HomeMy Public PortalAbout19810408 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Aeeting 81-9
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1, LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
- Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
April 8 , 1981
I . ROLL CALL
President Richard Bishop called the meeting to order at 7 :40 P.M.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Barbara Green,
Nonette Hanko, Harry Turner, and Richard Bishop.
Member Absent : Edward Shelley.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, Steven Sessions ,
Emma Johnson, Charlotte MacDonald, Stanley Norton, and Jean Fiddes .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. March 18 , 1981
Motion: B. Green moved the approval of the minutes of March 18 , 1981.
D. Wendin seconded the motion.
Discussion: J. Fiddes stated the adjournment time for
the meeting should be changed from 8 : 26 P.M. to 8 :26 A.M.
The motion to approve the minutes as corrected passed
unanimously.
B. March 25, 1981
D. Wendin requested that the second sentence of paragraph three
on Page six be corrected to read: "He felt the provision of
maps could be discussed under publicity and that camping areas
and transportation were unique items that should be addressed
individually as they came up for a site" .
K. Duffy suggested that memoranda numbers be incorporated into
the section of the minutes relating to the discussion of Issues
and Questions from Site Emphasis and Program Evaluation Workshops
(Item A of Old Business with Action Requested) to clarify what
memoranda were being referred to at various points in the
discussion. R. Bishop stated that, rather than incorporating
memoranda numbers into the minutes , staff should attach
the memoranda discussed during the agenda item to the minutes
of the March 25, 1981 as part of the permanent record of the
meeting.
B. Green stated that the memorandum referred to in the second
paragraph on Page Seven should be changed from M-91-32 to
M-81-32 .
K. Duffy stated that the date of the memorandum referred to in
paragraph one on Page Six should be corrected to read: "dated
March 18 , 1981" .
H. Grench noted staff would be preparing a summary report of
Herbert A Grench,General Manager
Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin
Meeting 81-9 Page Two
Board action taken during the discussions of the issues and
questions from the site emphasis and program evaluation
workshops .
Motion: B. Green moved the approval of the corrected minutes
of March 25, 1981. K. Duffy seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
J. Fiddes stated there were no written communications .
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
H. Grench requested the addition of Special Orders of the Day
to the agenda for an introduction.
R. Bishop stated the agenda was adopted as presented with the
addition of Special Orders of the Day.
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Beez Jones , 16891 Stevens Canyon Road, Cupertino, questioned
Director Duffy about public entry points off of Monte Bello
Road to the Picchetti winery area. K. Duffy responded there
were two gates on the left-hand side of Monte Bello Road
leading to the area; the first gate was signed "Area Closed"
and was not for public use and the second gate was for
public use. She noted that members of the public could walk
around the second gate, follow the trail past the parking
area, and loop around the back of the winery buildings .
N. Hanko noted the gate to be used by the public was not
signed, and the Picchetti Winery Review Committee would be
noting this information in its report to the Board.
K. Duffy stated the lights in the parking lot outside the
District office had not been on at night for several months
and requested that staff look into the matter.
VI. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Joint Acquisition Project with the Town of Los Gatos for
Los Gatos Creek Park (Lands of the California Province
for the Society of Jesus)
C. Britton reviewed report R-81-13, dated April 1, 1981,
regarding the joint acquisition project with the Town of
Los Gatos for the acquisition of the proposed Los Gatos
Creek Park from the California Province for the Society of
Jesus. He noted that negotiations had reached an impasse
with Novitiaterepresentatives and that the Town of Los
Gatos wanted to formalize the Joint Powers Agreement with
the District before considering beginning eminent domain
proceedings . He reviewed various conditions of the Joint
Powers Agreement, noting that the District and the Town of
Los Gatos would equally share the acquisition costs , as
well as the Land and Water Conservation Fund grant money, and
the District would have a Park, Recreation, Scenic and
Open Space Easement over the entire property, similar to the
easement the District has on the Edgewood site.
Meeting 81-9 age Three
K. Duffy asked if there were any potential conflicts in the
Agreement's section 12 that referred to enforcement of or-
dinances. C. Britton responded that the ordinances had not
been compared, and S. Norton stated he felt the more restrictive
ordinance would apply.
