HomeMy Public PortalAbout19810422 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) ting 81-11
41
am
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTILL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1, LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
M I N U T E S
April 22 , 1981
I . ROLL CALL
President Richard Bishop called the meeting to order at 7: 35 P.M.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Edward Shelley,
Nonette Hanko, Harry Turner, and Richard Bishop.
Member Absent: Barbara Green.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, Steven Sessions ,
Iris Youngs, Jean Fiddles , Charlotte MacDonald, Emma Johnson,
Pat Starrett, Del Woods , and Stanley Norton.
II. 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.
III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
J. Fiddes stated the Board had received a letter, dated April 16 , 1981,
from Jean Rusmore, 36 Berenda Way, Portola Valley, thanking the
Board and staff for their participation with the American Youth
Hostel Golden Gate Council Board at the workshop on April 11, 1981.
R. Bishop stated he had received a letter from Supervisor Rod
Diridon thanking the Board for contacting the Santa Clara County
Board of Supervisors about the addition of Gill Mustang Ranch
to Henry Coe State Park and said the Board of Super-
visors had gone on record in support of the project.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
H. Grench stated the date for the meeting was incorrect on the agenda
and should be changed to April 22, 1981.
R. Bishop stated the agenda was adopted with the inclusion of
the date change to April 22, 1981.
Herbert A Grench,General Manager
Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,NonetteG Hanko,Richard S Bishop,Edward Shelley,Harry A Turner,Daniel G Wendin
Meeting 81-11 Page Two
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Harry Haeussler, 1094 Highland Circle, Los Altos , noted that
the Windmill Pasture Committee was to have reported back to
the Board in March and asked why the Committee had not made
its report.
D. Wendin said he and the other committee members , H. Turner
and N. Hanko, had not yet met, and H. Turner volunteered to
be responsible for calling a meeting of the committee, which
was charged to prepare guidelinesfor overnight sleepouts in
Windmill Pasture.
VI. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Proposed Lease of a Portion of the Picchetti Ranch Area
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
R. Bishop introduced report R-81-15 from the Picchetti Winery
Committee regarding the leasing of the Picchetti Winery area.
He stated that several public meetings were held to discuss
the matter, noting that members of the public had expressed
concerns about the disruption of the peace and tranquility
of the area as a result of additional traffic and reckless
drivers , and having the District repair and maintain the
buildings , rather than pursuing a lease arrangement. He
stated that the Committee felt that a proper winery operation
in the area would not severely impact residents in the
area and that it was not appropriate for the District to
use its own funds to restore the buildings . He said that
a meeting would be held in the future to discuss the entire
use and management plan for the Picchetti site and members
of the public were encouraged to attend and speak at that meeting.
K. Duffy reviewed the specific lease proposals and stated that
the Committee voted unanimously that the Board direct staff to
negotiate a lease with Ronald and Rolayne Stortz of Sunrise
Winery. K. Duffy stated two corrections to the "Brief Summary
of Proposals" : 1) "5 cases" listed under Maximum Size for
the Rorden proposal should be changed to "5000 cases" , and 2)
Ridge Winery production noted under Maximum Size should read
"25 ,000 cases" . I
Beez Jones , 16891 Stevens Canyon Road, Cupertino, noted there
was a need to provide for adequate public parking for people
wanting to use the site. K. Duffy responded that the lessee
would provide for public parking.
S. Sessions reviewed memorandum M-81-44 , dated April 19 , 1981,
which was attached to the Committee 's report. He noted that
the Stortz proposal would provide adequate general public parking
and trail access to the site and that it would take approximately
two months for staff to negotiate the lease. He reviewed maps
of the area showing existing land use and proposed land use,
which showed the impacts of the proposals .
K. Duffy noted that Mrs. Tish Picchetti had agreed to be an
historical consultant when the restoration project began.
Meeting 81-11 Page Three
H. Hauessler asked that the Board give consideration to equestrians
who ride in the area and consider placing a watering trough for
horses on the site.
