HomeMy Public PortalAbout19760428 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) ti
meting 76-13
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
April 28, 1976 745 Distel Drive
Los Altos, CA
I. ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by President Hanko at 7 : 40 P.M.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko, Barbara Green
and Daniel Wendin.
Member Absent: Edward Shelley
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Edward Jaynes, Jon Olson,
Anne Crosley, Carroll Harrington, Bradley Clifford, Jennie
George, Phyllis Lee, Del Woods and Stanley Norton.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Minutes of April 14 , 1976 .
N. Hanko stated the consensus that the minutes of April 14 , 1976
be approved as presented.
III . ADOPTION OF AGENDA
N. Hanko stated the consensus that the agenda be adopted without
change.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications at this time.
V. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. Crosley advised that there were three written communications
to the Board: (1) a letter from Director Shelley stating he
was unable to attend the April 28 Board meeting and encouraging
other Board members to support the proposed Fremont Older open
Space Preserve Addition, Unit No. 2; (2) a letter from the
Sempervirens Fund inviting the Board to their annual sponsors '
outing to be held at Castle Rock State Park on June 6 , 1976;
and (3) a letter from the Special Districts Association of Santa
Clara County regarding proposed consolidation of several resource
conservation districts.
i
A. Minutes of Argil 28 , 1976
N. Hanko said she did not recall making the statement in the
C last sentence of the second paragraph on page five of the
minutes, and asked that it be removed.
I
i N. Hanko referred to the Motion to Amend on page seven of the
minutes and suggested the words "and County" be inserted between
fthe words "city" and "officials" in that paragraph.
j N. Hanko stated the consensus that the minutes of April 28 ,
1976 be approved with the above changes.
I
I
Meeting 76-13 Page two
VI. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Proposed Addition to the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve,
Unit No. 2.
H. Grench introduced his report (R-76-11) dated April 27, 1976
regarding the Proposed Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Addi-
tion, Unit No. 2 . He advised that earlier this month the
District had been offered an option to purchase a 75-acre parcel
of land located west of the existing Fremont Older Open Space
Preserve for a price of $75, 000 .
J. Olson described the site as rectangular in shape, with a north/
south ridgeline, and including a portion of a tributary of Stevens
Creek. The vegetation includes woodland, chaparral and grass-
land areas, as well as a few fruit trees which are no longer
productive. There are no structures on the site, but there are
hiking and equestrian trails leading through the property.
Access to the site is from a 20-foot right-of-way leading from
the end of Regnart Canyon to the southwest portion of the
property. Automobile access is not feasible now or in the
future due to the limited development of the road and the
potential impact on the neighborhood. The proposed 75-acre
addition provides a scenic backdrop for the existing Preserve
and offers the potential for maintaining a viable trail system
in the area which would link the Fremont Older Open Space Pre-
serve, Regnart Canyon and Lower Stevens Creek County Park.
The interim use and management recommendation for the site
would be to allow the current level of use by hikers and
equestrians to continue; to sign or fence parcel boundaries
at points where recreational users might stray onto adjacent
private property; and to install motorcycle barriers at
entrances to the site. He further recommended that long-range
planning for the 75 acres be incorporated with planning for
the existing Preserve.
H. Grench advised that the District ' s interim Master Plan shows
the proposed 75-acre addition as scoring high in open space
values. All of the site is within the Sphere of Influence of
the City of Cupertino, and half lies within the unincorporated
area of Santa Clara County. The acquisition of the site for open
space has been found to be in conformity with the County's General
Plan. He said the Cupertino Planning Commission had considered
the site at its meeting on April 26 , but declined to make a
decision on whether the site was compatible with Cupertino' s
General Plan because it felt it didn't have enough information
about the District' s acquisition plans for the area, and since
the Cupertino City Council had not yet made a decision on the
City' s proposed Hillside Plan. It was the position of the
District' s staff that the 75 acre parcel was very similar to
the 68 acre addition that was considered by the Cupertino
Planning Commission in October, 1975 . Both are in the Urban
Meeting 76-13 Page three
Service Area of Cupertino and in the area designated as "agricul-
ture/open space" in the 1964 General Plan. Both are shown in the
Cupertino 1972 Open Space and Conservation Element of the Cuper-
tino General Plan as "residential/recreational" areas. The only
difference in the two sites is that the 75 acres is not quite
contiguous to the existing Preserve. At the time the Cupertino
Planning Commission considered the 68 acres, it was decided that
open space within the Urban Service Area was an appropriate under-
lying use, but that it would like to consider each proposal
individually. There appears to be no question that open space
outside the Urban Service Area is a compatible use. H. Grench
referred the Board to a letter dated April 28 , 1976 from Mr.
