HomeMy Public PortalAbout20231101 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD)
November 1, 2023
Board Meeting 23-31
* Approved by the Board of Directors on December 13, 2023.
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Wednesday, November 1, 2023
The Board of Directors conducted this meeting in accordance with
California Government Code section 54953.
APPROVED MINUTES*
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
President Kishimoto called the special meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District to order at 5:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Craig Gleason, Zoe Kersteen-Tucker, Yoriko Kishimoto,
Margaret MacNiven, and Curt Riffle
Members Absent: Karen Holman
Staff Present: General Counsel Hilary Stevenson, Assistant General Manager Susanna
Chan, Assistant General Manager Brian Malone, Chief Financial
Officer/Director of Administrative Services Stefan Jaskulak, Executive
Assistant/Deputy District Clerk Loana Lumina-Hsu, Executive
Assistant/Deputy District Clerk Shaylynn Nelson, Natural Resources
Manager Kirk Lenington, Land and Facilities Manager Brandon Stewart,
Rangeland Ecologist Lewis Reed, Conservation Grazing Program
Manager Matthew Shapero
Director Kersteen-Tucker provided opening remarks introducing the Agricultural Policy, the
work and outreach preformed by staff for the past several years and thanking the local and
agricultural community and coastal partners.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director MacNiven seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Holman absent.)
Meeting 23-31 Page 2
Assistant General Manager Brian Malone provided background on the 2004 Coastal annexation
and expanded District Coastal mission, explained the Board Ad Hoc Committee, and
development of the Agricultural Policy including public outreach and engagement workshops.
BOARD BUSINESS
1. Proposed New Agricultural Policy (R-23-129)
Natural Resources Manager Kirk Lenington provided the staff presentation on the proposed
Agricultural Policy provided the staff presentation on background and timeline of the agriculture
policy development process, partner and stakeholder engagement, policy elements and
implementation. Mr. Lenington explained the policy framework and guiding policy documents,
including the District’s Coastal Mission Statement and the Resource Management Policies. He
provided background on the District Growth on the Coastside beginning in 2004.
Rangeland Ecologist Lewis Reed continued the staff presentation with explaining the stakeholder
outreach and engagement process and the development of the Agricultural Policy. Outreach and
engagement with the local coastal groups included board, peer agency, and producer workshops;
surveys in English and Spanish; stakeholder review of the framework and the draft policy;
consultations with San Mateo Farm Bureau; and peer agency review of the draft policy.
Producer workshop topics covered supporting environmentally sensitive agricultural practices,
intensive agricultural lands (row crops), and housing and agricultural lease structures.
Land and Facilities Manager Brandon Stewart and Mr. Reed introduced and explained the
agricultural policy elements, thirteen policies, and implementation actions.
Director Kersteen-Tucker spoke on the history of the development of the agricultural policy and
how to expand partnership with the local community. The policy incorporates local community
feedback, viable agricultural use, partnership developments, infrastructure assistance, longer
leases, and affordable agricultural workforce housing. Director Kersteen-Tucker stated the policy
is adaptable to changes in science , climate changes, social environment changes, and including
the local area of ranching and farming next to Silicon Valley.
Director MacNiven spoke on the policy emphasizing how inclusive the policy is wanting to
maintain the agricultural heritage of the area; incorporations of the core of the District mission to
preserve and protect; and stated the District recognizes the diversity of the area, are proud of the
it and want to maintain the diversity. Director MacNiven stated the policy is a living document
and can be revisited in the future.
Director Riffle spoke on the staff’s efforts since 2013 to develop the Agricultural Policy, which
is clear, implementable, and adaptable. He acknowledged the need for further learning from the
local community and noted the policy is adaptable and can change as agriculture changes.
Director MacNiven inquired about the frequency of review of the Agricultural Policy and if a
timeline was included in the policy.
Mr. Malone explained there was discussion with the ad hoc committee and ultimately it was
decided not to incorporate a specific date or timeline but instead include a statement in the
policy that it is a living document which it can be amended as needed.
Meeting 23-31 Page 3
Public comment opened at 5:50 p.m.