N. Hanko asked if any consideration had been given to having a
trail around the perimeter of the historic site, noting the
plan presented by staff called for a trail through the historic
area. S . Sessions responded that the map was graphic and that a
perimeter trail was in the plan.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board direct staff to negotiate
a lease and return to the Board with the recommended
lease, direct staff to prepare a use and management
plan concurrent with the lease negotiations , returning
to the Board for approval of both at the same meeting,
and ask the existing Picchetti Winery Committee to be
available to staff during the lease negotiations .
H. Turner seconded the motion.
Discussion: D. Wendin requested that he be allowed to
amend his motion to identify the proposal presented by
the Stortzes as the successful proposal. H. Turner
concurred with the request. Discussion centered on
whether the lease and the use and management plan should
be considered for approval by the Board at the same
meeting. H. Grench noted that the second meeting in
June was a target date, by which time staff would try
to complete both the lease negotiations and the use
and management plan. Mr. Stortz said he favored having
the use and management plan approved first since it might
have some effect on the lease negotiations. H. Grench
said that a noticed, public meeting could be held with
the neighbors and Board members to gather input to use
in the development of the recommendations of the use
and management plan. N. Hanko said it was essential
for the Board to consider the use and management plan
before Mr. Stortz had to make a lease commitment.
D. Wendin noted staff should bring the basic parameters
of the lease and the use and management plan before the
Board for some consideration before presenting the items
to the Board for final adoption. E. Shelley suggested
that the Board adopt the use and management plan two
weeks before the proposed lease was presented to the
Board for approval.
Motion to amend: N. Hanko moved that the motion before the Board
be amended to include the statement that there will be a
meeting of the Board at which time there would be a pre-
liminary approval of the use and management plan prior
to the time the plan is presented to the Board for final
approval. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion to
amend passed unanimously.
D. Wendin stated he felt it inappropriate for the District to use
its public funds for the renovation of the winery buildings. He
Meeting 81-11 Page Four
quoted from the Committee ' s report, noting that the lease arrange-
ment would restore the vitality and traditional use to the area,
as opposed to having a lifeless historical building complex with
a memorial plaque.
The motion as amended passed unanimously.
The Board adjourned for a recess at 8 : 45 P.M.
The Board reconvened for the public meeting at 8 : 58 P.M.
B. Addendum to the Thornewood Proposal Parameters
D. Wendin, representing the Thornewood Committee, reviewed briefly
the results of the Committee meetings that had been held, including
the public meeting held the previous Wednesday. Referring to the
Committee' s report R-81-14 , dated April 17 , 1981, he said there
were a couple of aspects of the "Addendum to the Thornewood Pro-
posed Parameters" that represented policy statements on the part
of the District, and the Committee members felt their charter
was not broad enough to adopt these policies without formal
approval by the Board. He said the Committee wanted to be sure
that the public had an opportunity to provide input on the lease
addendum.
D. Wendin pointed out changes that needed to be made in the Thorne-
wood Bidders' Form T-1, noting Item D should read "Your estimate
of market value of the restored premises (1981 dollars) " and Item E
should read "Your estimate of monthly triple net rental value of
the restored premises (1981 dollars) " .
He noted the Committee was requesting that proposers submit their
best and final proposals to match the parameters as amended by
the report presented by 5 : 00 P.M. , Thursday, May 28 , 1981, and
submit their questions, in writing, by 5 : 00 P.M. on Wednesday,
May 5 , 1981. He said these questions would be answered, in writing,
by 5: 00 P.M. , Wednesday, May 13, 1981, noting that although an
attempt will be made to answer questions received after May 5, 1981,
it might not be possible. He said the Committee hoped to have its
work completed by the first meeting in June.
N. Hanko asked if there were any proposers who were discouraged by
the proposed parameters. D. Wendin said he did not believe so,
adding that certain improvements had been restricted (exterior
non-historic changes to the building, perimeter chain-link
fencing, and tennis courts) . D. Wendin stated that because the
Committee believes that the lease has value, depending on the
extent and nature of the restoration, some sort of up-front contri-
bution in cash or equivalent should be made by the proposer to
the District.