James Sisk, Cupertino Planning Director, regarding his reasons
for questioning more open space acquisition within the Urban
Service Area.
H. Grench recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No. 76-9
to exercise the option to purchase the 75 acres for $75,000, and
that it adopt the interim use and management plans set forth in
the report. He further recommended that the Board pursue joint
planning with the City of Cupertino, and that a presentation of
the District' s draft Master Plan be made to Cupertino as soon
as possible after the Plan has been printed.
N. Hanko opened the Public Hearing at 8:10 P.M.
Mr. William McGuire, 10421 Phar Lap Drive, Cupertino, said the
proposed acquisition is contiguous to his property, and that
access to the 75 acre site is by a private easement crossing
his property. He expressed concern about increasing the use
along the road easement, since he felt the geography of the area
did not lend itself to greater use. He said the road could not
be widened without damaging the steep slope, and pointed out
there was no area appropriate for parking facilities.
J. Olson replied that the access road was considered to be a
primitive one, and the District staff was not recommending
its use by automobiles. The level of use, which was basically
hiking and equestrian, would essentially remain unchanged.
Mr. McGuire said the road easment was private, and could not
be used by the public. E. Jaynes replied that there was suf-
ficient recorded evidence to show that the owner of the 75-acre
parcel would succeed to access rights from an easement established
in about 1915 .
S. Norton advised that it was his opinion, based on his knowledge
of the site, that the District would succeed to access rights,
but that he had no opinion at this time as to whether the
private easement could be extended to the public.
Mrs. Kathy Nellis, 22322 Regnart Road, Cupertino, said she also
felt the easement was a private one, and her attorney interprets
it as such. She added that the road, which is gravel, is not
suitable for public use. She noted that a nearby horse stable
Meeting 76-13 Page four
continues to send equestrians onto her property without permis-
sion, but that her family has allowed special group activities
on their property from time to time. She objected that there
had not been sufficient notice of this meeting to nearby property
owners. She said she had been supportive of the District in
the past and favored open space, but felt the District was
fostering a poor relationship with the residents of Regnart
Canyon. It appeared to her the District must be planning to
acquire her mother-in-law' s property in order to connect the
existing Preserve with the proposed 75-acre addition. Mrs. Nellis
said she and her husband believed they had a valid contract on this
property, not the District, and that a settlement with the
present owner had been reached with respect to the suit brought
against the owner by the Nellis ' . She pointed out that her
husband had approached the owner some time ago about purchasing
the property. At that time the owner said the District had
displayed no interest in purchasing the property. The owner
and the Nellises signed a contract, she said, and litigation
began when the owner declined to close the deal . She added
that title to the property was to pass to the Nellises next
week.
N. Hanko, asked Mrs. Nellis what her plans for the 75-acre parcel
would be. Mrs. Nellis replied that she and her husband planned
to develop the land into five-acre sites (low-density residential) .
She said they were willing to work with the District in allowing
trails, or in donating a portion of the site for a trail link.
She said they wanted to keep as much of the property as possible
in family ownership. She pointed out that the 75 acres was not
contiguous to the existing Preserve, and that it did not complete
a topographical feature, as the 68 acres did. She added that
according to a questionnaire, Cupertino residents will use
available public property, and it would therefore be difficult
for the District to control use.
A. Crosley advised that Mr. and Mrs. Tannenbaum, 19056 Tilson
Avenue, Cupertino, had called to express their support for the
acquisition of the 75-acre parcel.
Mrs. Linda Stuckey, P.O. Box 1115, Cupertino, said she was con-
cerned about the route by which the District would allow public
access.
