Loading...
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.