HomeMy Public PortalAbout19760310 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Meeting 76-9
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
745 Distel Drive
March 10, 1976 Los Altos, CA
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by President Hanko at 7 : 30 P.M.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Barbara Green, Nonette
Hanko, Edward Shelley and Daniel Wendin.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Edward Jaynes, Jon Olson,
Anne Crosley, Carroll Harrington, Robert Garcia, Phyllis Lee
and Del Woods.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of February 5, 1976
N. Hanko suggested the following sentence be added to the
fourth paragraph on page two of the minutes : "If an inter-
pretation results in a new policy, the matter should be
agendized. " The Board agreed that this change be made.
N. Hanko suggested the following sentence be added to the
fifth paragraph on page two: "The option to visit sites
should be available to Board members. " The Board agreed
that this change be made.
H. Grench suggested the last sentence in the fifth paragraph -
"It was the consensus that the General Manager had to 'play
it by ear. "' - be inserted instead after the second sentence
in that paragraph. The Board agreed that this change be made.
N. Hanko asked that an annual review of sites and informational
reports at meetings be added to the minutes as ways in which
the District can keep informed. The Board agreed that this
change be made.
It was agreed that the third paragraph on page three of the
minutes be replaced with the following sentence: "The sub-
ject of wardism was raised , and it was agreed it should be
discussed by the Board at another time. "
Meeting 76-9 Page two
It was the consensus of the Board that the minutes of Febru-
ary 5, 1976 be approved as amended.
III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
There were no written communications.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
The agenda was adopted by consensus of the Board .
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications at this time.
VI. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Mid peninsula
Regional Park District Requesting Consolidation of Election
and Requesting Authority for Registrar of Voters to Assist
District Clerk in the Conduct of the San Mateo County
Annexation Election to be Held on June 8, 1976
S. Norton advised that Board that it would be necessary to
pass a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District Requesting Consolidation of Election and
Requesting Authority for Registrar of Voters to Assist District
Clerk in the Conduct of the San Mateo County Annexation Election
to be Held on June 8 , 1976. He said the purpose of the resolu-
tion was to obtain the election services of the San Mateo County
election officials for the June 8 election, advising them that
the District would pay the required election costs.
In response to a question from B. Green, S . Norton stated that
regional park district law does not provide for rebuttals to
ballot arguments. He further advised that the Board has retained
the right, under Section Five of the Resolution, to receive,
file and select the ballot arguments for and/or against the
annexation measure. He said a certain procedure for selection
of the arguments must be followed, and he would be submitting
a written report to the Board on this subject at a later date.
Motion: B. Green moved adoption of Resolution No. 76-8, a
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpenin-
sula Regional Park District Requesting Consolidation
of Election and Requesting Authority for Registrar
of Voters to Assist District Clerk in the Conduct of
the San Mateo County Annexation Election to be Held
on June 8, 1976 . E. Shelley seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
Meeting 76-9 Page three
VII. NEW BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED
A. Presentation of 1975 Progress Report
H. Grench distributed copies of the 1975 Progress Report of
the Midpeninsula Regional Park District which had been
received from the printer that afternoon.
C. Harrington said the Progress Report would be sent to
city officials and staffs, and to other public and private
organizations and interested citizens.
B. Comparison of Land Management Costs
H. Grench introduced his memorandum (M-76-29) dated March 4 ,
1976, regarding a report on the Comparison of Land Management
Costs which was prepared for Board discussion.
J. Olson introduced his report (R-76-8) dated March 3 , 1976 ,
which sets forth a Comparison of Land Management Costs of
public lands owned by other public agencies and one private
company. He said he chose open space sites which are operated
similarly to how MRPD sites might be operated, as follows :
(a) Marin Municipal Water District watershed lands; (b) East
Bay Municipal Utilities District watershed lands, specifically
the San Pablo and San Leandro areas; (c) the privately owned
San Jose Water Works Company lands; (d) San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission, specifically the Peninsula watershed
and the Alameda watershed areas; (e) East Bay Regional Park
District lands, specifically Tilden, Garin, Coyote Hills, Las
Trampas, Briones and Wildcat Canyon park areas; (f) City of
Palo Alto Foothills Park; (g) Marin County Regional open Space
District; and (h) Midpeninsula Regional Park District lands.
