HomeMy Public PortalAbout19750326 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) lof
Meeting 75-7
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
I
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
March 26, 1975 745 Distel Drive
Los Altos, CA
I . ROLL CALL
Vice-President Shelley called the meeting to order at 7 : 41 P.M.
I
Members Present: Barbara Green, Nonette Hanko, Edward Shelley
and Daniel Wendin.
Member Absent: Katherine Duffy
I
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Edward Jaynes, Jon Olson,
Anne Crosle StanleyNorton and r Harrington.
Y
o n Ca roll
Audience of three persons.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of March 12, 1975
N. Hanko said she did not recall making the statement attributed
to her in the last sentence of the third paragraph on page four
of the minutes of March 12, 1975. E. Shelley said he had made
the statement, and the consensus was stated that he be given
credit for it.
N. Hanko said she would like the minutes to reflect the reason
she made an amendment to the motion, and suggested-the fol-
lowing sentence be inserted on page seven after the paragraph
beginning "Amendment" :
"N. Hanko stated that although she personally
favored equal ratings of 15 each for Wilderness
Experience and Guiding Urban Form, she said
she was offering the following amendment be-
cause it best represented the combined opinions
of the five directors and would therefore be
consistent with the rest of the weighting sys-
tem. "
i
Minutes of March 26, 1975
K. Duffy stated the consensus that the minutes of March 26 ,
1975 be approved as presented.
I
Meeting 75-7 Page two
D. Wendin said he objected to the change because the general
discussion had been broad, and the minutes should not necessarily
reflect the individual opinions of each Director.
E. Shelley suggested the tapes be reviewed to determine if the
proposed additional sentence did actually reflect statements
made by N. Hanko, and that the matter be considered at the next
Board meeting. He stated the consensus that this was agreeable.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
E. Shelley asked that SB 476 and AB 523 be considered under New
Business Requiring Action, and that the subject of Joint MRPD-
County Action be considered under New Business Not Requiring
Action. He stated the consensus that this was acceptable.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Dr. Robert Mark, 725 Cowper, Palo Alto, said he had been studying
the weightings that had been used in preparing the Master Plan
composite map. He was in the process of determining correlations
that may or may not exist in the different categories , and he .
asked that Board members take a few minutes at some point during
the meeting to fill out forms he had prepared which would reflect
Board opinion regarding how much categories relate to one another.
E. Shelley said he thought the information which Dr. Mark was
working on could be very valuable, inasmuch as present data does
not show correlations. N. Hanko suggested the Board listen to
Dr. Mark' s presentation after the Claims were considered.
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
H. Grench referred the Board to a letter dated March 24, 1975 ,
which had been received from Mr. Alan E. Ellis regarding District
support for the "Save the Canyon" committee which was trying to
establish a nature preserve on property owned by the Los Gatos Union
High School District. H. Grench advised that the District had
sent a letter in support of the committee on May 23 , 1974 , and
he suggested the Board might want to reiterate its position in
another letter. N. Hanko said that it seemed appropriate since
the Board had not changed its position on the matter. There was
a consensus that H. Grench send an appropriate letter to the Los
Gatos High School District and the involved cities reminding them
of the Board' s support for the goals of the "Save the Canyon"
committee.
VI. OLD BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Citizen Participation in Site Planning
H. Grench referred the Board to his report (R-75-2) dated March
19, 1975, regarding citizen participation in the planning for
Meeting 75-7 Page three
the maintenance and use of District lands. One of the ideas that
had been discussed at the February 2, 1975 Goals Workshop was
the establishment of formal citizens ' committees to advise the
staff and Board. Under that structure, there would be a five-
member committee for each site and a five-member regional com-
mittee for all sites which would presumably provide a regional
perspective. H. Grench said he felt a formal citizens' committee
structure would be very cumbersome in terms of the number of
meetings the staff would be committed to attend, and that it
might be difficult to find five people with the commitment to
serve on the regional citizens' committee. He thought it was
important that staff have the flexibility of establishing meet-
ings with neighbors and interested citizens to fit work
schedules. Staff members should also have the option of working
with individuals or with groups, whichever might seem most appro-
priate and effective. H. Grench recommended the Board adopt the
informal approach to citizen participation in site planning rather
than a formalized structure.
B. Green suggested that Directors could help the staff in meeting
with neighbors and interested citizens. She also thought there
should be a time limit set on the site planning process.
E. Shelley suggested the possibility of a single site advisory
committee which could form subcommittees for individual sites.
He said the Board should consider carefully what the charge of
any citizens' committee would be, as it is the staff and Board
who have prime responsibility for the planning of the use of Dis-
trict lands, not local citizens.