D. Wendin noted that there could be a problem if the Town of
Los Gatos had certain ordinances that the District did not
care to enforce or if the Town's code required the District
to meet certain ordinances in order to open the land. He
cited the provision of toilets as an example.
C. Britton responded that the area would be a joint facility,
even when it was maintained as open space, and said if there
were restrictions imposed by the Town ' s code in order to open
the property, negotiations would take place.
K. Duffy noted the wording in section 14 Income was confusing
and suggested deleting the words "as descil-bed in exhibit "A" .
C. Britton responded he would prefer not to make the change
in the final documents since it was not a substantive change
and because the documents had been typed and the wording
approved by Los Gatos .
H. Turner asked for an explanation of the District's share
of the acquisition costs . C. Britton responded that the
District 's commitment made earlier was about $350 ,000 , based
on the original grant application, and the initial ex-
penditure the Board was being asked to approve was up to
$35,000 , which was for acquisition costs , not the land costs.
He said, at this point, no written offers to purchase the
property had been tendered, other than the initial one
based on the appraisal .
N. Hanko, referring to section 13 Sale as Surplus , asked
what procedure would be involved in selling the property.
C. Britton stated the procedure would be quite complicated,
including a vote of the citizens of Los Gatos, as well as
a vote of the electorate within the District. He noted
this aspect would be covered more specifically in the Park
and Open Space Easement.
K. Duffy asked about boundary adjustments , and C. Britton
responded that the best way to handle that type of situation
would be at the time of acquisition with modification of
the agreement if necessary.
N. Hanko asked about access to the site, and C. Britton responded
that there were no easements through the front portion of
the property and that all access to the property would be from
existing lands of Los Gatos , Los Gatos Creek, and from Alma
Bridge Road. He said no traffic would pass through the
Novitiate building complex and winery.
Motion: K. Duffy moved the approval of Resolution 81-26, a
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving
Meeting 81-9 Age Four
and Authorizing Execution of a Joint Powers
Agreement for Purchase of Real Property, and
Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and
All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to
Closing of the Transaction (Los Gatos Creek Park) .
H. Turner seconded the motion.
Discussion: C. Britton noted that Section Three of
the Resolution authorized the General Manager to
expend up to $35,000 to cover costs of acquisition.
D. Wendin asked if this amount would be included as
a contingency in the 1981-1982 budget. C. Britton
responded that the total would be broken down into
normal line item categories , rather than appearing
as a contingency. The motion passed unanimously.
B. Update and Proposed Action on the District's Legislative
Program
H.Grench reviewed memorandum M-81-39 , dated April 1, 1981,
regarding the District's legislative program and said he
would ask the Board to take positionsand set priorities
on various legislation discussed in the memorandum. He
noted that the February 3 , 1981 letter from Monterey
Peninsula Regional Park District, referred to in the
memorandum, was not attached, but he would verbally relate
the letter ' s comments .
H. Grench reviewed AB 597 proposed amendments, and S. Norton
stated the amendment to Section 5540 of the Public Resources
Code would put the District on the same level as cities
and counties holding open space easements and would clarify
that a county assessor would be required to treat lands
subject to open space easements as enforceably restricted,
thus allowing a tax break for the property owner. In
response to a question from N. Hanko, S. Norton stated it
was his opinion that such open space easements outside
the District boundaries would also qualify for the tax break.
H. Grench stated that the Legislative Committee had not
supported the request from the Monterey Peninsula Regional
Park District to reduce the number of signatures required
for the nomination of candidates for the position of
director. He suggested that the Board delay taking any
action on this matter until the East Bay Regional Park
District responded to the request.
H. Grench noted AB 597 would be heard in Sacramento by the
Local Government Committee on April 21, 1981 at 8 : 00 A.M.
He said Robert Beckus had advised that the President or another
member of the Board be present to testify at the hearing.
Discussion centered on whether any Board members would be
able to attend. It was not determined which Board member
would attend, although K. Duffy indicated she might be able
to represent the District at the hearing.
