HomeMy Public PortalAbout19730711 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Meeting 73-14
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Board of Directors
July 11, 1973 Sunnyvale Community
Center
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Wendin called the meeting to order at 7 :40 p.m.
Members present: Daniel Condron, Katherine Duffy, Nonette
Hanko, Daniel Wendin
Personnel present: Herbert Grench, Stanley Norton, Virginia
Cooper
Audience of three persons
II. MINUTES OF JUNE 27, 1973
N. Hanko requested that the consideration of the minutes
be delayed. President Wendin stated that they would be
delayed until after the Special Order of the Day.
III. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
1. Conservation Element of the General Plan of Santa Clara
County
President D. Wendin introduced Mr. Arthur Ogilvie, member
of the County Planning Department. Mr. Ogilvie gave some
historical background regarding the general plan of Santa
Clara County. The State Planning Act was amended about
two years ago to include open space and conservation ele-
ments. In December 1972 these two elements were due; the
time was then extended to June 30, 1972. On 30 June 1973 the
date was again moved to 30 December 1973. At the time of first
extension, there were two changes made in conservation
element requirements: (1) language relating to historical
and archeological requirements, and (2) the creation of a
special committee to see if the plans were adequate.
D. Wendin asked what legal effect would be since the Board
of Supervisors had adopted the conservation element.
Mr. Ogilvie replied that the document will be used in res-
pect to review of applications and will be one of the imple-
ments determing whether a negative environmental impact
statement can be filed or if it will require a full blown
environmental impact report. Mr. Ogilvie also commented
that the City Council, the Planning Commission, etc. do
not have to abide by the adoption, but this does require
people to look at the alternatives for the first time, and
in turn, it may provide a legal basis for suits which could
be brought against government.
Meeting 73-14 page 2
Mr. Ogilvie then gave a slide presentation representative
of numerous, aspects of the conservation element which
included water, agricultural lands, vegetative areas,
endangered wildlife species, natural community areas,
air resources, wildlife resources, endangered vegetative
species, non-urban open space resources, historical
resources and archeologic and paleontologic resources.
President Wendin announced a recess. The meeting was
recessed from 8 : 50 p.m. to 9 :00 p.m.
II . MINUTES OF JUNE 27, 1973 . . .continued
N. Hanko listed the following corrections to the minutes
of 27 June 1973:
1. On page 2, on the last paragraph where it states "as
law stands now" , add word "State" before "law" to distin-
guish between District ordinances and laws of state.
2 . On page 2, under V. , A. , the word "Midpeninsula" was
misspelled.
3. On page 4 under 4, "Planning" , the second to last
sentence, strike the word "funding" and insert "grants-
manship" .
The minutes were then unanimously approved as corrected.
IV. REPORTS
1. Federal Revenue Sharing Funds
H. Grench suggested that the most appropriate use for
Feddral Revenue Sharing Funds, if available, might be
for a study to develop a master plan to identify and
prioritize lands which the District would like to see
as long term open space. Such a plan would tie in with
city and 03unty plans and would have a more general
interest and thereby we might qualify for a broader funding
source. The General Manager did state that the potential
for receiving funds is not great. The deadline for sub-
mitting the proposal is within a week. K. Duffy asked to
whom the proposal would be submitted. H. Grench replied
that it would be submitted to the County who then submit
a list to the federal government of projects which they
consider important. He stated that he has a list of the
County applicants and recipients for the last entitlement
period if the Board would like to see it.
D. Wendin inquired about the price of such a plan. H.
Grench stated that in talks with independent planners who
have done comparable studies in Portola Valley and Santa
Barbara that $50, 000-$75,000 would provide a minimal study
comparable to the open space and conservation elements of
a general plan. He also mentioned other types of funding
which might be applicable. (1) Land and water conservation
funds; in that instance a master plan is required, but can
be quite general. (2) The 1974 State Bond Funds has the
same requirements, (3) AB 920 also requires a general master
plan.
