational Report GENERAL MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATI Review and comment on proposed trail closures. No formal Board action is required. DISCUSSION At your August 24, 1988 meeting, you asked to be informed prior to any action that may be taken regarding the closing of any trail to bicycle and/or equestrian use. Closures are designated as seasonal and interim closures, and are based on concerns for trail safety and resource damage during winter conditions. The seasonal closure designation is for trails closed during extremely wet conditions and/or when new construction presents concern about potential resource damage, usually between the months of November and April Interim closure status is applied to trails which are closed temporarily pending the application of Board-adopted trail use guidelines in the Use and Management review process. The status of the interim closures is currently being reviewed by the Use and Management Committee and will be a future discussion for the full Board. The attached chart will be updated based upon the decisions made at these meetings. Changes from last year's closure list are shown in underline and str-ikeeut. The changes involve removing eight trails from the closure list in El Corte de Madera Open Space Preserve. These trails were under construction or had extensive maintenance work done last year, and are now compacted and suitable for all weather use. The exact extent of the necessary closures will be determined by the weather, but staff wishes to include the full range of possible closures to ensure that adequate notice is given. More information is provided on the attached chart. The General Manager intends to approve staff trail closure recommendations, contingent upon your comments and any public input at your November 9 meeting. Prepared by: Gordon Baillie, Management Analyst Michael Newburn,Area Superintendent David Sanguinetti,Area Superintendent Contact person: erson: John Maciel,Operations Manager i 05-119 Page 2 PROPOSED SEASONAL AND INTERIM TRAIL CLOSURES TO BICYCLISTS AND EQUESTRIANS (See definition of"Seasonal" and "Interim" below) Preserve Trail Bicyclists Equestrians Comments 1. Bear Creek Aldercroft Creek Trail Closed Seasonal Trail is very popular with equestrians from Bear Creek Stables,and is Redwoods highly susceptible to damage when wet. Final determination on access awaiting completion of master planning process. 2. Long Ridge Peters Creek Trail Seasonal Seasonal Very popular with mountain bicyclists. Tread can get very muddy during wet conditions. Staff anticipates closures during and immediately following heavy rainfall. Ridge Trail—Chestnut Orchard Seasonal Seasonal Same conditions as above. to Peters Creek Trail 3. El Corte de Methuselah Seasonal Seasonal Trail is highly susceptible to damage during extended periods of rain. Madera Leaf Trail Seasonal Seasonal Trail is highly susceptible to damage during extended periods of rain. Virginia Mill Seasonal Seasonal " " " " " " " " " Giant Salamander Seasonal Seasonal Trail was identified in the geological survey report as being a source of sedimentation. Gorden Mill Seasonal Seasonal . Tim Seasonal Seasonal cc cc cc cc cc cc cc cc &,..,seve.Tr,;l Seasonal Seasonal Seasonal elesuf:e due te Fe routes during eenstruetion i a e CFe k Trail Seasonal Seasonal cc cc cc cc cc a cc Blue Blesseto Seasonal Sessenal Gr-esseut Seasonal Seasonal area Spring Beard Seasonal Seasonal " Steam-Beakey Seasenal Seasenal " Manzanita Seasonal Seasena4 `< " *=New closures SEASONAL CLOSURE: Closed during extremely wet conditions or when new construction presents serious concern over trail safety and potential resource damage,usually between the months of November and April. INTERIM CLOSURE: Closed temporarily pending the application of Board-adopted trail use guidelines in the use and management review process. CLOSED: Closed permanently as a result of Board action R-05-119 Page 3 PROPOSED SEASONAL AND INTERIM TRAIL CLOSURES TO BICYCLISTS AND EQUESTRIANS (See definition of"Seasonal"and"Interim"below) Preserve Trail Bicyclists Equestrians Comments 4. Fremont Toyon Trail Seasonal Seasonal Very popular with equestrians from Garrod Stables and mountain Older bicyclists. Tread can get very muddy during wet conditions. 5. Monte Skid Road Trail to Canyon Trail Seasonal Seasonal Very popular with mountain bicyclists and equestrians. The shaded Bello (Lower Nature Trail) canyon environment can prevent the tread from drying through the winter season. Alternate route available. White Oak Trail Seasonal Seasonal Tread can get very muddy during wet conditions. Staff anticipates (Permit lot to Skid Road Trail) closures during and immediately following heavy rainfall. 6. Picchetti Zinfandel Trail Closed Interim Permanent status of equestrian use pending U&M process. Ranch 7. Purisima Whittemore Gulch Seasonal Seasonal Narrow,winding,seasonally wet trail,highly susceptible to damage. Creek This trail is normally closed for the winter. Alternate route available. Redwoods Soda Gulch Trail Interim Interim Narrow,winding, seasonally wet trail with poor line of sight and some very steep side slopes. Majority of trail offers no room for passing. Permanent status pending U&M review process. Alternate route available. Grabtown Trail Seasonal Seasonal Trail repairs from the El Nino storms completed. Re-routed trail needs first year to settle. 8. Rancho San Black Mountain Trail Interim Open Permanent status pending U&M review process. Antonio 9. Saratoga Saratoga Gap Trail Seasonal Seasonal Generally wet conditions during the winter. Damage can occur if open. Gap I '=New closures SEASONAL CLOSURE: Closed during extremely wet conditions or when new construction presents serious concern over trail safety and potential resource damage,usually between the months of November and April. INTERIM CLOSURE: Closed temporarily pending the application of Board-adopted trail use guidelines in the use and management review process. CLOSED: Closed permanently as a result of Board action I R-05-119 Page 4 PROPOSED SEASONAL AND INTERIM TRAIL CLOSURES TO BICYCLISTS AND EQUESTRIANS (See definition of"Seasonal" and"Interim"below) Preserve Trail Bicyclists Equestrians Comments 10. Skyline Ridge Trail south of Horseshoe Interim Interim Permanent status pending U&M review process. Alternate routes Ridge available. 11. Windy Hill Razorback Ridge Trail Closed Seasonal Constructed to average three-foot width. Staff anticipates closures during and immediately following heavy rainfall. There has been ongoing tread damage to this trail, due to use. Betsy Crowder Trail Closed Seasonal Generally wet conditions during the winter. Damage can occur if open. Lost Trail Closed Seasonal Trail suffers severe impacts when wet. There is limited horse use on the trail,but the use that is present can have a significant impact. Hamm's Gulch Trail Closed Seasonal Same conditions as above. *=New closures SEASONAL CLOSURE: Closed during extremely wet conditions or when new construction presents serious concern over trail safety and potential resource damage,usually between the months of November and April. INTERIM CLOSURE: Closed temporarily pending the application of Board-adopted trail use guidelines in the use and management review process. CLOSED: Closed permanently as a result of Board action i Regional Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-05-117 Meeting 05-25 November 9, 2005 AGENDA ITEM 4 AGENDA ITEM i Approve Resolution to Add One Credit Card for the Network Specialist with a Credit Limit of $2,000 and Increase the Credit Limit of the Assistant General Manager to $5,000 GENERAL MANAGER RECOMMENDATION IL7work Approve the attached Resolution to add one credit card fort Speci~aI A�wita credit limit of$2,000 and to increase the credit limit of the Assistant General Manager to $5,000, which also rescinds your previous Resolution No. 05-16. DISCUSSION The District issues credit cards to the General Manager, the Assistant General Manager,the Operations, Planning, Public Affairs, Administration and Human Resources (currently vacant), and Real Property Managers, the Foothills and Skyline Area Superintendents, the Construction, Maintenance and Resource Supervisors, the