Motion: H. Turner moved that the Board authorize a member
of the Board to incur reasonable expenses for a trip
to Sacramento on April 20 and 21, 1981. N. Hanko
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Meeting 81-9 -,age Five
H. Grench noted that the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park
District had also suggested, at the request of the Monterey
County Registrar of Voters, that the Public Resoucres Code
governing the District refer to the uniform District election
law, rather than having all the specifics of election pro-
cedures in the Code. He said S. Norton found problems with
this approach, so staff was not pursuing the matter.
H. Grench noted he wanted to change his "no position" re-
commendation on SB 353 to a C priority support position and
the Board concurred. He stated that if East Bay Regional
Park District wanted to pursue the bill , then the language
should be explicit in stating that a Board may delegate to
the prosecutor or court the determination of whether a violation
of a District ordinance was a misdemeanor or infraction, and
R. Bishop stated concurrence of the Board with this statement.
Discussion centered on SB 354 , introduced by East Bay Regional
Park District, and the wording of the bill. D. Wendin
questioned two phrases in the current wording of the bill ,
"not otherwise eligible for a group plan" and "if eligible
for a group' s medical or dental or both" . He noted that the
first restriction was not in the original bill the Board
reviewed and wanted to see it clarified before the bill
became law and that the wording of the second phrase cited
was ambiguous. He recommended removal of the first phrase
unless there was a reason for it, noting that he had
originally supported the bill since it was intended to make
available health and dental plans to all directors and
noted the current wording might make a director, having a
professional association medical plan or an inadequate group
plan, ineligible.
R. Bishop stated the Board's consensus that they would support
SB 354 if the offending language discussed during the meeting
was totally removed. If the language was not removed,
staff was directed to present the bill to the Board for ad-
ditional consideration. The Board also concurred that SB 354
be given a B priority.
H. Grench stated that the East Bay Regional Park District had
an author for SB 993 which related to benefit assessment
districts and said he would be reporting to the Board at a
later time on this bill. He noted Senator Garcia apparently
was not willing to carry the bill to extend the reappropriation
of the State trails money and a new author would be sought.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board take the positions
and priorities as contained in the report and
as modified during the meeting. B. Green seconded
the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
Meeting 81-9 Page Six
C. Proposed Historic Preservation Grant Application
S . Sessions reviewed memorandum M-81-40, dated April 2, 1981,
regarding the submittal of an Historic Preservation Grant
application for funding to initiate the rehabilitation of the
Picchetti Brothers Winery building. He noted that the
proposed construction called for the replacement of the winery
roof and the stabilization of the building with interior
support columns . He said the total grant amount requested would
be $25,000 , with the District's matching share of $25 ,000
to be provided by the successful lease proposer.
Motion: N. Hanko moved the adoption of Resolution 81-27 , a
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving
the Application and the Project Agreement for
Historic Preservation Grants-in-Aid Funds for
Picchetti Brothers Winery Rehabilitation Project
K. Duffy seconded the motion.
Discussion: H. Turner asked if the matching $25,000
share could be provided in the form of materials
and services by the lessee and what would happen
if the lessee fell short of providing the $25,000
matching share of the grant. S. Sessions responded
that the matching portion of the grant could be
in the form of materials and services, and R. Bishop
stated that under the lease there would be a con-
tractual obligation on the part of the lessee to
put up the money. D. Wendin noted it was difficult
to conceive that the lessee would be putting up less
than $25,000 for the restoration. The motion passed
unanimously.
VII. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Adoption of Negative Declaration for Stevens Creek Shoreline
Nature Study Area Trail
S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M-81-41, dated April 2, 1981,
noting the Board had authorized staff to submit a grant applica-
tion to the Coastal Conservancy for the development of a segment
of the South Bay Trail, that staff had prepared an Initial
Study for the project, and staff would be submitting a Negative
Declaration, upon the Board's ratification, as a part of the
grant materials.
B. Green stated she felt the trail , which would increase
pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the area, might affect
a breeding, feeding, or nesting area and felt that item 4e
in the Initial Study should be answered maybe, rather than no.
She noted thatsquirrels had burrowed homes in the area and that
birds nested next to the road. The other members of the Board
concurred with B. Green's suggested change.
K. Duffy noted the District could consider closing the trail
as a mitigation step at the time of year when the birds were
nesting.
B. Green stated the Initial Study form included several
typographic and wording errors and requested that staff
correct the form.