D. Wendin said he thought interim use of District lands - which
will generally reflect the status quo - is a concern to local
residents. Long-term use, also concerns neighborsi especially
if traffic might increase significantly. When citize
ns come
forward with questions and suggestions, he said, they should
know how they can be a part of the planning process. He thought
perhaps the citizens ' committee concept could be started on a
site-by-site basis as needed.
H. Grench noted that a sketch plan for use of District land is
set forth in a report at the time the Board considers acquisi-
tion. Then, interim use plans will generally reflect the
status quo. Long-term use plans cannot really be considered
by the staff until it has had a year or two of experience in
studying the property and its potential uses.
Dr. Robert Mark said he thought it was important to have the
regional outlook for District lands through citizens that do
not have a local interest in a particular parcel. He felt the
Board should not overlook the possibility of using volunteer
resource people to study the District' s land. He cautioned
Meeting 75-5 Page four
the District that sometimes continuation of the status quo on
land is not necessarily good.
H. Grench said that staff would meet with neighbors and interested
people to determine present land use, and any report from the
staff would reflect citizen input. The Board would then be
responsible for making a final decision as to interim or long-
term use.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that staff be directed to begin informal
contacts with individuals and known groups with respect
to Permanente Creek Park and Fremont older Preserve, and
that a citizen' s committee be established at the earli-
est practical time to assist in the interim planning
process.
N. Hanko seconded the motion.
Discussion: H. Grench commented that, as a result of
initial meetings, a core group of interested people
would probably become evident, and these would probably
be representative of different local viewpoints. J.
Olson agree, adding that the staff would draw from
this input for its report and submit it to the Board
for consensus. Then public hearings could be held
prior to adoption. D. Wendin thought the interim
use report should be a report and not a plan. He said
citizen' s committees will probably evolve for some Dis-
trict properties but not for others. The motion passed
unanimously.
VIII . OLD BUSINESS NOT REQUIRING ACTION
A. Draft Regulatory Ordinances
J. Olson introduced the memorandum (M-75-54) from the General
Manager dated, March 20, 1975, regarding the draft regulatory
ordinances for the District. He noted that ordinances were
based primarily on East Bay Regional Park District' s Ordinance
38; however, other sources were considered. He said the most
important aspect about the District' s ordinances was that inter-
pretation of the severity of the violation was left to the court
or other appropriate official. He emphasized that he saw the park
ranger' s function with respect to the public as an educational
one, rather than punitive.
S. Norton advised that one who violates the ordinance would not
have the right to a jury trial for an infraction, but also could
not be sentenced to jail as with a misdeameanor. He stated that
the proposed ordinance called for a permit system for use of
District lands.
H. Grench said the ordinances were preventative in nature until
the District had some experience with land use. S. Norton added
Meeting 75-7 Page five
that the ordinances would automatically apply to lands presently
owned by the District or those acquired in the future. He said
any change in the ordinance would require publication and posting,
and any change in District rules or regulations would require
the same procedure.
E. Shelley said he thought some District lands should be open to
casual public access without requiring a permit, and suggested
that this option be inserted in the ordinances.
Dr. Robert Mark urged the Board to consider those people who have
been using the land for a number of years already.
D. Wendin said the only feasible way to protect the District' s
land with the present limited staff is through a permit system.
He said the District has an obligation to protect its lands and
know what kinds of activities are occurring and what effect those
activities have.
In response to a question from E. Shelley, S. Norton advised that
East Bay Regional Park District' s ordinance prohibits activities
and then amends its ordinance as appropriate for particular sites
to allow specified actions.
H. Grench suggested that permission to enter without a permit
could be granted by the Board, but people must abide by the
ordinances also. J. Olson cautioned that posting ordinances or
rules obligates a certain amount of patrolling by the District,
since the posting assumes the public will be using the land.
D. Wendin asked if staff could return with a plan for allowing
access without a permit or with a permit on designated properties.
S. Norton pointed out that some ordinances are included to call
attention to presently existing laws in the State Penal Code.
Following discussion, the Board directed staff to return with
the following changes:
SECTION 103. The possibility of oral permission
rather than only written permission to enter
onto District lands should be addressed.
SECTION 400. Item 400. 2 (c) should be deleted.
SECTION 405. The title should be changed from
"NUDITY" to "INDECENT EXPOSURE. "
Board dismissed for a brief recess.
SECTION 406. The reference to Section 706 should
be corrected to read Section 806.
Meeting 75-7 Page six
SECTION 408. The wording should be changed
to allow staff to determine if assembly is
appropriate for an open space operation,
whether or not the other requirements have
been met.
SECTION 410. Item 410. 1 should be worded in
a more positive way.
SECTION 603. Item 603. 3 should be simplified
or included as an appendix.
J. Olson explained that the reason for Section 406 "Metal Detect-
ors" was that some people hunting artifacts do so with such
items, dig up the earth to uncover them, and leave.