Support Services Supervisor, and the General Counsel. The Network Specialist orders hardware, software, and other computer supplies (i.e. back-up tapes, computer discs) on a regular basis to maintain the District's network and respond to the District's networking needs. The District has established accounts with some vendors for making purchases. Increasingly, however,the Network Specialist makes purchases with new online vendors who offer the best price, but don't offer an account option or accept purchase orders. As such, the Network Specialist has a growing need to use a credit card to make network-related purchases. The Assistant General Manager's credit card is used frequently for various District needs such as District-wide trainings and conferences, staff events, office supplies, as well as the computer products noted above. Consequently, the credit limit on this card is quickly reached. To improve the District's efficiency in carrying out normal business functions and to reduce the frequency of"maxing out" existing credit cards, staff proposes adding a credit card for the Network Specialist at a $2,000 credit limit and increasing the Assistant General Manager's credit card limit to $5,000. Prepared by: Michelle Jesperson, Management Analyst Contact Person: Sally Thielfoldt, Assistant General Manager RESOLUTION NO. 05- RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF DISTRICT CREDIT CARDS AND RELATED BORROWING OF FUNDS FROM FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OMAHA WHEREAS,the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, with its principal office at 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, California 94022-1404, and is duly authorized to transact business in the State of California; and WHEREAS, the District currently holds several accounts and maintains in good standing a business relationship with the Mid-Peninsula Bank, whose affiliate is First National Bank of Omaha("Lender"); and WHEREAS,the Lender has agreed to issue the District credit cards for use by authorized positions in the employment of the District, at no cost; and WHEREAS,the District has authorized the General Manager,Assistant General Manager, Operations Manager, Planning Manager,Public Affairs Manager,Administration/Human Resources Manager(currently vacant), Real Property Manager, Skyline Area Superintendent, Foothills Area Superintendent, Support Services Supervisor, General Counsel, Construction, Maintenance & Resource Supervisors (4) and Network Specialist to be issued District credit cards; and WHEREAS,the issuance of these credit cards will enable the District to borrow from time to time from the Lender on such terms as may be agreed upon between the District and the Lender, such sum or sums of money as in their judgment should be borrowed; however, not exceeding at any one time the principal amount of forty-three thousand dollars($43,000.00),which represents two thousand dollars($2,000.00) per authorized position other than the General Manager and Assistant General Manager,twelve thousand dollars($12,000.00) for the General Manager and five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) for the Assistant General Manager, in addition to such sum or sums of money as may be currently borrowed by the District from the Lender on terms where funds are borrowed without use of credit cards. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District authorizes and agrees to the terms of the issuance by the Lender of credit cards to specified District employees, and hereby rescinds Resolution No. 05-16. Regional Open , . ace MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors I FROM: L. Craig Britton, General Manager DATE: November 9, 2005 RE: FYI s Regional Open S$hce MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT November 9, 2005 Cupertino City Council 10350 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 SUBJECT: Gate of Heaven Permit Application U-2005-04 Honorable Council Members: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the appeal submitted by Gate of Heaven Cemetery to the Cupertino City Council. The District has worked extensively with Gate of Heaven and City staff during the design review process and has submitted two previous letters to the Planning Commission regarding this proposed project(dated May 25, 2005 and August 16, 2005). The District maintains its position and respectfully requests that the City Council support and uphold the Planning Commission's unanimous (5-0) decision on August 23, 2005 to deny the Cemetery's request to change their current Use Permit to allow the installation of vertical gravestones. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(District)manages the 165-acre Rancho San Antonio County Park, which borders the cemetery, as well as the 3,800-acre Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve, adjacent to the cemetery. This is the most heavily used Preserve out of the total of 26 managed by the District in Santa Clara, San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties. This area also serves as an open space outlet to residents of the adjacent and surrounding urbanized areas. The initial permit for the Cemetery was granted by the County of Santa Clara before the annexation of this area into the City of Cupertino. The County recognized that the Cemetery is located on the urban fringe adjacent to extensive natural areas. The District supported the County's subsequent Use Permit requirement for flush gravestones to reduce the visual impacts of this use. The annexation of this property by the City has not changed the adjacency of the Cemetery to the surrounding natural areas, and the reasons for inset gravestones are as valid now as they were then. Furthermore, the current permit proposal shows only anticipated development for the next ten (10) years. Less than half of the fifty-eight (58) acres is currently in use, but over time Gate of Heaven's long-range goal would be to develop the entire property. Some of this undeveloped land directly borders dedicated public open space and is clearly visible when entering and exiting the preserve. The District would hope that such i 33o Distel Circle 650-6g1-12oo info@Openspace.org BOARD Of DIRECTORS:Pete Siemens,Mary Davey,Jed Cyr, GENERAL MANAGER: Los Altos CA 94022-1404 650-6gi-0485 fax www.openspace.org Deane Little,Nanette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C.Nitz L.Craig Britton i Cupertino City Councii November 9, 2005 Page 2 a precedent would not be set that would allow for the future installation of upright gravestones and terraced walls in the undeveloped areas of the cemetery, which is not covered in the current plan. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed project. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please feel free to contact me or Cathy Woodbury, Planning Manager at (650) 691-1200. Sincerel , L. Craig n ton, General Manager cc: MROSD Board of Directors Ms. Ciddy Wordell, City of Cupertino Mr. Robert Lindberg, Gate of Heaven I 1 i i i i i I Regional Open {, ace MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: L. Craig Britton, General Manager DATE: November 4, 2005 RE: FYI s I I I I � r�FAEEs, PROTECTING OPEN SPACE AND PROMOTING LIVABLE COMMUNITIES Supervisor Liz Kniss, District 5 County Government Center 70 West Hedding Street,East Wing, IOh Floor San Jose, CA 95110 October 26, 2005 Dear Supervisor Kniss: I am writing on behalf of Greenbelt Alliance,the Bay Area's leading land conservation and urban planning non-profit,to express our strong support for an extension of the Santa Clara County Park Charter Fund for another 12 years. The Park Charter Fund is a renewal and not a new tax and has been the primary source of funding for County Parks since 1972. Voters have continually shown support for the fund, with 80% of them renewing it in 1996. The Park Charter Fund provides stable revenue for the County Parks system, which includes over 260 miles of trails, ten reservoirs and almost 45,000 acres in 28 regional parks. 