Meeting 81-9 age Seven
Motion: B . Green moved that the Board ratify the finding of
a Negative Declaration for the project in accordance
with the Initial Study as modified during the
meeting. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion
passed unanimously.
VIII . INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
R. Bishop stated he and Kathy Blackburn had discussed having
a picnic for the members of the Board and the docents and said
he would like to set the date for the event. The Board
scheduled the picnic for Saturday, June 6, 1981.
H. Grench announced the California Parks and Recreation Society's
annual meeting would be held in Sacramento on May 14-15, 1981
and asked Board members to contact him if they were interested
in attending.
H. Grench reported on the joint office-field staff informational
meeting held at the ranger yard on March 27, 1981. He noted
the Board might want to consider having the same type of meeting
when the question of a ranger-ride-along program was discussed.
J. Fiddes stated Gary Foss , the District's personnel consultant,
had been working on the cafeteria-style benfit plan. per-
formance evaluation review schedule, and on the filling of
the new Secretary to the General Manager position during
the past few months.
S. Sessions reported a neighborhood meeting would be held at
Montclair School on April 21 to discuss the parking problems
on St. Joseph 's Avenue. He said the County of Santa Clara
would be considering a no parking resolution on April 20 for
one side of the curbing running from the Interstate 280
overpass out to the residential area on St. Joseph's Avenue.
S. Session announced that a three-hour Windy Hill field trip
was held on Sunday, March 29 , 1981. He said thirty people
attended the field trip, and their input would be used by
staff in formulating the forthcoming Use and Management Plan
for Windy Hill .
S. Sessions reported that members of the District's Ranger
staff had assisted in another rescue at Devil ' s Canyon
on Sunday, April 5, 1981. H.Grench pointed out that this
was on private property.
N. Hanko announced the Public Notification Committee would be
holding its second meeting at noon on Wednesday, April 15, 1981,
at the District office. She noted the Committee was con-
sidering appropriate notification for land acquisitions
and site use and management plans.
K. Duffy reported she had made a presentation on Monday,
April 6 , 1981 to members of the Saratoga Parks and Recreation
Commission. She stated Saratoga officials had suggested that
another gathering be held at the Picchetti winery area, as
had occurred in the past, and she felt this type of gathering
would enhance the District' s public relations effort.
Meeting 81-9 Page Eight
K. Duffy suggested the Board consider having two-person, rather
than three-person, committees since it was often difficult
to find a mutually agreeable time for three committee members
to meet. N. Hanko stated she supported the idea for committees
dealing with non-controversial items. R. Bishop stated the
membership of current Board committees should not be
changed, but that the Board consider forming two-member
committees in the future when a non-controversial item is
involved.
The Board discussed the April 11, 1981 Special Meeting with
representatives from the Golden Gate Council of American
Youth Hostels, Inc. R. Bishop stated D. Wendin would chair
the meeting, and staff distributed the meeting's agenda.
R. Bishop stated the Board's consensus that if there were not
enough Board members present to constitute a quorum at
9 :00 A.M. , the members present could proceed as a committee
of the Board.
IX. CLAIMS
Motion: B. Green moved the adoption of the revised claims ,
C-81-8 , dated April 8, 1981. N. Hanko seconded
the motion.
Discussion: D. Wendin questioned Claims 2001 and 2012 .
J. Fiddes responded that Claim 2001 to DFM Associates
in the amount of $22.17 was for a copy of the 1981
California Elections Code and Claim 2012 to the
City of Palo Alto on the amount of $3 .47 was for
utilities in the Skyline area. The motion passed
unanimously.
X. CLOSED SESSION
The Board recessed to Closed Session at 9 :15 P.M.
XI . ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11 : 25 P.M.
Jean H. Fiddes
District Clerk
CORRECTIONS TO MINUTES OF
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. April 8, 1981
E. Shelley noted that Special Orders of the Day, which had been
added to the agenda when it was adopted, was not included in
the minutes. H. Grench stated the Special Order of the Day
was the introduction of Emma Johnson, the District' s new
Secretary to the General Manager.
Motion: N. Hanko moved the adoption of the minutes of April 8,
1981 as corrected. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
B. April 11, 1981
Motion: E. Shelley moved the adoption of the minutes of April 11, 1981
N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.