E. Shelley clarified the last paragraph of the Addendum regarding
the submission of questions by proposers saying the intent was for
both the questions and the answers of all the proposers to be dis-
tributed to all other proposers.
Meeting 81-11 Page Five
D. Wendin explained Paragraph B under proposers ' instructions,
noting that the financial statement and cash offer of the winning
proposer would be retained and all others would be returned.
D. Wendin said that the Committee expected to return to the Board
with an evaluation of the Proposals , based on evaluation criteria
encouraged by the Board, adding that if the Board encourages a
certain objective, then the Committee would "weight" the proposals
accordingly.
Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board approve the Addendum to
the Thornewood Proposed Parameters, including Proposers'
Instructions, Lists A, B, and C, and the Thornewood
Bidders ' Form T-1, as corrected. D. Wendin seconded
the motion.
Discussion: Tom Gano, P.O. Box 59, Star Route, Woodside,
CA. , 94062, questioned the rationale of an "up-front
offer" saying that the District is asking the proposer
to not only put considerable funds into the house in the
first two years to bring it up to a reasonable state of
repair but to include an "up-front" sum of money. H.
Turner responded that the value of the rent-free occupancy
of a restored house and prime grounds in Woodside could
very likely exceed the dollar costs of the renovation and
restoration of the site that the bidder proposed to under-
take, adding that it is not known at this point how much
money would be spent. He said a reasonable range of
estimate is as low as $100, 000, and in the Committee' s
opinion rent-free occupancy for twenty-five years would
be worth more than that. Therefore, the Committee saw
the possibility for additional cash or an equivalent asset
being required to restore the balance. He also noted
that this was a competitive process, and the Board expected
to receive the most competitive and best possible proposal.
D. Wendin pointed out that the proposer may also submit
terms. H. Turner said that the proposal could also relate
to the use of the land as assets to cover the value of
that cash payment. E. Shelley said that there was nothing
to exclude the proposer from proposing a shorter term
lease. The motion passed unanimously.
VII. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
A. Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan for the
Black Mountain and Page Mill Road Areas
S. Sessions introduced the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Use and
Management Plan for the Black Mountain and Page Mill Road Areas
(report R-81-16, dated April 17 , 1981) , pointing out that the focus
of the use and management plan was the proposed development of the
Page Mill Road Area which contains four basic elements : the parking
area, the trail system, a backpack camp and removal of the old
cabin and the cisterns. He said the backpack camp and the demolition
portion have been previously approved by the Board, and that the
Plan had been through a series of public meetings , including the
review process with the City of Palo Alto. He said all elements
Meeting 81-11 Page Six
of the Plan had been approved by the City of Palo Alto with the
exception of the proposed parking area, which at that time had been
identified as the "G" location, and that the present proposed
parking area, location "L" , was presently going through an approval
process with the County of San Mateo. He said the District has
been awarded a $35 ,000 Land and Water Conservation Fund grant for
the development portion of the project.
D. Woods reviewed the preliminary architectural and landscape plans
for the proposed parking lot, noting that it had also been presented
to the planning staff and the Public Works Department of San Mateo
County and that the final plan will be very similar to the plan
being presented to the Board at the meeting.
D. Wendin asked if the landscaping would soften the effect of the
fence around the parking lot and make the parking area less visible
from the highway.
D. Woods pointed out that the low growing plants would not block
the view, explaining that there would be an island in the middle
to help direct the traffic around and prevent misuse.
N. Hanko informed the Board that she had visited proposed site "L"
with Mary Gordon, former Palo Alto Planning Commissioner, and re-
lated Mrs. Gordon ' s opinion that, although this is not as desirable
as the "OK Corral" site, the "L" location is a livable plan. N.
