Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19780118 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) hw Meeting 78-2 . . B. Minutes of January 18, 1978 � H. Turner stated the consensus that the minutes of January 18, 1978 be approved as presented. ' Board of Directors ' ' u M I N U T E S January 18 , 1978 375 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA I . ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order by President Turner at 7 :48 P.M. Members Present: Richard Bishop, Katherine Duffy, Barbara Green, Nonette Hanko , Edward Shelley, Harry Turner and Daniel Wendin. Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Jon Olson, Craig Britton, Anne Crosley, Stanley Norton and Rose Hartman. San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Commission Members: Joel Schreck, Henry Yee, Sylvia Leutz and Joseph Higgins. San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Staff: Duane "Doc", Mat- tison, Director of Parks and Recreation II . SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY A. Meeting with San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Commission { 11. Turner welcomed members of the San Mateo Countv Parks and Recreation Commission to the meeting. He described the geo- graphical region which comprises the jurisdiction of the Midpen- insula Regional Open Space District, and pointed out that the District shares a common jurisdiction with San Mateo County. H. Grench described the lands currently owned by the District, including one which is partially in San Mateo County. He said that although all sites are open to the public, the District had thus far been taking one step at a time in advertising its sites so that tax revenues could be concentrated primarily on acquisition of land. He said the District had been very successful in cooperating with other agencies by allowing day camps operated by city park and recreation departments to be conducted on District lands. The District has also started a. very popular docent program which takes croups of people on hikes lead by a person knowledgeable in the geology, plant and animal life, and cultural history of a site. I Meeting 78-2 Page two J. Olson said another example of cooperation between the Dis- trict and Santa Clara County was a trail along Skyline which had been constructed by the District on County land, and which connects several publicly-owned lands. H. Grench said the owner of a parcel usually initiates contact with the District in the land acquisition process . J. Olson explained how the District had interested city parks and recreation departments in day camps on District lands. Duane "Doc" Mattison said the San Mateo County Parks and Recre- ation Department has been in operation since 1924 , when Memorial Park was its first acquisition. He described the parks in the County system, noting that the State beaches used to be owned by the County. He said the San Francisco Watershed lands contain 23 ,000 acres , 19 ,000 of which are operated by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation and 4 ,000 of which are part of a recreation easement. The County spends $2 million annually for the operation and maintenance of its parks. The process through which the County must go in order to acquire land is very complicated, he said, and although Charter for Parks money can be used for development , it cannot be used for main- tenance. He advised that the County is in the process of updating its General Plan, which may affect future planning for parks. He said the County would be using $500 ,000 from the Gregorio fund and Charter for Parks to develop a trail from Wunderlich Park to San Francisco. D. Mattison said the County received notification last April that part of the State College Site was surplus, and was asked if the County was interested in it. The County said they would be interested if the entire site was available, since it had regional qualities. The County has agreed to declare its interest after learning that subsequent legislation can be introduced to declare the remainder of the site surplus. D. Mattison said the San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that the County support the acquisition of Hassler by the District. H. Grench said the District has advised the State of the Dis- trict ' s interest in the State College Site. The District has also approached San Mateo County regarding joint acquisition and management of the property, but no action has been taken by the County yet. H. Grench said the District hopes to share acquisition costs for the Hassler site , and has committed itself to providing half the money needed in excess of grant funds . The City of San Carlos has said it is no longer interested in assisting Meeting 78--2 Page three with the purchase of Hassler, but this position could change after the forthcoming election. The District has been informed by the State that $550 ,000 will be available in Land and Water Conservation Funds toward this acquisition, and a Committee of three Board members will be attempting to meet with San Carlos and/or the County on this matter. R. Bishop said he felt Hassler was an important site and might best be approached by joint efforts. He said District, City and County functions on the same site could complement each other very well. D. Mattison said the County had financial problems , particularly since there had not yet been a court determination on how much the County must pay for San Bruno Mountain property. He added that the Jarvis amendment on property tax reform, which would be considered in the June election, could affect the Charter for Parks program. D. Wendin said that at the right price, the Edgewood property would probably be considered a priority acquisition by the District. J. Schreck said it was clear the goals of the District and the Commission were similar, and that the two jurisdictions should start working together to discuss ways of cooperating on an acquisition. Gordon Jennings, 3611 Woodside Road, Woodside, said it was his understanding that the Jarvis amendment, if successful , could not affect taxes levied for existing debt commitments. H. Yee observed that the agencies would also have to work out what kinds of use would be allowed on a site , and who would be responsible for operations and maintenance. D. Wendin said the type of use would probably determine to what degree the District would be willing to provide operations and maintenance, but that it could be a shared responsibility. H. Grench and D. Mattison agreed that joint planning was a good idea to see where each agency' s interests lie , without making commitments. H. Turner stated the consensus that the District and County staffs would work together on planning on the Hassler and State College sites to identify cooperative possibilities for the two agencies. Meeting 78-2 Page four H. Grench said that Land and Water Conservation Funds had been allocated to the District for the purchase of land near Cooley Landing. A number of agencies are interested in joint planning for this area, and until the District knows more about each jurisdiction's preferences , the specific portion of land to be purchased will not be determined. D. Mattison said he felt Cooley Landing would probably be a priority area once the General Plan is revised, but he was not aware of current planning for this site. III. EXECUTIVE SESSION The Board recessed to Executive Session at 10 :03 P.M. to discuss land negotiations. IV. ADJOURNMENT The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11 :55 P .M. Anne Cathcart Crosley District Clerk