D. Wendin said the word "Park" in the District ' s title was mis-
leading, because the District is essentially an open space agency.
Proponents of the District ' s formation in 1972 stressed that
its purpose was to acquire and preserve land in the foothills
and baylands, and that land use, including access, would be
allowed only as appropriate to an individual site 's ecology
and the surrounding neighborhood. He reminded Regnart Canyon
residents that additional homes in the area would likely bring
more traffic into the neighborhood than a small increase in the
number of hikers and equestrians.
Meeting 76-13 Page five
H. Grench said the opportunity to purchase the property was
presented to the District unexpectedly earlier in the month,
and the option was to expire on April 30. The District then
discovered there were potential legal problems involved with
the site. The first notice to area residents came in connection
with the Cupertino Planning Commission meeting agenda, and the
Regnart Canyon homeowners received notice of this evening 's
meeting one working day after Board members received notice.
Because of the timing of the Cupertino Planning Commission
meeting, the staff could not complete its report until Tuesday,
and copies of the report were hand-delivered that evening
for distribution to homeowners. He added that there was sub-
stantial news publicity about the matter in local newspapers.
He agreed it would be desirable to have more communication
with neighborhood property owners.
N. Hanko suggested the Board could discuss a policy on notifi-
cation to the public when an option is received at a future
meeting. She said the access road to the 75-acre parcel was
sufficient for District patrol and for providing fire protection,
and the District's interest in acquiring the site was mainly
to protect it. The District did not have any "grand strategy"
for acquisition in the area, she stated.
B. Green said she was in favor of exercising the option, and
hoped the legal matters would be resolved.
K. Duffy said the property under consideration was very beauti-
ful and was valuable as an open space area by itself and in
relation to the existing Preserve. She said she believed the
District had acted in good faith in accepting an option offered
to it, and the District should not be used by other people to
further their efforts to sell their property to someone else.
She added that a joint planning effort between the District and
the City of Cupertino would be a very good idea.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that it is the District ' s intention to
attend the first Cupertino City Council meeting at
which the proposed Hillside Plan is considered in order
to discuss Cupertino' s plans and the District' s plans
with respect to the Regnart Canyon area. D. Wendin
seconded the motion.
Discussion: N. Hanko pointed out that the Subcommittee
formed by the District to study the Cupertino Hillside
Plan concluded that the Urban Service Area boundary
was too large, and that the District wanted to be in-
volved in subdivision plans in the area. The motion
passed unanimously.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that staff be authorized to meet with
the Regnart Canyon Citizens Committee to jointly plan
for the use of public and private lands in the Regnart
Canyon area. K. Duffy seconded the motion.
Meeting 76-13 Page six
Discussion: Mr. Gordon Jennings, 441 East Meadow,
Palo Alto, said there was already a representative
from the Regnart Canyon area on the Citizens Advisory
Group for the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve Use
and Management Plan. J. Olson responded that the
Citizens Advisory Group was a short-term group being
consulted by staff for neighborhood input on the use
and management plan for the Preserve. K. Duffy said
she felt communications between the District and the
area's residents needed improvement, and she said she
would help in any way she could to clarify the goals
of the District with respect to this area. The motion
passed unanimously.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the District place highest priority
on presenting the District ' s draft Master Plan to the
City of Cupertino. B. Green seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
Motion: K. Duffy moved adoption of Resolution No. 76-9 , a Reso-
lution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District Authorizing Exercise of option
to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing officer to
Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Conveyance to
District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute
Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate
to Closing of the Transaction (Fremont Older Open Space
Preserve Addition, Unit No. 2) . B. Green seconded the
motion.
Discussion: Dr. Robert Mark, 725 Cowper, Palo Alto,
said he felt the proposed acquisition was an important
visual aspect of the existing Preserve, and that the
potential trail corridors through the site were also
important. He agreed that public vehicular access was
probably not appropriate. K. Duffy said she did not
feel the District should commit itself to opening trails
until everyone has been involved in the planning pro-
cess. N. Hanko said she felt the property was important
in terms of its scenic value and trail link possibili-
ties. S . Norton said he hoped to meet with the Nellises
and their attorney, and possibly with Phillips and his
attorney, as soon as next week to discuss the matter
openly. Mrs. Stuckey said she felt the District ' s
agenda titles should be more clear, because she could
not tell from the title of this item what property it
concerned. The motion passed unanimously.