Hanko said that Mrs. Gordon had suggested that some additional
landscaping with trees be considered to soften the 10 space parking
area against the boundary of San Mateo County.
D. Woods said that staff was exploring the possibility of under-
grounding a section of the power lines , specifically the one by the
entrance to the parking area. In response to the suggestion that
there be more trees , such as Monterey pines or bay trees , Woods
said that there are not any native trees that grow on that kind of
hill slope and that would look appropriate.
N. Hanko stated her concern that the neighbors of the preserve would
have a shocking experience if there was not sufficient landscaping
to protect their view.
E. Shelley said that one of the primary reasons for picking a site
like this one was to have clear visibility from the road.
S. Sessions noted that the primary point of surveillance for the
lot would be from Page Mill Road.
D. Woods pointed out that the proposed development plan had not
provided for horse trailer parking.
R. Bishop asked if there has been any consideration for equestrian
access elsewhere.
Meeting 81-11 Page Seven
D. Woods responded that thought had been given to the possibility
of horse trailer parking and equestrian access at Canyon Road so
that equestrians could cross from Canyon Road onto Los Trancos.
He said there is a possibility of using the area where the barn was
removed for special access, thus providing access to both Canyon
Road Trail and Los Trancos.
H. Haeussler stated that he was concerned that the pull-out area
provided for horse trailers would be taken up with cars . He asked
if the area would be signed as reserved for horse trailers and
expressed his concern about the safety of making a left turn off
Page Mill Road into the lot.
D. Woods responded that vehicles making a left turn onto the site
would be coming up a moderately steep hill causing traffic to slow
down, and that the San Mateo Public Works Department staff felt
that the slower moving traffic was sufficient to allow enough line
of sight for making a safe left turn into the lot. He added that
a possible solution to the horse trailer parking would be use of
the larger area where the old barn was removed.
Tom Harrington, 4201 Page Mill Road, Los Altos , stated that he
strongly objected to the proposed location of the parking area, that
he was the one person most impacted by the parking lot as his
property looked directly down on it, that he intended to pursue his
objection, that location "L" had been way down the list in the
original survey of potential sites , and that the previous proposed
parking area had been sensitively placed. He said "L" location
had very poor visibility, and he suggested the Los Trancos lot
be expanded to accommodate more cars .
Purusha Obluda, 31570 Page Mill Road, Los Altos, implied through
a series of questions that the "L" location had been selected
because it was outside the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto,
and said he felt that there had not been enough public notification
and that there should be public meetings with the neighbors to allow
for more public input on the Plan. He asked the Board to delay
making a decision on the parking area and allow more time for the
public to provide input.
N. Hanko proposed a slight delay that would allow enough time for
the public to become apprised of the plan, and said there should be
a procedure for allowing people to look at the proposed parking
lot site.
E. Shelley asked if there had been public or neighborhood meetings
on the Plan and if there had been any meeting pertaining to this
particular site for the parking lot.
S. Sessions responded that besides the Board meeting when the Plan
had been discussed, he believed there had been four meetings before
Palo Alto Council members and Commissioners . He said there had not
been a specific neighborhood meeting on the "L" location.
Meeting 81-11 Page Eight
P. Obluda stated that he disapproved very strongly of location "L"
parking area and felt that the District had denied the public input.
Tom Dodd, 7051 Alpine Road, La Honda, agreed with the request to
delay approval until additional public input could be obtained. He
criticized the District for lack of concern toward the people in
the area.
Virginia McKim, 864 Cedro Way, Stanford, and Nat Sherrill , P.O. Box 4155 ,
Woodside, also supported the recommendation to delay a decision on
the proposed parking area.
Ellie Huggins , 824 San Francisco Court, Stanford, urged the District
to find a way for "this jewel" (Monte Bello Open Space Preserve)
to be opened for the public to enjoy.
Mark Schneider, P.O. Box 343 , La Honda, said that the proposed
parking area was only technically out of Palo Alto' s jurisdiction
and Palo Alto should be involved in the decision making process for
the site . He also said that he opposed any development in the area
of the barn since staff had originally stated that the fault line
ran through it.