Meeting 73-14 page 3
K. Duffy objected to the study on the grounds that it
would be a duplication of effort of city and County
plans, and also suggested that this study was premature
since there had not as yet been any goals and objectives
set up. H. Grench responded that our plan would in pre-
paration include a review of County and city studies.
Since what is needed immediately is a very general master
plan, H. Grench requested direction from the Board on a
commitment to the proposal. He also added that if a good
job is going to be done in the limited time available,
professional help from an independent outside planner
would be advisable. H. Grench received a concensus of
approval from the Board to engage an independent outside
planner for the preparation of the proposal.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board direct the General
Manager to request federal revenue sharing funds for the
development of a master plan of the scope covered by the
July 5 letter for lands which the District feels are
important for park and open space purposes. Seconded by
D. Condron. The motion passed unanimously.
V. EXECUTIVE SESSION
President Wendin suggested moving the executive session
to the last item on the agenda.
VI . NEW BUSINESS
1. Mountain View Baylands
N. Hanko suggested a referral motion to the goals and
objectives meeting.
H. Grench' s memo was duly noted by the Board. It
reads as follows: "Director Peters has suggested that
he would like to follow up on the status of certain
privately owned parcels of land which were suggested by
John O'Halloran at the baylands discussion of May 23,
1973, as being of value for park and open space purposes.
He wishes the concurrence and direction of the Board in
pursuing this matter. " The Board concurred.
2. N. Hanko brought up the memo regarding the Williamson
Act meeting being sponsored by the AAUW and League of
Women Voters on July 26. She requested the report from
S. Norton which had been previously requested. The con-
census of the Board was that most of the questions could
be answered by attending the meeting. H. Grench suggested
attendance at the meeting, and then if there are still
unanswered questions S. Norton might be of more help in
Meeting 73-14 page 4
clarifying.
3. H. Grench brought up the Special Meeting of 15 July
and the notice announcing same. The memo from Dr. Dave
Daniels was noted. H. Grench asked if there were any
objections to the format of the meeting by the Board.
There were none. He also requested that if any Board
members had goal topics they wished to have discussed
at the Special Meeting that they submit them by tonight.
VII. CLAIMS
H. Grench noted the additional claim for S. Norton in
the revised claims list (attached) .
K. Duffy questioned the wisdom of passing out the claims
list to each member of the Board. N. Hanko stated that
it is a general agenda item. D. Wendin stated that is
mandatory to review claims and approve them, and felt
all members should receive copies.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the claims be approved
as presented. The motion was seconded by N. Hanko.
The motion was passed unanimously.
V. ,EXECUTIVE SESSION . . .continued
The meeting was recessed to executive session at 10: 00 p.m.
to discuss personnel matters and a land negotiation.
VIII.A.DJOURNMENT
The meeting was reconvened from executive session and
adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Virginia Cooper
Secretary
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
�;,ummary of Special Ai< July 1-5, )73
.ng
(Proceedings r�ccrded c�n tape) Tea House
Mrs. Lois Hogle
2000 Old Page Mill Road
Los Altos Hlls
Attendance:
Board Members - Condron, Duffy, Hanko, Peters, Wendin.
Staff Grench, Norton, Cooper.
Others J. Thcrwald�;on (PA Bob Hanko, Lois Hogle (pm).
Discussion leaders Dr. Dave Daniels, M.D.
Closed meetlr7s and --ss-n.blic relatlonships were discussed. This
meeting waz, ori�Tir":Illy 41th a closed •am ression to discuss board and
staff functiorting 3nj effectiveness. inv Thor-walson commentcd on
the sacrifices ncds, ary because of the public's moral and legal right to know.
General a-�.reemont was expressed on the fact that the meeting was opened to the
public for the entire session Some uncertainty was expressed concerning the
ability to speak freely in hashing out problems during a public session.