80% of the funds will be allocated for operations and maintenance, 5% will be for park improvements and 15% will go towards the acquisition of more parkland and natural areas. By preserving the current level of funding, the County Parks system will continue to grow,providing people with the opportunity to escape into the natural environment without having to travel too far. In the next 20 years, Santa Clara County is projected to grow by another 400,000 residents to a population of over 2 million. Therefore, it is important to plan for the future needs of Santa Clara County citizens by continuing to invest in the County Park system. Not only will it contribute to the quality of life for residents, but the funding will protect watersheds and natural areas of outstanding scenic quality as well as preserve habitat for wildlife. We thank you for your leadership on this important issue. Please let this letter serve as our authorization to use our name as an endorser on the Park Charter Fund measure. Sincerely, Michele Beasley South Bay Field Representative 10/24/2005 02:32 FAX 6503414676 ASSEMBLYMAN MULLIN 1@001 COMMITTEES! STATE CAPITOL CHAIR,HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P.O.BOX 942049 SACRAMCNTO,CA 94249-0019 iniff BUDGET (916)319-2019 orni' , ry EDUCATION PUBLIC EMPLOYEES,RETIREMENT FAX(916)319-2119 DISTRICT OFFICE AND SOCIAL SECURITY I s28 S.EL CAMINO REAL,SUITE 302 SUBCOMMITIME: SAN MATEO.CA 94402 BUDGET-SUBCOMMITTEE#1. a 0 -1900 s )340 HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES FAX 650)3414676 -S! AX SELECT COMMITTEE E-mail:AssembymgmborMullln@ammbly-ca-gov CHAIR,BIOTECHNOLOGY Website:httpJ/demearsts-asr-smblY-c;2.govimembers/al 9/ ASSEMBLY'Q RI T BIOETHICS,MEDICINE AND TECHNOLOGY October 10,2005 Ms. Rutb G. Coleman,Director Department of Parks and Recreation 1416—9' Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Ms. Coleman: I write to express my strong support for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's 0 of grant funding through the Habitat Conservation Fund program in application for $500,00 the cate or of Anadromous Salmonids/Trout Habitat- The district would use the funds to gy acquire 183 acres now owned by the Peninsula Open Space Trust and under District management- The property includes steelhead-spawning habitat in a section of Lobitos Creek, and Irish Ridge, a significant watershed area. Acquisition of this property will allow the district to protect the quality of Lobitos Creek permanently as habitat for federally protected steelhead trout. miles soutli of Half Moon Bay on the coast-facing Slopes The property is situated about six between Tunitas and Purisima Creeks and presents an outstanding combination Of resource and recreational values as a natural extension of the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. The creek and adjoining land pTovide a he and dense alder shaded riparian habitat for young steelbead trout as they corridor, which is critical in providing an ideal gradually float down to the mid-headwaters of Lobitos Creek where they remain for a year before migrating to sea in the first winter storms. In addition, the property is home to the federally protected red-legged frog, deer and mountain lion and there is an opportunity to expand the existing public trail system and potential for a regionally significant trail connection between Skyline ridge and the coast. Acquisition and preservation of this key property is of great significance to my constituency. Together with the adjacent Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve, this acquisition will enlarge and connect an essential riparian corridor on the peninsula, as well as enrich the habitats that are critical to protecting steelhead trout. I urge your most favorable consideration of the Midpeninsula open Space District's meritorious request. / Sinc ly, Gene Mull in, ASSEN0LY MEMBER, I 9T H District Printed on Recycled Paper Mr.Thomas Dempsey Office of Grants and Local Services California State Parks and Recreation P.O. Box 942896 Sacramento, CA 94296 October 18,2005 Dear Mr. Dempsey; I strongly support Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's application for $500,000 of Habitat Conservation Fund grant funding under the Anadromous Salmonids/Trout Habitat category to purchase 183 acres of property on the southern coast of San Mateo County. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District plans to acquire property currently owned by the Peninsula Open Space Trust and managed by the District. Natural resources on this property include steelhead-spawning habitat in Lobitos Creek and a significant watershed area, Irish Ridge. Acquisition of this property will enable the District to protect the watershed and creek water quality permanently for the benefit of steelhead trout, a federally protected species. The property consists of coast-facing slopes between Tunitas and Purisima Creeks approximately six miles south of the City of Half Moon Bay. In terms of recreational and resource protection value, the location is outstanding. The area is a natural extension of the neighboring Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. The creek and adjoining land provide a healthy and dense alder shaded riparian corridor. This environment is ideal for young steelhead trout as they gradually float down to the mid-headwaters of Lobitos Creek and where they grow for a year before migrating out to sea with the first winter storms. The property is also home to the federally protected red-legged frog, deer and mountain lion. There is potential to enhance the existing public trail system in the area and also to explore opportunity for a regionally significant trail connecting Skyline ridge and the San Mateo County coast. I urge you to assist in funding this high priority project for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Acquisition of this key 183-acre property will permanently protect species' habitat, allow connection of essential riparian corridor on the Peninsula,provide opportunities for regional trail linkages and enhance the benefit of the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Thank you for considering this request. Sincerely, Richard Gordon, President San Mateo County Board of Supervisors OCT 21 2005 16:33 FR SFRWQCB 5106222501 TO 916506910485 P.02/02 California IfIvIleonal Water Quality Control Board San Francisco Bay Region ArDoldl Alan C.Lloyd,Ph.D. 1515 Clay Sum%Suite 1400,Oakland,Cwilbmia 94612 Governor Agency Secretary (5 10)622-2300-Fax(5 10)622-2460 http;/fwww,wutcrboar&.cp.gov/3Anfraciscobay October 21,2005 File No. 2178.11(crf) Mr.Thomas Dempsey Office of Grants and Local Service California State Parks&Recreation P.O.Box 942896 Sacramento,CA 94296 Dear Mr.Dempsey, I am writing to express Water Bond staffs' strong support for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Distriefs application for a grant from the Habitat Conservation Fund program to acquire 183 acres of land in the Lobitos Creek watershed,which supports steelhead spawning habitat Our Regions Basin plan has identified existing beneficial uses for the named subwatershed in coastal San Mateo. The property is situated about six miles south of Half Moon Bay on the coast-facing slopes between Tunitas and Purisirna Creeks and presents an outstanding combination of resource and recreational values as a natural extension of the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve.The creek and adjoining land provide a healthy and dense alder shaded riparian corridor,which is critical in providing an ideal habitat for young steelhead trout as they gradually float down to the mid-headwaters of Lobitos Creek where they remain for a year before migrating to sea in the first winter storms. In addition,the property is home to the federally protected red-legged frog,deer and mountain lion,and there is an opportunity to expand the existing public trail system and potential for a significant trail connection between Skyline ridge and the coast. These factors make the acquisition and preservation of the property a high priority for the District,and we urge you to assist in funding these projects,and thereby ensuring these properties are permanently protected. Together with the adjacent District open space preserves,these acquisitions enlarge and connect the riparian corridors of the peninsula,as well as enrich the habitats that are key to protecting steelhead trout. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, (�m,&, Susan Gladstone, Section Leader Coastal Counties Section North Bay Watershed Management Division Cc- Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Board of Directors Preserving enhancing, and restoring the San Francisco Bay Area's waters for over 50 years P--cvcI,-dPzwer TOTAL PAGE.02 | � Sally �� oldt From: Bloria |oon Sent 28. 20053:50PM To: Malone; Bunny Congdon; Carrie Sparks-Hart; Cathy Woodbury; Chris Braley; Cindy Roessler; Coastal Annex Environmental Impact Report; Community Programs; Craig Beckman; Craig Britton; David Gagner; David Sanguinetti; David Topley; Deane C. Little; Del Woods; Dennis Danielson; Doug Vu; Duncan Simmons; Elaina Cuzick; Foothills Crew; Foothills Ranger; Gloria | Gordon B U|ie Grant Ke Greta Young; Holden Neal; Jeannie Buscaglia; xeo Cyr; Jennifer Williams; Jim Cimino; Jim Mort; John Dickey; John Maciel; Jonas Roddenberry; Julie Norton; Kathleen Hart; Kathleen Jones; Ken Miller; Kenneth C. Nitz; Kirk Lenington; Kristi Altieri; Larry Hassett; Margaret Reimche; Mary Davey; Master Plan; Matt Freeman; Matthew Sagues; Meredith Manning; Michael Bankosh; Michael Jurich; Michael Newburn; Michael Reeves; Michelle Jesperson; Michelle Kneier; Mike Foster; Mike Williams; Minh Tran; Noelle Antolin; Nonette Hanko; Ornbudsperson; Pamela Naito; Paul McKowan; Pete Siemens; � Renee Fitzsimons; . Management Intern; Rudy J ; Sally ieUbdt; Skyline Crew; Skyline Ranger; Skyline Volunteer Trail Patrol; Stan Hooper; Sue 8chaotman; Tom Lauoten; volunteer Subject: Visitor � Eric Armstrnng' u hiker who frequents the District's preserves regularly, stopped by the Administrative Off ice � today. He was driving by,and when he recgonized our MROSD sign outside had to stop and come in to say "Thank you for all that you do}" Nu asked meto pass ifonto all staff. � Nowisn't that fhawoy to start off ogrmot weekend. Have o good one! 6|nrio � � � � � � � � � 1 Regional Open Spce MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT November 1, 2005 Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors 70 West Hedding Street, 1 Oth Floor San Jose, CA 95111 Re: Endorsement of Cogpjy Parks Charter Fund Renewal Dear Supervisors: Enclosed is the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's Resolution endorsing the placement of the county parks charter on the June 2006 ballot. 1 Sincer y, L. Craig Britton General Manager Enclosure cc: MROSD Board of Directors Lisa Killough, Santa Clara County Parks i i 33o Distel Circle 650-691-1200 info@openspace.org BOARD OF DIRECTORS:Pete Siemens,Mory Davey,Jed Cyr, GENERAL MANAGER: Los Altos CA 94022-1404 650-691-0485 fax www.openspace.org Deane Little,Nonette Honko,Lorry Hossett,Kenneth C.Nitz L.Craig Britton I' Regional Open SA%ce ------------------- MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT November 1, 2005 Lisa Killough, Director Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Department 298 Garden Hill Drive Los Gatos, CA 95032-7669 Dear Lisa: On behalf of District, I would like to thank you very much for your presentation at the October 26, 2005 Board meeting. We enjoyed hearing about the County's history and its strategic plan for the future. We are pleased to continue our close relationship as a public agency partner in the County's endeavor to continue to maintain parks and open space lands for this and future generations. Sincer rll�ll L. Craig Brit on General Manager cc: MROSD Board of Directors 33o Distel Circle 650-691-1200 info@openspace.org BOAR D OF DIRECTORS:Pete Siemens,Mary Davey,Jed Cyr, GENERAL MANAGER: Los Altos CA 94022-1404 650-6gi-0485 fax www.openspace.org Deane Little,Nanette Hanko,Lorry Hassett,Kenneth C Nitz L.Craig Britton A, Regional Open Srace November 2, 2005 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Mr. Ron Sturgeon P.O. Box 36 San Gregorio,CA 94074 Re: District Purchase of Lands on the San Mateo County Coast Dear Mr. Sturgeon: The following is a response to your August 24, 2005 letter addressed to District staff members,Del Woods and Mike Williams, regarding your views about recent land purchases the District has made in the Coastside Protection Area. In general,we recognize that your concerns center around a perception that the District is not supportive i commitment to I strongly that to the contrary the District has shown is of agricultural land use. We fees t t g g Y �'Y support agricultural land use in numerous ways. For instance,the District has begun to implement its Coastside Protection Program and, as you note,has purchased the Miramontes property and is in the process of purchasing the POST(Forde)property as part of that Program. The Service Plan and Use and Management Planning Process for these acquisitions will provide an ample opportunity for the preservation of agricultural land uses. Even where(as here)agricultural uses are not present when lands are purchased,the planning process includes assessment and opportunities to re-introduce agricultural uses. In addition,the Memorandum of Understanding we have entered into with the San Mateo County Farm Bureau to make agricultural preservation a key component of our Program represents one of the strongest partnerships between open space providers and the agricultural community in the state. Lastly,the operative Coastside Protection Program documents represent the District's strong commitment to making agricultural land preservation a priority. You expressed a concern that grant conditions might preclude agricultural uses on the POST(Forde)or Miramontes properties. We want to assure you that is not correct. The Miramontes Ridge property was purchased with the assistance of a Coastal Conservancy Grant. The POST(Forde)property is the subject of a grant currently being considered under the Habitat Conservation Fund Program. The conditions and terms of contracts for both grant programs do not preclude either continuing or re-establishing agricultural land uses. The Coastal Conservancy grant conditions provide for compatible agricultural uses for the Miramontes Ridge property. Of course a key goal of both grant programs is to emphasize the protection of a site's natural resources. As a result,when and if agricultural uses become a component of a use and management plan,they will be implemented in an environmentally sound manner. In fact, in the case of Miramontes Ridge,the June 29, 2005 staff report to the Board of Directors expressly states that studying the re-establishment of farming or grazing activities will be part of the development of the final Use and Management Plan for the site. In the case of the POST(Forde)property,the September 14,2005 staff report to the Board of Directors in connection with the Habitat Conservation Fund grant application makes the same observation. We hope these facts address and resolve your concerns regarding this issue. The environmental review process for the Miramontes Ridge and POST(Forde)properties was appropriate and fully adequate for each project as contemplated by CEQA. The lengthy history of 33o Distel Circle 650-691-1200 info@openspace.org s0ARDOF DIRECTORS:Pete Siemens,MaryDavey,Jed Cyr, GENERAL MANAGER: Los Altos CA 94022-1404 650-691-0485 fax www.openspace.org Deane Little,Nonette Hanko,Larry Hossett,Kenneth C.Nitz L.Craig Britton it Mr. Ron Sturgeon November 2,2005 Page 2 environmental review that accompanied the development of the Coastside Protection Program evidences the District's firm commitment to appropriate environmental review when it undertakes a project. With regard to your concerns about consultation concerning District acquisitions,conditions for consultation are addressed in Implementation Action G.5.13(i)of the District's Service Plan which states: "To ensure that local viewpoints are considered in all significant District planning and decision-making relating to the Coastal Annexation Area,the District will consult with local elected officials, government agencies,and government-sponsored organizations within the Coastal Annexation Area." To accomplish this,we are committed to inviting officials,agencies and organizations to consult with us prior to the District Board of Directors' consideration of a significant land purchase