Director of Land Stewardship Daniel Olstein from Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST)
explained the role of POST in supporting the coastal community and agriculture. Mr. Olstein
spoke in support of the Agricultural Policy which provides to the District the clarity and
guidance to do work and investment, and partner with local farmlands. He expressed excitement
for the opportunities to partner and protect farmlands with conservation easement, infrastructure
on District lands and also on the local farms. Additionally, he stated that the policy supports
diversity and looks forward to partnering with local communities and farmlands.
BJ Burns expressed his confusion on the discussion of row crops as he was under the impression
the District allows grazing and not row crops, and not be involved in leases. Additionally, Mr.
Burns asked the District to control brush on lands for grazing operations and how many thousand
acres are grazed compared to how many acres were grazed in the past. Mr. Burns stated ranchers
need water and grass and without brushing, there is less grass. He suggested having test plots of
acres to spray, get public involved to see if there’s anything in ground that hurts the land, and
look for alternative. Lastly, he stated seeing row crops need help for water and land, and land
sitting idles as there are no markets and farmers are leaving and quitting, stating farmers need
help to save agriculture.
Kerry Burke commented that the policy is too wordy and requested a clearer document with a
checklist for implementation. She also noted that the Coastal Service Plan should be added as
the local community does not have it readily available. Additionally, she stated a preference that
the Agriculture Policy should lead with agriculture rather than leading with resource protection.
Ms. Burke stated the community is watching the District’s acquisition of Cloverdale, how it
effects water users of the Lake Lucerne communities, and for the District to gain the trust of
agricultural community is dependent on how the District resolves the Lake Lucerne issue.
Additionally, the community is wanting limited access development and will watch how the
District’s will subdivide and develop on agricultural lands with areas for the public to enjoy.
Erik Markegard thanked staff and spoke in support of the Agricultural Policy.
Peter Marchi spoke about his concern of public access and the watershed, stating food safety
compliance requires that the water is not contaminated. He opposes public access and prefers no
limited access, as water can be easily be contaminated which serve the row crop farmers.
Public comment closed at 6:01 p.m.
Mr. Malone stated there were conversations with Farm Bureau about row crops and how the
Agricultural Policy can actively support row crops, preserve and protect lands for ecological
rangelands, sustainable ranching. The policy allows the Board to choose to fund projects through
partnerships that preserve row crops for the future on the San Mateo coast. The District has
learned management of brush encroachment on the Coast including the speed of brush
encroachment. It is a priority for the District, will do work on test plots, and work with ranchers
on the most effective means for brush management.
Mr. Malone reported that the Coastal Service Plan is incorporated within the Agricultural Policy.
Additionally, the District currently oversees two areas in grazing lands with public access and is
working with tenants on future plans including regional trails, while being sensitive to the
Meeting 23-31 Page 4
environment and agriculture. An element of concerned that was included in the Agricultural
Policy is the issues farmers raised are all elements of the plan including no food contamination,
and closing down public access for spraying. The District is working on lot line adjustments
cooperatively with farmers for subdivision to divide upland ranchlands and intensive row crops
working with farmweers and owners of the land. If there is an operator whose operation depends
on both elements, we would not break those apart elements apart.
Mr. Stewart spoke on the brush management stating the District is meeting with ranching tenants
to review vegetation management areas for the next year, which allows the District to complete
bio-surveys and evaluate projects most beneficial to tenants. Conservation Grazing Program
Manager Matthew Shapero will work closely with all tenants to identify projects most beneficial
to their operations, so the District can implement workplans this fall. Additionally, staff is
engaging in more conversations with tenants to discuss infrastructure improvements projects
include improving water delivery systems and the routing of the Purisima-to-the-Sea Trail.
Director Gleason asked for clarification on the methodology for brush control projects.
Mr. Stewart explained the District is exploring options for the brush management such as
physical and chemical to ensure the chosen option is implementable, affordable, and durable so
the brush does not return.
Mr. Reed explained the research on brush management and room for improvement. Policy AG-
10 is specifically about the need to prioritize research which includes how the District can do
better brush management.
Director Kersteen-Tucker inquired about the timing for reviewing the policy to assess its
effectiveness for the community, the land, and the users.