D. Woods pointed out that the area would not be developed and that it
is a flat area that could provide parking for horse trailers.
Geri Albers , 925 Arbor Road, Menlo Park, spoke on behalf of the
Plan and said she hoped that the Board would act quickly to open
this preserve to the public.
P. Obluda suggested using Los Trancos lot for parking, with the
riding ring area used for overflow parking.
M. Schneider pointed out that the original parking lot had what
they called landscape reserve, meaning 35 cars with 20 spaces for
overflow.
K. Duffy asked if there was a possibility for future expansion in
location "L" .
D. Woods said that "L" location had expansion capabilities for
approximately 15 cars, but the expansion area would fall under
Palo Alto' s jurisdiction.
M. Schneider asked how much earth would have to be moved and how
the amount compared with the different proposed sites.
D. Woods answered that 700 cubic yards would have to be moved, an
amount less than for site "G" . He added that the riding ring area
would require major excavation to make the access road.
N. Hanko said she felt the "OK Corral" had not been discussed to
the fullest extent by the Board and that there were ways of access
to this site other than the long road.
Meeting 81-11 Page Nine
D. Woods continued the presentation pointing out that the trails
plan has been developed to utilize a lot of existing old roads
and trails. He said the Stevens Creek Nature Trail would have a
5% grade to allow the handicapped and physically limited easier
access into the Canyon Road Area.
D. Wendin questioned the wording in the description of the Geology
Trail, saying the statement, "This trail would not be intended for
general public use , " would be misleading.
R. Bishop suggested changing the wording and deleting the words ,
"general public use" , noting it would be open to individual hikers.
H. Haeussler asked if horses would be restricted on the trails and
why there were no trails proposed on the west side of the preserve.
D. Woods explained that the west side of the preserve had a number
of Douglas firs and sensitive soils.
M. Schneider objected to the Geology Trail because of the geologi-
cally sensitive nature of the proposed area and because it would
be developed to serve only geologists.
P. Obluda said that the public was being asked to "rubber stamp"
the Board proposal and that it is unfair to assume that the silence
of the public meant approval .
D. Woods said that at the beginning of the planning process for
this area, a neighborhood meeting was held and notices were sent
to local residents. As a result of that meeting people were selected,
representing each of the viewpoints , to hike the trails , to comment
and to provide input into the planning process.
D. Woods continued the presentation of the Use and Management Plan,
explaining that the primary signing would be at the proposed parking
area. Trail signs would be placed on trails in appropriate locations .
He said the campground element had already been approved and staff
is in the process of obtaining permits from the City of Palo Alto.
He said staff had received approval from the Board to remove the
cisterns above the sag pond, the cabin, and the free standing fireplace.
He said staff is proposing that a portable, recirculating toilet
be installed near the proposed campground and that another restroom
that would accommodate the physically limited was proposed near
the parking area.
S. Sessions commented on the natural resource management of the area,
saying that Phase I of the fire management plan had been completed
and plans for fire management for the next seven years had been
tentatively laid out. He said that attempts at staff level had
been made to contact Palo Alto about the drainage erosion from
the Palo Alto water tank. He added that staff is recommending
that a letter from the President of the Board of Directors be
sent to the Palo Alto City Council asking for a total restoration
of the eroded area and asking Palo Alto staff to address the problem
of possible continued erosion.
S. Sessions said staff was recommending that what was formerly
three areas (Page Mill Road, Black Mountain, and Picchetti Ranch)
Meeting 81-11 Page Ten
be addressed as two areas : Page Mill Road Area (Page Mill Road
and Black Mountain) and the Picchetti Ranch Area, which would in-
clude additions in that area. He said staff was requesting that
the Board of Directors adopt the Use and Management Plan as pre-
sented and authorize staff to implement the Plan.
K. Duffy referred to S . Sessions ' s comment on the agricultural
portion of the plan, noting that staff may need more policy guidance
and asked what direction the Board should be taking.