Gcals and objectives --f
1) The n,: eting evolved somewhat
shakily wit -, a confusion of exact' objects''es but a una.ninity In the desire to
got the District moving quickly "Ind s_o0th_',,r with a guiding policy of goals and
objectives. After a round-table, discu!>.sion and review of an outline sheet
distributed by Dan Con=lrcn, a rough outline for the activities of the day
was worked out. These da_,ys di.,c-1J,,;1ons wore designed to answer articulated,
questions of staff-board reiation-hips, inJivid,,_,,al roics, resposibilitles- -�, d
expectations; determine directions, gcals and objectives as a framework for
MRPD activities and as a gee
for success; and determine a strategy for fiit.vlre
action.
Dave Daniels was free to lead, comment, focus and direct the day's
activities inorder to facilitate participation and action.
The following outline evolved for the day's activities:
I. Task Oriented Group Training Session - Dr. Daniels
II, Policy discussion on staff participation in contributing to policy setting
III.Basic Policy Objecti-es - Statement development.
IV. Strategy (Action Plan) of information gathering.
V. Criteria of Success.
VI. Management- expectations of staff aiid board.
I. Task oriented Group Training Session - Dr. David Daniels.
KEY ELEMENTS TID -EFFECTIVE TASK GRCUP FUACTIONING
A. Interpersonal relationships - key to getting along, functioning and
con-municating. Naccooiry e2emants area
1. Empathetic understanding
2. Genuineness
3. Pcsi-t!,:e
c*vp in 1")*.h �jjlreCtjUns for positive working
MINUTES OF JULY 15, 1973
D. Wendin stated that his understanding had been that the
minutes of the special meeting were to have been a sense
type minutes rather than official. H. Grench stated that
according to the Rules and Procedures, official minutes
are required. K. Duffy explained her procedure in putting
the minutes together. ' . 7-
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the minutes of July 15, 1973
be accepted as sense minutes and not necessarily as official
policy of the Board. D. Condron seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
Summary of Special me- ,ing : July 15, 1973. page 2
Experience blocked relationships (dis eemnnts)------are they,:
1. Personal?
2. Substantive ?
3. Value issued ?
B. Management Process
1. Task orientation
2. Leadership
C. Technical Knowledge.
D. Awareness of situational unique factors---correct analysis of situations.
THE TASK GROUP PRI OCP'9S: AN OUTLINE
This outline was passed out and discussed, A group meeting assessment sheet
was also passed out for use at the end of the meeting.
The role, choice and functioning of a chairman were discussed. . Rotation of the
cha n ---discussion put off to another date.
11. Policy regarding staff pirticipa.tion in contributing to thv policy-making
process. Bill Peters acted as facilitator of the discussion.
Discussed; ma-aipulative vs participatory (often a fine line)
neutral vs iq-�sitive role for the staff
information only vs positive recommendations
time constraints of evaluating all possible alternatives
4 _
Full-time staff vspart-time board (input constraints)
it was decided that exact methodology of initiating policy and taking
action would be discussed under item VI.
CONSENSUS
1. To function with a strong manager system.
Manager principle initiator of policy
Manager to have strong policy input, positive recommendations.
Manager free to advise on directions
Manager free to give opinions on all matters
Manager free to initiate action within constrains of policy
guidelines.
2. To require strong staff-board communications.
consultation with board members on areas of specific concern
additional regular contact
*(Implications of the Brown Act not resolved in this discussion)
3. Need for strong board responsibility under strong manager system.
to keep thoroughly informed
oncui , .: ,,:. t !-�-_ke final Judgements and determinations
in r.3L ers of pDiicy setti
initi to policy
establish priorities, goals and objectives# guidelines for action.
Summary of Special Meeting: July 15r 1973. page 3.
Discussed: Special relationship of board chairman and manager.
Greater communications necessary
Facilitate agenla
Restate board consensus in emergency situations (requiring
rapid action)
Discussed: Stan Norton's role
Board Atty vs managment atty
legal opinions vs extra-legal participation
CONSENSUS
Stan -can and should:
1. Initiate polity ,legal or extra-legal,
2. _Participate in discussions a.hd state opinions on any subject.