Motion: B. Green moved adoption of the interim use and manage-
ment recommendations for Unit No. 2 of the Fremont Older
Open Space Preserve Addition contained in report No.
R-76-11 . D. Wendin seconded the motion.
Amendment to Motion: N. Hanko moved to amend the motion
by adding a paragraph (c) to page 5 of the report which
Meeting 76-13 Page seven
states that vehicle access on the property will be
limited to official patrol and fire protection. K.
Duffy seconded the motion to amend.
Discussion: Mr. Gordon Jennings said he did not think
the access road would support vehicles. He added that
he felt current patrol of the existing Preserve was
excessive. Mr. William McGuire said he did not think
a fire truck would be able to use the road. N. Hanko
said the District 's purpose in acquiring the site was
to oversee its protection better than it has been
cared for in the past. Mrs. Thomas Learned, 22005
Regnart Road, Cupertino, said she was concerned both
with the access question and with the possibility of
condemnation by the District. D. Wendin pointed out
that the interim use and management plan does not
change the current use of the site, and the long term
plan will be formulated with citizen input. Mrs.
Kathy Nellis said people would come to the site whether
or not the District encourages use. J. Olson replied
that it was not the District' s intention to allow public
use of the access road. He pointed out that District
patrol vehicles with firefighting equipment could get up
the road. If necessary, "No Parking" signs will be
posted or gates will be installed to discourage such use.
The motion to amend passed unanimously.
Motion to Amend: N. Hanko moved to amend the motion by
adding a paragraph stating that in order to discourage
vehicle access from Regnart Road, the District will be
prepared to participate in traffic controls in appro-
priate places if needed, after consultation with area
residents and city officials. B. Green seconded the
motion.
Discussion: Mrs. Linda Stuckey asked how the District
could protect adjacent property owners from trespassers.
J. Olson said the District could enforce its regulatory
ordinance with respect to proper patrol and maintenance
of District lands. He said his interpretation was that
the police powers of District rangers could therefore
be extended to cover that type of circumstance. S.
Norton said he felt that was an arguable point which
deserved some study. Mr. Richard Childress, 22025
Regnart Road , Cupertino, advised the Board that area
residents were concerned about the placement and use of
any connecting trail between the Preserve and Stevens
Creek Park. N. Hanko replied that trails would be
considered, with citizen input, during the planning
process. Mrs. Kathy Nellis said she felt it was most
important to involve the property owner in planning
for the site. The motion to amend passed unanimously.
The motion to adopt the interim use and management
recommendations, as amended above, passed unanimously.
Meeting 76-13 Page eight
Motion: N. Hanko moved that to the extent any planning agency
may be deemed to have disapproved the location, pur-
pose or extent of the acquisition (pursuant to Govern-
ment Code Section 65402 or otherwise) , such disapproval
is hereby overruled. D. Wendin seconded the motion.
Discussion: N. Hanko said she made the above motion
on advice of the District 's Legal Counsel . The motion
passed unanimously.
The Board recessed at 9 :28 P.M. and reconvened at 9 : 50 P.M.
VII. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Land Use Workshop Follow-Up.
1. Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site Use
and Management Plans.
D. Wendin introduced a memorandum (M-76-69) dated April 22 ,
1976, from the Land Use Workshop Subcommittee suggesting a
proposed Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site
Use and Management Plans. The Subcommittee met with the
General Manager and Land Manager to prepare such a policy
as the result of Board direction given at its April 14 , 1976
meeting. D. Wendin said that the phasing was given further
consideration by the Subcommittee, resulting in the policy
statement below:
"Staff shall prepare site-specific plans which
allow for open public access as soon as possible
after approval of the site plans. For each
site, the plan shall include the phasing neces-
sary to protect the environment as the use
increases, including protection of both the
site ' s ecology and of the neighborhood, and to
measure the impact of such use. The plan shall
detail how all aspects of public access will be
handled, including signing, patrol and parking.