Included in the report were two charts, one of which set forth
data about the acreage, staffing, capital improvement invest-
ment, planning and administrative costs, users, and cost per
person and per acre for each of the land units studied. The
other chart compared factors which affect management costs and
land use, such as type of use, public awareness of agency and/or
specific land unit, attractiveness of land, proximity of land
to urban areas, quality of other open space lands, type of
permit system, etc.
J. Olson presented some projected costs of operating District
sites based on different types of use. He separated the cost
of maintenance and patrol from the cost of providing capital
improvements. He noted that signing sites would probably
Meeting 76-9 Page four
attract visitors who reside outside the District. One impli-
cation of signing is that night patrol may be needed, which
could necessitate doubling patrol staff. Generally, J. Olson
felt there was a range of costs which could apply to types of
land use, and that increased costs are related primarily to
the intensity of use and number of users of a site.
J. Olson felt there is potential for greater use of District
sites within the current land management budget, or with a
slight budget increase, especially through use by controlled
groups. He added that the District's docent program could be
expected to handle much of the demand for use. J. Olson said
the question is how can the District phase the opening of its
lands consistent with having sites that physically lend them-
selves to increased use without impacting the local area or
the District' s land acquisition budget. He suggested the
District might include, as part of a long-term approach to
opening its lands, a comprehensive review of recreation and
open space preferences, needs and resources. At that time
(perhaps eight years from now) the District ' s priorities
and management plans could be integrated with those of other
agencies. He recommended that the Board suggest a proposed
budget ceiling which they would be willing to allow in the
open space resources program. Staff could then return with
an outline of the level of use and site plans which might be
implemented with the budget ceiling.
Dr. Robert Mark, 725 Cowper, Palo Alto, said he found no valid
correlation in the land management cost data between size and
cost or between users and capital investment. He suggested no
conclusions could be drawn from the data to assist in deci-
sions on land use.
D. Wendin said the data was helpful in showing a range of
possible costs to the District in future years. He noted
that each agency used in the survey had a somewhat differ-
ent purpose, but the cost data cannot be ignored, whether
it relates closely to the District or not. If the cost per
acre of managing District lands is so low (e.g. , $10/
that it does not affect the land acquisition program, then
there is no problem. However, he added, if the figure is
much greater than that, which is very likely, then the land
acquisition program will be affected.
B. Green said she felt the data could not be compared in a
meaningful way with the District ' s sites.
N. Hanko said she felt District lands would not receive the
same use as the areas compared in the survey. She asked if
some additional data could be compiled on places like Hidden
Villa and the Stanford lands, Sunnyvale Mountain Park, Burne
Park in Los Altos Hills and Esther Clark Park in Palo Alto.
Meeting 76-9 Page five
J. Olson said comparing private with public lands was somewhat
tricky because public agencies have special responsibilities,
such as for providing maintenance and patrol.
N. Hanko stated the Board 's consensus that the compilation of
additional land management figures would be left to the dis-
cretion of staff.
H. Grench presented the results of some calculations on land
acquisition versus land management expenditures over a period
of years based upon the average cost per acre approach. He said
he felt it might be helpful to prepare some cost projections
which might indicate land management costs for the District,
using different models, since this model may not be a valid
approach.
E. Shelley said he did not think changes in the use of District
lands would have much effect on the land acquisition program.
Mr. Gordon Jennings, 441 East Meadow, Palo Alto, said he felt
the land management cost data contained in the report could be
very useful. It was his observation that the amount of money
spent by park and recreation agencies on recreation was equal
to the amount of money budgeted for that purpose. He felt it
was important to know where the expenditures were coming from,
e.g. , how is staff time being spent. He suggested the District
should try different land uses to gain experience and provide
it with data.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board recess for a short
period. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
The Board recessed at 9 :00 P.M. and reconvened at 9 :20 P.M.
J. Olson suggested the District would be able to compile its
own data based on its experiments with different sites.
K. Duffy asked why restrooms had been included in the cost
data for primitive staging areas. J. Olson replied that some
health departments require that restrooms be provided when
the use of a site reaches a certain level.