3. Be primarily accountable to the board 'of directors.
4. Be responsive to the general manager in all but major undertaking---
(a matter. of Stan's judgement )
Continued discussion of monitoring of Stan's time, activities and effectiveness
as atty for the district was put over into item VI as a discussion of management
functioning.
Mrs. Cooper's role was also carried over to that item in order to give the
subject adequate discussion.
Daniels commented thatthe above consensi should be included in a broader
framework of andinistra.tive policy.
i
REVIEW OF A.M. ACTIVITIP—l! BY DAVE DANIELS
1 " Much was accomplished.
2. Participants: were open, direct and willing to speak out (positive)
all have strong, dominant personalities (a warning)
were too long-winded and tended to repeat the same
arguments. (work on being more concise. Especially
important for the chairman. )
3. General Advice to the Manager (and atty) ; be sure to represent all
board members equally. Be cautious that no input from individual board
members be considered as secret or priviledged information (in order to
avoid the "betrayer trap". )
4. General discussion of the importance of the issue of trust in solving
problems of board-staff-atty relations.
?punch break (12:30 - 1 paw)
Summary of Special Meetings July 15, 1973. page 4.
AFTERNOON SESSION
III. Policy Statements. Dan Condron acted as facilitator.
A. Dan oulin-,d phases of growth of MRPD.
1. Formulative or essentially political phase.
2. Basic organization and staff building. (post election)
3. Today's phazse designed to develop a basic framework which will
indicate a sense of direction, guide action and facilitate evaluation
of accomplishments. This is done by developing a set of goals and
objectives and from that an action plan for the short and long
range future.
B. Outline for the discussion and development of a set of basic policy
statements:
1. Preservation of Open Space
a. Acquisition
b. Advocacy (Tmpact on others)
'The term "open space" must be defined.
2. Use of acquired lands-----recreational, limited, agriculture,access,
care, maintenance-------
3. Administration (Staeff and board functioning)---a broad topic
which. includes items defered from VI in the am sessiom,
the above were considered to be functions mandated- by the public.
4. Communications with the public.
of personnel, board and staff,
5. . Personnel (efficient functioning p , ,
was considered to be covored in item 3 ) This item evolved to
mean the goal of personal growth, interaction and development,
which although laudable goals are not a public mandate and not
to be a topic of discussion today.
Condron's outline (distributed am) was discussed and added to for use as
a refezence source or "shopping list" .
C. CONSENSUS POLICY STATEMENTS
1. Preservation of Open Space.
a. Acquisition-----to purchase or acquire interst in the maximum
amount of open space land within the district, including the
baylands and foothills.
b. Advocacy-----to influence ct:ier public and private agencies
to preserve open space.
'Daniels commented that the relative emphasis of these two items may
be a future source of conflict on the board.
to a r .c : 1 n --disc,,,ssion was deferred to strategy
session because it should not considered under "goals" topic.
T
Summary of special meetings July 159 1973 page 5•
C• CONSENSUS POLICY STATEMENTS (continued)
2. Use of Acquired Lands.
*There was discussion of the commitment concerning land use and recreation
expenditures which wa-s made to the Supervisors by District supporters
during the campaign. Stan agreed to supply directors with a copy of
this agreement. 'rne agreement should be reviewed 9:
discussed and included in Tne policy statement.
After discussion and reordering the items fell into five topics or
statements.
a. To work with local communities (and the county) to develop land
uses consistent with the (general plans"i gu idelines? of) Cities
and County.
care , land stewardship) of open space land.
b. To provide proper ( F)
P Pr F
(Fire protection, maintenance, protection of ecosystems, etc.)
c. Whem possible to sustainagricultural*. use on land in which the
District acquired interest.
e. (To allow) Utilization for outdoor recreation. (educational-
interpretive centers, hiking, trails, limited camping with
minimum improvements etc. )
*NOTE: initially this statement read "low utilization", but later
discussion determined that intensity of use should be tied to the
particular site under permit control (seasonable, where feasible, etc.)
f. (To develop• a) Land management policy that allows public access
appropriate to the nature of the land and its proper maintenance
as open space.