The phasing shall be consistent with the limita-
tions of open space management budget, workloads
and priorities. "
The Subcommittee further recommended a policy on permits as
follows:
"A permit system may be used as a tool to control
access to environmentally sensitive sites and to
keep track of group usage. Otherwise, permits
for individuals will not be required. On sites
where a permit is required, permits will be given
out on site unless the individual is having an
adverse impact on the site or on others using
the site. "
Meeting 76-13 Page nine
Motion: D. Wendin moved adoption of the Policy Regarding
Phasing of Implementation of Site Use and Manage-
ment Plans as set forth in memorandum M-76-69,
dated April 22, 1976. N. Hanko seconded the
motion.
Motion to Amend: N. Hanko moved to amend the
proposed Policy by inserting the words " , use as
as tool for education" in between the words "site"
and "and" in the third line of the second para-
graph. K. Duffy seconded the motion.
Discussion: H. Grench advised that, without the
proposed amendment, the policy would be inter-
preted that permits would not be required except
in special situations. D. Wendin said the words
"environmentally sensitive" include situations such
as neighborhood considerations, and that the para-
graph on permits should be kept directly following
the paragraph on phasing. The motion to amend failed
on the following vote: AYES - B. Green and N. Hanko;
NOES - K. Duffy and D. Wendin. The motion to adopt
the Policy Regarding Phasing of Implementation of Site
Use and Management Plans passed unanimously.
2 . Policy Regarding Trails on District Lands.
N. Hanko introduced her memorandum (M-76-70) dated April
22, 1976, suggesting proposed Policy Regarding Trails on
District Lands. She said she prepared a General Use policy
and a Development, Maintenance and Patrol Policy as follows,
based on her interpretation of Board views expressed in the
March 17 Preference Poll:
"General Use. Provision of use for hikers
(and equestrians where feasible) will be
available for each District site unless
ecological considerations are determined
by the Board to dictate otherwise.
"Development, Maintenance and Patrol. The
development of new trails and the—mainten-
ance of trails (including litter clean-up)
will be accomplished where feasible through
a staff initiated volunteer program approved
by the Board on a site specific basis. "
Motion: N. Hanko moved adoption of the General Use Policy
Regarding Trails on District Lands as set forth
in her memorandum M-76-70, dated April 22 , 1976.
K. Duffy seconded the motion.
Discussion: D. Wendin said he felt a trails
policy was inappropriate, and should be considered
on a site specific basis. The motion failed on
the following vote: AYES - B. Green and N . Hanko;
NOES - D. Wendin and K. Duffy.
Meeting 76-13 Page ten
Motion: N. Hanko moved adoption of the Development, Main-
tenance and Patrol Policy Regarding Trails on
District Lands as set forth in her memorandum
M-76-70, dated April 22 , 1976. K. Duffy seconded
the motion.
Discussion: N. Hanko said she felt it was neces-
sary to summarize the "loose ends" from the Land
Use Workshop held in February, in order to give
direction to staff in budget planning. D. Wendin
said his view of the Land Use Workshop was for
discussion purposes only, not for policy formula-
tion. The motion failed on the following vote:
AYES - N. Hanko; NOES - D. Wendin, K. Duffy and
B. Green.
VIII-. OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED
A. Docent Program.
E. Huggins, Coordinator of Volunteers, advised that the docents
who are involved in training to lead groups on District sites
are currently in the middle of their training program. They
will be learning about the history, ecology, flora and birds
on Black Mountain Open Space Preserve, as well as about Dis-
trict policies. She said the docents are learning to interpret
natural phenomena on the site and are eager to apply their
knowledge. The next phase will involve taking groups of people
on the site for an environmental education experience.
E. Huggins said there may be a need for a brochure about the
District sites, and she said she would like some direction
from the Board regarding the amount of advertising for the
docent program. She advised that there were numerous requests
for docent tours already, even without advertising.
E. Huggins invited Board and staff and their families to a picnic
with the docents to be held on May 14 , 1976 at 6: 00 P.M. on
Black Mountain. She said each participant should bring a cup
and utensils, and let her know by May 10 who will be attending .