and any subsequent significant actions that pertain to land use planning, such as master planning. Our approach will include hosting on-site land tours with District staff and interested parties in order to provide an opportunity to have a meaningful exchange of information about the land that is being considered for purchase,or undergoing a planning study. In addition, interested parties will be invited to on-site public workshops with the Real Property Committee,which is a standing committee comprised of three Directors,plus a public meeting held with all of the Board of Directors at which the purchase or use and management plan will be considered for final adoption. Public notification for the public workshops and Board meetings include all the entities notified for consultation, plus any other agencies,organizations or individuals that have requested to be included in the notification process. In the case of the Agricultural Advisory Committee and at the request of Marcia Raines,the Director of San Mateo County Environmental Services Agency,all notices for consultation and public workshops have,up to this point, been sent to the County's Environmental Services Agency and the Agricultural Commissioner,Gail Raabe. More recently,we have been asked by Ms. Raabe to send notices to Steve Ross in the Planning Department, who we understand is the staff liaison to the Agricultural Advisory Committee. He will then distribute these notices to the Committee. Finally,your interpretation of comments you state were made by District staff pertaining to the development potential and value of the Miramontes Ridge property is not correct. It has been our experience that POST,which is a private organization,not a public agency, is primarily in the business of purchasing and holding desirable open space properties for ultimate conveyance to park and open space agencies or other organizations or owners that are equipped to manage and operate these properties. The development potential for any property, such as Miramontes Ridge,remains in place unless recorded conservation easements or deed restrictions have decreased or eliminated that potential. Thus,there is always a potential risk that POST could be unsuccessful in finding a management agency or organization or owner to take over a property it owns,and ultimately need to explore the possibility of selling the prope private buyer who may then decide to develop the property at a future date. Sinc rely, L. Craig Britton, General who r cc: MROSD Board of Directors Regional ®pen S -ice MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT November 2, 2005 Dennis Martin Road Public Workshop Neighbors and Interested Parties November 17, 2005 Thornewood Open Space Preserve Independence Hall Woodside, California 2955 Woodside Road Woodside, CA Subject: Public Workshop to Discuss Dennis Martin Road 7:00—9:00 PM Dear Neighbors and Other Interested Parties: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District(District) is hosting a public workshop to discuss land use issues along Dennis Martin Road and the adjacent Thornewood Open Space Preserve. The purpose of this meeting is to solicit public input into the District's development of a Use and Management Plan for this area. Dennis Martin Road is comprised of an unsurfaced and badly eroded trail that extends from the lower portion of Old La Honda Road up to Schilling Lake. The trail has had a long history of neighborhood and public use, some of which has been undesirable and a nuisance to nearby property owners. In May 200 2 the District held a neighborhood meeting in Woodside to discuss problems associated with Y a � g unclear ownership and management responsibilities of Dennis Martin Road. At that meeting, it was evident that neighbors were interested in having the District secure the necessary land rights to enable it to assume future management of the road. To that end,District staff recently completed the tasks of obtaining Quit Claims from the majority of property owners having parcels abutting or along Dennis Martin Road, and successfully completed a Quiet Title Action. With ownership of Dennis Martin Road finally resolved, the District is now interested in starting a use and management planning process whereby public input will be gathered in order to develop a draft Use and Management Plan that will be eventually presented to the Board of Directors at a public hearing. If you own property adjacent to Dennis Martin Road or have an interest in this portion of the open space preserve, I encourage you to attend this meeting. District staff will provide an overview of the planning process to provide appropriate public access and ensure visitor safety, and will address on-going efforts to protect water quality and eradicate slender false brome. This will be followed by a short presentation by the Old La Honda Road Homeowners Association and a public comment period. The District is mailing this notice to neighbors and interested parties who were previously notified of the District's 2002 neighborhood meeting. The mailing list has been updated to reflect any change of ownership that have occurred since 2002. Sincerely, Del Woods, Senior Acquisition Planner cc: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Board of Directors 330 Distel Circle • Los Altos,CA 94022-1404 • Phone: 650-691-1200 Fax: 650-691-0485 • E-mail: mrosd@openspace.org • Web site:www.openspace.org OFaE�sT Board ol'Direcfors:Pete Siemens,Mary C. Davey,Jed Cyr, Deane Little, Nonette Hanko,Larry Hassett,Kenneth C. Nit:z < General Manager:L.Craig Britton i MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT I I For Immediate Release Contact: 1Zudy Jurgensen October 21, 2005 Public Affairs Manager (650)691-1200 DISTRICT ANNOUNCES PUBLIC MEETINGS ON BUILDING GOOD NEIGHBOR RELATIONS -- Pescadero, Skyline, Ralf moon Bay, and Los Gatos meetings scheduled to gather public input -- LOS ALTOS, CA [October 21, 2005] —Four public meetings in November and December 2005 have been scheduled by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) to provide the public with extensive opportunities to advise how the District can best build relationships with its neighbors and amend its "Good Neighbor Policy." The meetings will be held on the coastside, on Skyline Boulevard, and in Los Gatos at the following dates and locations: November l: Pescadero (7:30 p.m.- 9:30 p.m.) Pescadero Elementary School (620 North Street) November 3: Skyline (7:30 p.m.- 9:30 p.m.) MROSD Skyline Field Office (21150 Skyline Blvd.) November 17: Half Moon Bay (7:30 p.m.- 9:30 p.m.) Ted Adcock Community Center(535 Kelly Ave.) December 1: Los Gatos (7:30 p.m.- 9:30 p.m.) Neighborhood Center (208 East Main Street) I The District's Good Neighbor Policy governs how MROSD interacts with iiN neighbors and was last revised in August 1996. The amended policy will cover a variety of topics from addressing neighbor privacy to natural resource management issues such as controlling invasive species. The public meetings and the amended policy, when completed, are designed to foster a spirit of cooperation between the District and its constituents on whose behalf the agency manages 50,000 acres of open space land. A process to seek input from the public on issues constituents believe should he addressed in the Good Neighbor Policy was initiated earlier this year and included a number of interviews with constituents and several meetings with local neighborhood organizations, including the Midcoast Community Council, Pescadero Municipal Advisory Council, the South Skyline Association and Kings Mountain Association. In addition to the upcoming public meetings, District neighbors and constituents will also be able to provide their suggestions through e-mail, the District's Web site, as well as through regular mail. Constituents' input will be used as a reference by the District as the amended Good Neighbor Policy is drafted, which will then be presented to the public for comment at a District workshop in Los Altos before the Board holds a final public meeting to vote on the amended policy. Created by voters more than 30 years ago, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has successfully protected and managed 50,000 