*NOTE: Under law the public does not have a right of unlimited
access to district land.
It was felt that these statements were preliminary and needed futther
expansion and refinement.
item VI
3. Staff and Board --- discussion deferred to/later in the day.
4. Communica,tlons with the public.
To educate and make clearly visible -to the public the purposes and
activities of the District and to encourage communication from
the public to the board.
(to communicate values of open space, philosophy of open space and
ecology, etc; Not to be self-serving)
*Suggested implementation such as newsletter, knterpretive classes,
etc. will to left to action progra°a discussions.
E. Follow up acti on on the above sta.temen,s to include:
1. R fi:seliarz of a,&j e .i a:~: 'i arm 6 L_a�,ements ktazk given to Cinny)
2. Short term goals definition.
3. Action program (including workshops)
Break at 3:40 pm.
Summary of Special Meeting: July 15, 1973. page 6.
VI. of staff bo rc3. (combination of VI am and 3.pm)
Staff and Board functioning Kay Duffy - facilitat6r.
A. Virginia Cooper's roles What degree available to board members? (``his
question never answered. ) Will Ginny be allowed to expand her role on
the sta T? Is hor job to be more inclusive than just secretarial role?
CONSENSUS:
1. Secretarial tasks are a required priority at this time but an
expand.cd role for Ginny will be allowed and encouraged.
2. Ginny's expanded role and job description will be clarified as
tasks are accomplished and evaluated against the District's
overall needs
3. Future staff needs must be evaluated in the near future in terms of
management needs end District goals. Expanded personnel ..njust be
approved by the board.
B. Stan's role s Availability to individual members? Extra-legal functions?
CONSENSUS:
1. Stan's r.irticipation in extra-legal ectivities can be a helpful
p�.rt of his contribution to the District. (review of land, testimony,
lobbying, information gathering, etc.)
2. It is the responsibility of:
a. .Board members to recognize the limits of Stan's available time
and carefully judge tasks requested.
b. Stan to use discretion (be conservative) in determining; the
value of his time in responding to individual board members,.'
e. Board members to consult Herb and/or the entire board on ,any
major tasks asked of Stan.
d. Herb to consult with the board on major tasks asked of Stan.
e. Herb, Stan and the board to continue to evaluate the work
load and contributions of tan's activities. (Broad records
of time andactivities are being kept by Stan. )
3. A policy on the use-of Stan's time in preparing resolutions and
ordinances at individual request will be deferred until this becomes
a problem. As a rough guide not morethan 10% of Stan's time should
be spent on individual requests.
C. Herb's direction in speaking to landowners in the absence of policy
guidelines.
CONSENSUS:
1. Hert be encouraged 'go contact ar :°zany landowners as possible fcr the
purposes of education (own >rs and district) within time constraints,
stopping short of neaotiations.
2. Negotiations must- be authorized by the board.
3. Basic l nd a3c ul%iticn policies must be determined soon in order to
4. Bo,�,r
5. Current n i Lions wii! continue.
Summary of Special Meeting July 15, 1973
Pie 7.
IV. Strategy or Action Plan
A. Short term---tinny was given the assignment of writing a concise Action
and Consensus report (not minutes) on today's meeting. To include
rough policy statements drawn up today with supporting paragraphs.
Further refinements of these statements to be presented to the board
for discussion will also be Ginny's task. The board should have a
rough copy of the statements by next board meeting.
B. Because time has run cut this meeting, honette and Dan Condron were
given the task of working up an outline as a framework of the action
program.• This will be'discussed at the next board meeting. Should
include topics for action, time guidelines, workshop or other desired
actions, suggested delegation of responsibility, etc.
Meeting ended ant •5:20pm.
NOTE: This summary was written up by Kay Duffy because Ginny was i11.
Any spelling mistakes are the fault of the typewriter. Please excuse typing,
KD
. J