A lecture on the San Andreas Fault by Tim Hall is scheduled for
June 19, she added, and Board and staff were invited to attend.
IX. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Park District in Support of Ballot Measures J and
K Appearing on the-City of Saratoga Ballot in the June 8,
1976 Election.
K. Duffy recommended that the Board adopt Resolution No.
76-10 in support of the City of Saratoga ballot measures
Meeting 76-13 Page eleven
J and K appearing in the June 8, 1976 election. Ballot
measure J is a bond issue which would authorize the City
of Saratoga to incur a bonded indebtedness in the principal
amount of $2 million for park and recreation facilities
involved in the acquisition of approximately 400 acres of
Saratoga hillside open space located from Hakone Gardens
north to the Parker Ranch. Ballot measure K would increase
the maximum tax rate of the City of Saratoga by $1. 30 for
each $100 assessed valuation, to be effective for either
the 1976-1977 or the 1977-1978 fiscal year, the revenues
of which would be used to acquire approximately 400 acres
of open space land in the Saratoga hillside located from
Hakone Gardens north to the Parker Ranch.
Motion: K. Duffy moved adoption of Resolution No. 76-10,
a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Mid-
peninsula Regional Park District in Support of
Ballot Measures J and K Appearing on the City of
Saratoga Ballot in the June 8, 1976 Election. N.
Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed
unanimously.
B. Possible Scheduling of Meeting with Trails Task Force.
N. Hanko introduced her memorandum (M-76-71) dated April
22, 1976, regarding the scheduling of a Possible Meeting
with the Trails Task Force. She advised that the Trails
Task Force was interested in meeting with the Board to
discuss the tasks which were included in their original
charge, as well as any other tasks the Board would like
them to perform. Attached to the memorandum was a tentative
agenda with topics that could be discussed at such a meet-
ing. She suggested a Special Meeting be scheduled for
Thursday, June 3, 1976 for this purpose.
D. Wendin said he felt the order of paragraphs 1 and 2 of
the discussion outline should be reversed, because the
discussion items in paragraph 1 would be irrelevant if
the Board came to the conclusion that the Trails Task Force
in its present status as a Board-appointed group should no
longer continue.
N. Hanko said she felt it was important to establish if the
original charge of the Trails Task Force had been completed.
Motion: D. Wendin moved adoption of the agenda set forth
in memorandum M-76-71, with paragraphs 1 and 2
reversed, for the proposed Special Meeting. K.
Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed on
the following vote: AYES - D. Wendin, B. Green
and K. Duffy; NOES - N. Hanko.
Meeting 76-13 Page twelve
Motion: N. Hankc, moved that a Special Meeting of the Board of
Directors be held on Thursday, June 3 , 1976 , from
12 : 00 Noon to 2 : 00 P.M. for the purpose of discussing
the role of the Trails Task Force. B. Green seconded
the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
C. Special Districts Forum.
H. Grench advised the Board that they had previously received
copies of a letter from East Bay Regional Park District inviting
one Board and one staff member to attend their Special Districts
Forum to be held from May 22 through May 25. He pointed out that
the Open Space Conference co-sponsored by the District on May 22
conflicts with one of the Forum dates.
B. Green said she would plan to attend the Forum on Tuesday,
May 25, and K. Duffy said she would plan to attend on Monday,
May 24 .
N. Hanko stated the consensus that a letter be sent to East Bay
Regional Park District accepting their invitation for Monday
and Tuesday, and advising them of the weekend conflict with the
Open Space Conference.
X. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
There were no informational reports.
XI. CLAIMS
Motion: B. Green moved adoption of ,the revised claims (C-76-8)
dated April 28, 1976, as presented. K. Duffy seconded
the motion. The motion passed on the following vote:
AYES - B. Green, K. Duffy and D. Wendin; ABSTAIN - N.
Hanko.
XII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Board recessed to Executive Session at 10 : 38 P.M. to discuss
land negotiations.
XIII . ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11: 58 P.M.
Anne Cathcart Crosley
District Clerk