acres of open space which the public enjoys 365 days a year. The District is an independent, non-enterprise, California special district whose mission is to purchase and preserve a regional greenbelt c f open space land in perpetuity,protect and restore the natural environment, and provide opportunities for ecologically sensitive public enjoyment and education. www.openspace.org MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT For Immediate Release Contact: Ana Ruiz November 3, 2005 District Project Planner (650)691-1200 Open Space District to Hold Second Community Planning Workshop on Sierra Azul/Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves Master Planning Process Continues for Over 18,000 Acres of Open Space -- LOS ALTOS, CA [November 3, 2005]—The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District will hold its second public workshop on Thursday,November 10 at 7:00 p.m. at the Los Gatos Neighborhood Center to assist the District in developing a resource protection and visitor-use plan for the combined 18,000-acre Sierra Azul and Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves. "The public has shown great interest in this master planning process with more than 100 community members attending the first workshop and over 300 individuals responding to a survey about the project and the preserves," said Ana Ruiz the District Planner overseeing the project. "This dynamic community response is a testament to the importance of developing a long-range plan that guides the use and management of Sierra Azul and Bear Creek Redwoods in a manner consistent with the District's mission of protecting and managing natural resources, while balancing community needs for access and low-intensity recreation." This community workshop is the second in a series of three public workshops on the Master Plan for Sierra Azul/Bear Creek Redwoods Preserves. The public will have the opportunity to learn the resource inventory results from data collected for each Preserve,and review the analysis of key challenges and opportunities for land management and future visitor use that was prepared using public input and property information previously gathered. Details of the second workshop are as follows: Thursday, November 10, 2005 from 7:00 p.m.— 10:30 p.m. Los Gatos Neighborhood Center, 208 East Main Street, Los Gatos, CA 95033 (Located across the street from the Saratoga/Los Gatos Recreation Department) The third public workshop is tentatively scheduled for early 2006, and will provide an opportunity for the public to review and comment on draft Master Plan alternatives. In addition,the District will continue to provide informational mailings and may plan a second community information table. Information presented at the meeting, including handouts, are available on the District's Web site for anyone who is unable to attend the workshop. A Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ)document and survey results from the District's Stakeholder Questionnaire are also available online for review. More information about the Sierra Azul and Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves, as well as a map and directions to the workshop location, can be obtained at www.opensaace.orgLirtasterplan or by calling the District at(650) 691-1200. About Bear Creek Redwoods&Sierra Azul Open Space Preserves Bear Creek Redwoods Preserve is located west of Lexington Reservoir and Highway 17 in Los Gatos. At over 1,300 acres,Bear Creek Redwoods abounds with Douglas fir,oak, madrone and the redwoods for which it is named. Currently,a permit is required to access Bear Creek Redwoods. With its rugged,wild character, Sierra Azul Preserve, located just east of the PAGE 2 For Immediate Release Lexington Reservoir,also in Los Gatos,totals over 17,000 acres and is the District's largest preserve.It is divided into four areas:the popular Kennedy-Limekiln Area,the Cathedral Oaks and Rancho de Guadalupe Areas,which are currently closed to the public,and the Mt. Umunhum Area that features the 3,486-foot peak and the local landmark monolith.Currently,access to the preserve is provided via the Kennedy Road and Jacques Ridge staging areas. About Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is an independent,non-enterprise,California special district whose 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 District is divided into seven geographic wards,each represented for a four-year term by an elected Board member.Created by voters more than 30 years ago,the District has successfully protected and managed over 50,000 acres of open space.The public enjoys the District's diverse and beautiful preserves 365 days of the year. For more information,please visit www.openspace.org. I I Santa Clara County Open Space Authority Board Members November 1, 2005 G.Craige Edgerton Director,District 7 Craig Britton REOEIVED, Chairperson General Manager Alex Kennett Mid peninsula Regional Open Space District Director, District 1 1=' g I� p Vice-Chairperson 330 Distel Circle NOY 03 2a Jim Foran Los Altos, CA 94022-1404 Director, District 2 � 1 P ? l�s Sequoia Hail Dear Craig: Director, District 3 Garnetta J.Annabie For several years Santa Clara County Open Space Authority has been involved in Director, District 4 a lawsuit brought by taxpayer groups challenging the benefit assessment district Richard Forst established in 2001. As you will see from the enclosed news release, the Director, District S Authority has successfully defended its position in both Superior Court and the Mike potter 6th District Court of Appeals. Director, District 6 General Manager Several weeks ago the California Supreme Court granted review in the lawsuit, Patrick Congdon I which was brought by Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. I do not anticipate a date for review being set until sometime next year. Though the lawsuit has complicated our functioning, we continue to pursue our mission and will soon be dedicating the staging area at Rancho Canada del Oro. I look forward to the day when this issue finally will be resolved and remain confident the Authority will ultimately prevail. In the meantime, we will keep yoia informed of the lawsuit's progress. Thank you for your support. It's good to know we are part of a community working toward public goals that have been endorsed by so many throughout the region for so many years. once lye latrick Congdon General Manager, Santa Clara County Open Space Authority 6830 Via Del Oro, Suite 200 • San Jose, California 951 1 9-1 353 • 408-224-7476 • Fax 408-224-7548 Email- info@openspaceauthority.org • Website-www.openspaceauthority.org Santa Clara County Open Space Authority 6830 Via del Oro,Suite 200•San Jose,CA 95119•Tel(408)224-7476• Fax(408)224-7548•info@OpenSpaceAuthority.org PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Patrick Congdon, General Manager Lark Burkhart, Public Information Specialist Office: 408-224-7476 California Supreme Court Will Review Taxpayer Lawsuit Challenging Open Space Authority's Benefit District San Jose, CA October 17, 2005—Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (OSA) received notification October 12 that the California Supreme Court has granted review in the lawsuit brought by taxpayer groups contesting the Authority's 2001 benefit assessment. "We welcome Supreme Court review and were not surprised given the visibility of the case," said OSA General Manager Patrick Congdon. "It is an important issue, but I remain confident based on the decisions of the lower courts. 