J. Olson explained that Section 603 "Trespasses" was included
to make the ranger' s job of advising and enforcing both District
and State regulations easier. It would also be helpful when
the District is making arrangements regarding maintenance and
patrol with neighboring landowners.
J. Olson noted that the Board was responsible for entering into
contracts regarding grazing and harvesting (Sections 701 and 702) .
J. Olson advised the Board that Section 801.1 regarding prohibi-
tion of dogs was included because domestic animals have, in the
past, killed deer and other wild animals on park lands. Palo
Alto Foothills Park was an example.
B. "Friends of MRPD" Foundation
It was the consensus of the Board that this item be postponed to
the April 9, 1975 meeting.
VIII. NEW BUSINESS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Invitation to Tour Jasper Ridge
N. Hanko advised that Alan Grundmann had invited the Board to
tour the Jasper Ridge area on one of the following dates : April
7, April 11, April 12 or April 13.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board of Directors call a Special
Meeting for 10: 00 a.m. on April 11 for the purpose of
touring the Jasper Ridge area. B. Green seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Discussion: It was determined that the meeting place
would be given on the Special Meeting notice when
available.
Meeting 75-5 Page seven
B. Senate Bill 476
E. Shelley introduced his memorandum (M-75-55) dated March 24 ,
1975, which described the possible effects that passage of
SB 476 might have on the California Environmental Quality Act
and the State' s timberlands. He suggested the Board direct
the General Manager to send a letter to the appropriate committee
expressing the District' s opposition to the bill. He added
that a similar bill in the Assembly, AB 655, should receive
the same opposition.
B. Green suggested a copy be sent to Claire Dedrick, Director
of Resources.
Motion: E. Shelley moved that the General Manager be instructed
to send appropriate letters expressing the Board' s
opposition to SB 476 and similar bills to the proper
committees. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
C. Assembly Bill 523
H. Grench advised that staff had received that afternoon an
amended version of AB 523 from Assemblyman Calvo' s office. He
said Assemblyman Calvo had requested that a representative from
the District be present at the April 9 hearing on the bill
before the Revenue and Taxation Committee to express the Dis-
trict' s support. S. Norton explained that the bill would allow
Boards of Supervisors who had met specific qualifications
(i.e. , had adopted an open space element) to establish an "agri-
cultural reserve fund" for the purchase of land or interests
in land in order to preserve it. The money could be used to
compensate landowners whose land had been, in effect, downzoned.
The money would come from an additional 554 per $500 in real
estate transfer tax (the current 55� tax was unstructured and
could be used for general purposes) . The land could be released
from the agricultural reserve upon a 4/5 vote of the Supervisors.
N. Hanko, E. Shelley and B. Green said they felt the bill was
a good one. D. Wendin said he disagreed with the "special
purpose" aspect of the tax, and said he thought the money should
come out of a general fund.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board of Directors support
Assembly Bill 523, and that the General Manager be
directed to make this known to the Revenue and Taxa-
tion Committee on April 9, 1975. E. Shelley seconded
the motion. The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES - E. Shelley, B. Green and N. Hanko; NOES - D.
Wendin.
Meeting 75-7 Page eight
D. Meeting With Supervisor Steinberg and Bob Amyx
H. Grench advised the Board that he had met with Supervisor
Steinberg and Bob Amyx of the County Parks and Recreation Depart-
ment to discuss County and District plans. He referred the
Board to a memorandum from Mr. Amyx to the Parks and Recreation
Commission regarding 5-year proposals for park acquisition and
development. On page 8 of the memorandum, it is stated that
the County should consider acquisition of parcels along the
creek connecting Upper and Lower Stevens Creek Parks in order
to form a trail link. The acquisition would be accomplished
as the appropriate parcels become available. He said Supervisor
Steinberg asked about the possibility of a joint effort between
the County and the District to acquire the entire Stevens Canyon
area, with the County concentrating on the creekside parcels
and the District concentrating on the steeper slopes above the
creek.
N. Hanko noted that this kind of joint effort is consistent with
the District' s Action Plan and the UD/OS plan .
Motion: D. Wendin moved the the Board of Directors support the
concept of joint District-County efforts to form a
connection between Upper and Lower Stevens Creek Parks,
with the County' s interest primarily in creekside land
and the District' s interest primarily in the upper
slopes. B. Green seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
IX. CLAIMS
Motion: D. Wendin moved acceptance of the revised claims (C-
75-7) dated March 26, 1975. E. Shelley seconded the
motion. The motion passed unanimously.
X. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed to Executive Session at 11:43 P.M. to discuss
Land Negotiations.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 12: 10 P.M.
Anne Cathcart Crosley
Administrative Secretary