N. Hanko said she would like to see the costs which the Dis-
trict will have to spend for maintenance and patrol if no
attempt is made to attract users or provide facilities. H.
Grench advised that such data would be difficult to project
and separate from the costs if there is little public use.
R. Marks said it was his opinion the cost data provided in the
study represented the highest possible cost that could occur
under each circumstance.
Meeting 76-9 Page six
J. Olson said there were many small things which rangers must
take care of during the course of their duties that are
related to how many people use an area, for example, finding
lost dogs or children, helping a visitor whose car does not
work, dealing with motorcyclists or kids playing with matches ,
and dozens of small, time-consuming activities.
J. Olson emphasized that there were a number of things the
District could experiment with in order to increase land use
without affecting the budget greatly. He felt the District
should move cautiously regarding attracting users, since many
agencies had made the mistake of exhausting their land acquisi-
tion funds through patrol, maintenance and capital improvement
expenditures.
H. Grench added that the administration and effort of trying
just a few experiments will be quite a project in itself.
D. Wendin said he felt the Board should keep in mind the manage-
ment energy that will be spent on land use projects , since
properties which are close to the urban area will require
close supervision. He said the District cannot ignore its
legal liability, or expect that the District ' s lands will take
care of themselves.
Mr. Hunt Corregan, 11625 South Stelling Road, Cupertino, said
the District would have fewer land management costs if it did
not sign its sites or provide facilities such as parking lots.
B. Green said she favored phased increase of use on District
lands, on a site-by-site basis.
J. Olson said the District' s lands provided a unique situation
in that the sites are highly desirable, close to a highly
populated urban area, and alternate open space sites operated
by other agencies are limited.
N. Hanko proposed that another poll of Board members be taken,
listing the District ' s sites and potential variables. The poll
could include a timetable. D. Wendin said such a poll should
include a number of given factors, such as access.
After discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that a
poll would be prepared by N. Hanko and staff.
C. Land Use Workshop Follow-Up
H. Grench introduced his memorandum (M-76-31) dated March 4 ,
1976, which suggested an early scheduling of those aspects of
land use policies which will have an important bearing on the
new Action Plan and budget.
N. Hanko noted that the Board had just received the minutes of
the February 28 Land Use Workshop and had not had an opportun-
ity to review them. She suggested that a Board/staff meeting
Meeting 76-9 Page seven
be scheduled to discuss the responses made to some of the
premises at the workshop, in particular the premises dealing
with public access, money spent on the Open Space Resources
Program, signing and advertising.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board of Directors hold a
Special Meeting on Thursday, March 18, 1976 from
12: 00 Noon until 2: 00 P.M. for the purpose of con-
ducting a Land Use Workshop follow-up discussion.
B. Green seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
Mr. Ed Schell, P.O. Box 1345, Los Gatos, said he felt there
was a beneficial change in attitude during the workshop from
some negative attitudes at the beginniig.
VIII. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
A. Radich Subdivision
H . Grench said he would like the Board to be aware of a pro-
posed subdivision being planned for the area. between Highway
280 and Permanente Creek Park.
J. Olson described the location of the proposed subdivision
in relation to Permanente Creek and advised that the District' s
interest in the development depended on County plans for the
area. He said the creek area, consisting of about one acre,
might be offered to the District if the developers are able
to resolve sewer arrangements for the subdivision. The ques-
tion may take some time to resolve , he added.
IX. CLAIMS
Motion: E. Shelley moved acceptance of the revised claims
(C-76-5) dated March 10 , 1976 . B. Green seconded
the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
X. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed to Executive Session at 10 :27 P.M. to dis-
cuss land negotiations.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11: 24 P.M.
Anne Cathcart Crosley
District Clerk
C. Minutes of March 10, 1976
Dr. Robert Mark requested the following changes: On page four,
paragraph three, the word "valid" in the first sentence be
changed to "significant" and the addition of the phrase "but
the strongest correlation was between users and capital in-
vestment. " Dr. Mark also requested that the last paragraph
on page five be deleted from the minutes.
N. Hanko stated the consensus of the Board that the minutes
of March 10, 1976 be approved as amended.
I
,ICI
I
'I