'I'he biggest impact on us now is that the extra funding generated from Benefit Assessment District 11 remains unavailable for important acquisition projects." I'lie position of the Open Space Authority was affirmed July 6, 2005,by the 6th District Court of Appeals,which in turn had affirmed the decision of the Superior Court of Santa Clara County. In a 2-1 decision, the appeals court found that the OSA formed the Open Space Preservation District in compliance with Proposition 21 8's requirements and that the acquisition and maintenance of open space would provide a special benefit to assessed properties. In 2003 Santa Clara County Superior Court judge William Elfvmig also ruled in favor of the OSA and rejected the anti-tax lawsuit brought by Silicon Valley Taxpayers Association and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. In granting summary judgment in favor of the OSA,judge Elfving found in favor of the Authority on all issues. The benefit assessment was approved by a majority of affected property owners in the fall of 2001. The measure,which raises the yearly assessment by $20 per single-family household, provides the OSA with an additional$8 million annually for the acquisition of open space, hillsides,wildlife habitat, rivers and streams, and the preservation of agricultural lands in Santa Clara County. The Santa Clara County Open Space Authority(OSA) is an independent special district created in 1993 to help preserve, protect and manage urban and non-urban open space in the areas of Campbell, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, San Jose, and southern Santa Clara County. The OSA has preserved over 11,150 acres of land and manages over 375 acres of conservation easements. www.OpenSpaceAuthority.org November 4, 2005 Dear Trail Users: Thank you for your interest in our open space trails. We have received a number of e-mails regarding our interim closures and proposed amendments to certain Preserve Use and Management Plans. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's Use and Management Committee met on November 2, 2005 to review status of four trails that are currently closed on an interim basis to bicycling and/or equestrian use. The Committee discussed proposed amendments to four Preserve Use and Management Plans, specifically, Black Mountain Trail (Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve); Zinfandel Trail (Picchetti Ranch Open Space Preserve); Ridge Trail (south of Horseshoe Lake--Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve) and, Soda Gulch Trail (Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve). The Use and Management Committee will make preliminary recommendations to the full Board of Directors for determination of the final trail use designations. The matter is tentatively scheduled for the regular public Board Meeting on February 22, 2006. Your emails were made available to the Use and Management Committee and will also be distributed to the Board of Directors for their February meeting. If you would like to review the Agenda and Staff Report for this item, please be sure to visit the District's Web Site at www.openspace.org some time in February, 2006. Sincerely, Z. Crao Britton L. Craig Britton Distribution List: Debbi Brusco: dgbrusco@sbcglobal.net Marilyn Bauriedel: mbauriedel@ursu.com Bill Bauriedel: billb@stanford.edu Karen DeMello: karen.demello@gmail.com Judy Fenerty: judy@fenerty.com Patrick Gallagher: drrust@greenisles.com Susan Heist: svheist@aol.com Martin Hendess: martinwilliamh@yahoo.com Jan Hintermeister: Jan.Hintermeister@motorola.com Ken Lee: Kenton@rahul-net Chris Macintosh: cmaci@sbcglobal.net Josh Moore: josh—Moore@comcast.net David Oare: oare@comcast.net Henry Pastorelli: henry.pastorelli@moldev.com Susan Peterson: susan.peterson@mindspring.com Shane Reed: FORESTDAWG@HOTMAIL.COM LaPaula Sakai: hysakai@pacbell.net Mike Vandeman: mjvande@pacbell.net Christine Voci: vochl963@yahoo.com Claims No 05-20 Meeting 05-25 Date 11/9/05 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 3669 $1,533.90 Acterra Native Plants-Pulgas Ridge Staging Area&Skyline Ridge 3670 $169.01 ADT Security Services Burglar Alarm Service-SFO 3671 $37.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 3672 $104.00 American Red Cross Red Cross Training 3673 $500.00 Association of Bay Area Governments Annual Membership 3674 $95.80 Barron Park Supply Co. Plumbing Supplies 3675 $128.96 Ben Meadows Company Landscaping Supplies 3676 $60.00 Britton,L.Craig Reimbursement-Cell Phone 3677 $73.80 Cal-Line Equipment,Inc. Chipper Parts 3678 $135.26 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO&Windy Hill 3679 $1,594.02 Caterpillar Financial Services Corp. Mini Excavator Lease-Trail Construction At Pulgas 3680 $790.78 CMK Automotive Inc. Vehicle Maintenance Service 3681 $2,275.00 Concern Onsite Training&Executive Coaching 3682 $136.91 Congdon,Bunny Reimbursement-Cal PIERS Conference 3683 $693.26 Costco Office&Field Supplies 3684 $6,069.51 Cresco Equipment Rentals Equipment Rental-St.Joseph's Hill Road Work& Davidson Restoration Project 3685 $11.28 CSK Auto Vehicle Supplies 3686 $182.90 Davison,Steve Reimbursement-Tuition 3687 $208.20 Decatur Electronics,Inc. Radar Repair 3688 $32.00 Department of Motor Vehicles Special Equipment Registration Fee 3689 $1,112.27 Design Concepts Graphic Design Services-Labels,PDF Files For Web Placement&Maps 3690 $23,674.89 Donald Hays Trail Contractor Construction Of Ridgetop Trail At Pulgas Ridge 3691 $123.20 Fed Ex Shipping Charges 3692 $7,771.03 '1 First Bankcard Field Supplies-1,330.04 Office Supplies-53.07 Computer Supplies-1,146.14 Local Business Meetings- 382.81 Conferences&Training-1,889.02 Advertising- 29.63 Staff Recognition Event/Misc-3,046.46 3693 $191.06 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 3694 $58.55 G&K Service Shop Towel Service 3695 $226.06 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies,Tools&Equipment 3696 $367.17 Great Printing&Copies Printing Service 3697 $711.11 Hooper,Stan Reimbursement-Cal-IPC Conference/Tuition 3698 $225.00 Jim Davis Auto Smog Checks 3699 $765.25 LFR Levine Fricke Engineer&Design Services-Pulgas Ridge 3700 $350.00 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services-Personnel 3701 $142.08 Los Altos Garbage Co. Garbage Service-AO 3702 $125.15 Madco Welding Supplies 3703 $76.85 McKowan,Paul Reimbursement-Volunteer Supplies 3704 $112.35 Metro Mobile Communications Mobile Radio Antenna 3705 $1,288.72 Monster Mechanical,Inc. HVAC Maintenance&Repair-A.O. 3706 $56,75 Mountain View Garden Center Landscaping Supplies 3707 $18.00 Mountain View Los Altos Union High Fingerprinting-New Recruit School District 3708 $1,000.00 `2 North American Title Company Deposit-Hall Property 3709 $710.09 Office Depot Office Supplies 3710 $1,000.00 "3 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Rapley Ranch 3711 $1,000.00 `4 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Portola Lookout 3712 $22.41 Orlandi Trailer Trailer Accessories 3713 $950.00 Orrin Chrisman Engineering Support For Website 3714 $520.95 Peninsula Digital Imaging Printing-"Good Neighbor"Meeting Postcards Page t of 3 Claims No 05-20 Meeting 05-25 Date 11/9/05 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 3715 $388.19 "5 Petty Cash Replenish Petty Cash 3716 $155.07 Pine Cone Lumber Lumber 3717 $757.00 Platinum Roofing,Inc. Re-roofing-Skyline Rental Unit 3718 $635.75 Post Haste Direct Mail Services Mailing-"Good Neighbor Policy"Postcards 3719 $2,319.28 Priority 1 Field Supplies/Vehicle Accessories 3720 $8.09 Rancho Ace Hardware&Garden Shop Field Supplies 3721 $90.00 Reimche,Margaret Reimbursement-Supplies For Staff Recognition Event 3722 $1,000.00 Remington,Eric Consulting Services-Biotic Survey For HCF Grant Application 3723 $700.00 Roberta Wolfe Recording Services 3724 $189.09 Roessler,Cindy Reimbursement-Mileage&Cell Phone 3725 $1,125.97 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 3726 $31.21 Royal Brass Inc. Field Supply 3727 $651.45 San Jose Mercury News Advertisement-Contract Bid For Herbicide Application 3728 $20.00 Santa Clara County Emergency Mgrs. Meeting Expense Assoc. 