Mr. Lenington stated that the threshold to review the policy would be when staff believes the
best approach to issues, is constrained by the policy.
Director Kersteen-Tucker inquired about the metrics used for assessing rangeland health, the
District's measurements, and the District's criteria for evaluating rangeland health.
Mr. Lenington stated staff does have metrics, but that level of detail is not placed in the policy,
and as the science changes, the metrics will change.
Director Kersteen-Tucker asked how the District will incorporate the knowledge of the local
agricultural community.
Mr. Lenington stated the development of policies are a vehicle to have conversations with the
community and build relationships, and it is important to continue to have and deepen the
relationships with the local community.
Director Gleason asked how conservation and environmental stakeholders provided input.
Mr. Reed stated the District met with the Conservation Council which included representation
from various environmental and staff leveraged existing networks to broaden the outreach.
Director Gleason asked about the public access input through the process.
Meeting 23-31 Page 5
Mr. Malone explained there was not directed public outreach for the Agricultural Policy. The
District receives lots of input on providing public access, policies providing public access, and
will discuss with local community and agricultural partners to look at public access on the
parcels. Staff tried to balance the needs of the local agricultural community and public access.
Director Gleason stated getting both groups of local agricultural community and those wanting
more public access into the public forum to provide point of view would foster greater
understanding of opposing views.
Mr. Malone explained how similar discussions have occurred in the past and expect to have
similar conversations again in the future with tenants and the public.
Director Gleason asked if the District should have a position on the methodologies for an
animals’ full life cycle, for example feed lot finishing or grass finishing or is it left to rancher.
Mr. Reed explained District’s priority is developing rangeland management plan that is site
specific including full inventory and resource management priorities, and flexibility of working
with different operators with laying out the goals and land resources.
Public comment opened at 6:29 p.m.
John Miller spoke on California State growth to build houses, while there is no infrastructure to
support growth. He stated expectation of water rates changes and spoke on concern of housing
growth and purchase of the agricultural land.
Public comment closed at 6:31 p.m.
President Kishimoto spoke in support of the science-based research, measurements and results,
and indicators of what is happening to the soil.
Mr. Lenington explained there are partners the District works with that are already doing work
on soil measurements and soil health, how it can be improved through Agricultural practices, and
how staff is looking to them as leaders of the field of study. The Science Symposium is an
avenue to share District knowledge and information, and to receive others knowledge and
research.
President Kishimoto asked about a goal for the development of metrics.
Mr. Lenington explained monitoring program is just starting with early detection and rapid
response for weeds; a water quality monitoring program where staff samples creeks and ponds
including looking for harmful bacteria; and the Santa Cruz Mountain Stewardship Network
discussions of measures for ecological health overtime which is expensive. The Science
Advisory Panel recommendation was to hire post-docs to use existing data from partners in
region and analyze and set schedule to signal ecological health. Mr. Lenington stated it is also a
regional project, not just District, and emphasized wanting to work with partners.
President Kishimoto shared she looks forward to the policy continuing to evolve and combining
the science and wisdom of the grassroots, those working on the ground, and the Native
Americans who have managed the land for generations.
Meeting 23-31 Page 6
Director Gleason remarked education is discussed a few times throughout the policy in public
relations and outreach, stating the docent naturalists program can provide that education.
Director Gleason asked if the agriculture will be part of the docent-led program.
Mr. Malone explained the District does trainings with docents naturalists for new preserves and
areas. Staff will continue interpretive work such as signs for visitors can read to get the value that
the ccows bring to the land.
Director Kersteen-Tucker stated staff will work on education about agriculture throughout the
District, emphasizing the importance of educating the kids on the importance of agriculture and
where the food comes from.
Motion: Director Kersteen-Tucker moved, and Director MacNiven seconded the motion to
adopt a new Agricultural Policy to complement existing policies and replace the Agricultural
Use Statements (1978) to guide agricultural conservation partnerships and land management
actions.
ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Holman absent)
ADJOURNMENT
President Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 6:42 p.m.
Loana Lumina-Hsu
Deputy District Clerk