3729 $17.04 SBC Faxiine-FFO 3730 $162.36 SBC Telephone Service-AO 3731 $505.75 Skyline County Water District Water Service 3732 $1,037.38 Smith System Driver Improvement Advanced Driver Training Institute,Inc. 3733 $80.19 State Board Of Equalization Diesel Fuel Tax 3734 $245.00 Stevens Creek Quarry,Inc. Asphalt Recycling 3735 $236.80 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expense 3736 $825.00 System for Public Safety Recruitment-Background Research 3737 $11.49 The Workingman's Emporium Uniforms-Name Tags 3738 $533.36 Thielfoldt,Sally Reimbursement-Risk Management Seminar/Supplies For Staff Recognition Event 3739 $437.50 Thomas Fischer Consulting Services 3740 $92.87 Turf&Industrial Equipment Co. Vehicle Supplies 3741 $470.85 United Rentals Northwest,Inc. Equipment Rental 3742 $323.00 Verizon Cellular Phone Service 3743 $38.49 Verizon Wireless Messaging Services Pager Service 3744 $144.52 West Payment Center Legal Books/Supplements 3745 $711.74 West Tek Supply,Inc. Erosion Supplies 3746 - $1,786.15 Woods,Del Reimbursement-National Land Conservation Conference &Soil Erosion Seminar 3747 R $300.00 Acme&Sons Sanitation Pump Service 3748 R $94.86 Barg Coffin Lewis&Trapp Legal Services-Guadalupe Watershed 3749 R $126.23 BFI Garbage Service 3750 R $1,807.56 Britton,L.Craig Reimbursement-National Recreation&Park Association Conference 3751 R $2,225.00 California JPIA 2005-2006 Worker's Compensation Excess Pool Deposit 3752 R $16,594.28 EDAW Master Plan Contract Services-Sierra Azul&Bear Creek Redwood OSP 3753 R $284.93 eDirectSoftware Computer Supplies 3754 R $5,456.00 Employment Development Dept. Unemployment Insurance-Claims 3755 R $10.48 Environmental&Occupational Risk Consulting Service-Mileage Management 3756 R $220.28 Home Depot,Inc. Field Supplies&Equipment 3757 R $45.00 Jim Davis Auto Smog Test 3758 R $190.62 Langley Hill Quarry Base Rock-Charcoal Road Page 2 of 3 Claims No 05-20 Meeting 05-25 Date 11/9/05 Revised Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 3759 R $629.57 Los Altos Garbage Co. Dumpster Services 3760 R $587.79 McKowan,Paul Reimbursement-AVA Conference 3761 R $133.79 Miller,Starr&Regalia Legal Services-Saratoga Country Club 3762 R $34.00 Miller,Starr&Regalia Legal Services-Green Eyes,LLC 3763 R $22,117.43 Miller,Starr&Regalia Legal Services-Fogarty/MacFarlane Litigation 3764 R $861.00 Moore lacofano Goltsman,Inc. Consulting Services-Good Neighbor Policy 3765 R $971.02 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Equipment&Supplies 3766 R $90.63 Orlandi Trailer Trailer Accessories 3767 R $27.17 Paterson,Loro Reimbursement-Vehicle Supplies 3768 R $681.64 Peterson Tractor,Co. Equipment Repair 3769 R $537.68 Petty Cash Training&Seminars,Office Supplies,Parking&Mileage, Local Business Meeting Expense 3770 R $1,086.97 Post Haste Direct Mail Services Mailing-Fall 2005 Newsletter#2 3771 R $2,325.58 Priority 1 Vehicle Accessories 3772 R $146.40 Recreational Equipment,Inc. Uniform 3773 R $350.00 *6 Regents Of The University Of California Invasive Plant Seminar 3774 R $3,484.80 Rural Pig Management Pig Control Services 3775 R $171.79 SBC Telephone Service-AO&SFO/Internet Service-AO 3776 R $1,506.86 Shell Credit Card Center Fuel 3777 R $4,647.90 Shute,Mihaly&Weinberger LLP Legal Services-Coastal Annexation Litigation 3778 R $25.89 United Parcel Service Parcel Shipping 3779 R $258.56 West Payment Center Monthly Legal Subscription/Legal Books Total $141,192.83 *1 Urgent Check Issued 11/4/05 *2 Urgent Check Issued 11/1/05 *3 Urgent Check Issued 11/3/05 *4 Urgent Check Issued 11/3/05 *5 Urgent Check Issued 10/27/05 *6 Urgent Check Issued 11/8/05 Page 3 of 3 Claims No 05-20 Meeting 05-25 Date 11/09/05 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 3669 $1,533.90 Acterra Native Plants-Pulgas Ridge Staging Area&Skyline Ridge 3670 $169.01 ADT Security Services Burglar Alarm Service-SFO 3671 $37.00 Allen's Press Clipping Bureau Clipping Service 3672 $104.00 American Red Cross Red Cross Training 3673 $500.00 Association of Bay Area Governments Annual Membership 3674 $95.80 Barron Park Supply Co. Plumbing Supplies 3675 $128.96 Ben Meadows Company Landscaping Supplies 3676 $60.00 Britton,L.Craig Reimbursement-Cell Phone 3677 $73.80 Cal-Line Equipment,Inc. Chipper Parts 3678 $135.26 California Water Service Company Water Service-AO&Windy Hill 3679 $1,594.02 Caterpillar Financial Services Corp. Mini Excavator Lease-Trail Construction At Pulgas 3680 $790.78 CMK Automotive Inc. Vehicle Maintenance Service 3681 $2,275.00 Concern Onsite Training&Executive Coaching 3682 $136.91 Congdon,Bunny Reimbursement-Cal PIERS Conference 3683 $693.26 Costco Office&Field Supplies 3684 $6,069.51 Cresco Equipment Rentals Equipment Rental-St.Joseph's Hill Road Work& Davidson Restoration Project 3685 $11.28 CSK Auto Vehicle Supplies 3686 $182.90 Davison,Steve Reimbursement-Tuition 3687 $208.20 Decatur Electronics,Inc. Radar Repair 3688 $32.00 Department of Motor Vehicles Special Equipment Registration Fee 3689 $1,112.27 Design Concepts Graphic Design Services-Labels,PDF Files For Web Placement&Maps 3690 $23,674.89 Donald Hays Trail Contractor Construction Of Ridgetop Trail At Pulgas Ridge 3691 $123.20 Fed Ex Shipping Charges 3692 $7,771,03 *1 First Bankcard Field Supplies-1,330.04 Office Supplies-53.07 Computer Supplies-1,146.14 Local Business Meetings- 382.81 Conferences&Training-1,889.02 Advertising- 29.63 Staff Recognition Event/Misc-3,046.46 3693 $191.06 Foster Brothers Lock&Key Services 3694 $58.55 G&K Service Shop Towel Service 3695 $226.06 Gardenland Power Equipment Field Supplies,Tools&Equipment 3696 $367.17 Great Printing&Copies Printing Service 3697 $711.11 Hooper,Stan Reimbursement-Cal4PC Conference/Tuition 3698 $225.00 Jim Davis Auto Smog Checks 3699 $765.25 LFR Levine Fricke Engineer&Design Services-Pulgas Ridge 3700 $350.00 Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Legal Services-Personnel 3701 $142.08 Los Altos Garbage Co. Garbage Service-AO 3702 $125.15 Madco Welding Supplies 3703 $76.85 McKowan,Paul Reimbursement-Volunteer Supplies 3704 $112.35 Metro Mobile Communications Mobile Radio Antenna 3705 $1,288.72 Monster Mechanical,Inc. HVAC Maintenance&Repair-A.O. 3706 $56.75 Mountain View Garden Center Landscaping Supplies 3707 $18.00 Mountain View Los Altos Union High Fingerprinting-New Recruit School District 3708 $1,000.00 *2 North American Title Company Deposit-Hall Property 3709 $710.09 Office Depot Office Supplies 3710 $1,000.00 *3 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Rapley Ranch 3711 $1,000.00 *4 Old Republic Title Company Deposit-Portola Lookout 3712 $22.41 Orlandi Trailer Trailer Accessories 3713 $950.00 Orrin Chrisman Engineering Support For Website 3714 $520.95 Peninsula Digital Imaging Printing-"Good Neighbor"Meeting Postcards Page 1 of 2 Claims No 05-20 Meeting 05-25 Date 11/09/05 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District # Amount Name Description 3715 $388.19 *5 Petty Cash Replenish Petty Cash 3716 $155.07 Pine Cone Lumber Lumber 3717 $757.00 Platinum Roofing,Inc. Re-roofing-Skyline Rental Unit 3718 $635.75 Post Haste Direct Mail Services Mailing-"Good Neighbor Policy"Postcards 3719 $2,319.28 Priority 1 Field Supplies 3720 $8.09 Rancho Ace Hardware&Garden Shop Field Supplies 3721 $90.00 Reimche,Margaret Reimbursement-Supplies For Staff Recognition Event 3722 $1,000.00 Remington,Eric Consulting Services-Biotic Survey For HCF Grant Application 3723 $700.00 Roberta Wolfe Recording Services 3724 $189.09 Roessler,Cindy Reimbursement-Mileage&Cell Phone 3725 $1,125.97 Roy's Repair Service Vehicle Repairs&Service 3726 $31.21 Royal Brass Inc. Field Supply 3727 $651.45 San Jose Mercury News Advertisement-Contract Bid For Herbicide Application 3728 $20.00 Santa Clara County Emergency Mgrs. Meeting Expense Assoc. 3729 $17.04 SBC Faxline-FFO 3730 $162.36 SBC Telephone Service-AO 3731 $505.75 Skyline County Water District Water Service 3732 $1,037.38 Smith System Driver Improvement Advanced Driver Training Institute,Inc. 3733 $80.19 State Board Of Equalization Diesel Fuel Tax 3734 $245.00 Stevens Creek Quarry,Inc. Asphalt Recycling 3735 $236.80 Summit Uniforms Uniform Expense 3736 $825.00 System for Public Safety Recruitment-Background Research 3737 $11.49 The Workingman's Emporium Uniforms-Name Tags 3738 $533.36 Thielfoldt,Sally Reimbursement-Risk Management Seminar/Supplies For Staff Recognition Event 3739 $437.50 Thomas Fischer Consulting Services 3740 $92.87 Turf&Industrial Equipment Co. Vehicle Supplies 3741 $470.85 United Rentals Northwest,Inc. Equipment Rental 3742 1323.00 Verizon Cellular Phone Service 3743 $38.49 Verizon Wireless Messaging Services Pager Service 3744 $144.52 West Payment Center Legal Books/Supplements 3745 $711.74 West Tek Supply,Inc. Erosion Supplies 3746 $1,786.15 Woods,Del Reimbursement-National Land Conservation Conference &Soil Erosion Seminar Total $73,161.12 *1 Urgent Check Issued 11/4/05 *2 Urgent Check Issued 11/1/05 *3 Urgent Check Issued 11/3/05 *4 Urgent Check Issued 11/3/05 *5 Urgent Check Issued 10/27/05 Page 2 of 2 i