H. Grench said that this issue had been brought up at previous site
emphasis meetings and present policy was not clear. He said
that the Board needs to further define the policy.
M. Schneider asked what was proposed for demolition.
S. Sessions responded that the existing chimney, the cabin, two
cisterns and the spring box are to be demolished.
M. Schneider pointed out that there was a cistern on the hill with
no cover that apparently was not included in the recommendation,
and recommended that the safety hazards involved be taken care of
as soon as possible and that the spring box be left intact. He
objected to the demolition of the spring box, saying that it is a
usable water source and urged the Board to delay adopting the Use
and Management Plan and call for the formation of a local neighbor-
hood committee to make recommendations .
P. Obluda also objected to the removal of the spring box and the
two cisterns, saying that the spring box was a very beautiful , holy
place and to disturb that area and the trees around it would tear
the heart out of the place.
Doni Hubbard, 25228 LaLoma Drive, Los Altos Hills , asked if the
discing and reseeding of some of the trails would mean no trails
in certain areas, and how much of the Stevens Creek Nature Trail
would be closed to equestrians .
D. Woods replied that the discing and reseeding did not result in
any loss of trails or access and added that, because of the sen-
sitive nature of the terrain, the Stevens Creek Nature Trail
would accommodate only hikers .
D. Hubbard asked if there would be any creek crossing for horsemen
in this area and if this trail proposal represented a net loss of
trails open to horsemen.
D. Woods said that in that particular area there would not be any
creek crossing for horsemen, but that there would be no net loss
of equestrian trails.
D. Hubbard recommended that a decision be delayed on the Use and
Management Plan which would allow for input from the recently
formed Trails Council .
D. Wendin suggested that the discussion of the Use and Management
Plan be continued to the next Board Meeting in three weeks and
asked that comments be directed to four areas : 1) the trails plan,
2) the demolition element, 3) the geology trail , and 4) the proposed
Meeting 81-11 Page Eleven
parking area "L" . He urged members of the public to submit written
comments about the Plan to the District.
N. Hanko said that she would make herself available to the public
for tours of the proposed site for people who would like to view
areas being discussed, and voiced her support of the proposed
delay in the discussion.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that discussion of the Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve Use and Management Plan be continued to
the May 13 , 1981 meeting. R. Bishop seconded the motion.
Discussion: Discussion centered on whether the item should
be postponed three weeks or five weeks.
Amended Motion: D. Wendin amended his previous motion to delay
discussion and approval on the Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve Use and Management Plan until the
meeting of May 27 , 1981. R. Bishop seconded the
amended motion. The amended motion carried unanimously.
K. Duffy recommended that the safety measures pertaining to the
demolition portion of the plan be carried out as soon as possible,
but that the spring box be made safe and not be demolished.
Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board reconsider the demolition of
the spring box. N. Hanko seconded the motion. R. Bishop
called for a roll call vote. The motion did not carry on
the following vote :
Noes : R. Bishop, E. Shelley, H. Turner
Ayes : K. Duffy , D. Wendin, N. Hanko
Absent: B. Green
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the President of the Board of Directors
be given the authority to call a special meeting for the
purpose of a public tour of the Monte Bello Open Space
Preserve and the areas being discussion. E. Shelley
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
A list was circulated through the room for the purpose of learning
who would be interested in taking the suggested tour.
Viii. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
C. Issues and Questions from Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops - Ranger Ride-Along Program
Motion: D. Wendin moved the consideration of the Ranger Ride-Along
Program be continued to the next meeting when all Board
members were present. H. Turner seconded the motion. The
motion passed unanimously.
Meeting 81-11 age Twelve
IX. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
H. Grench reported AB 597 had been heard and passed by the
Assembly Local Government Committee on April 21 and would
probably go next to the Assembly's Ways and Means Committee.
He stated he and D. Wendin had been present for the bill 's
hearing, but it had not been necessary for them to testify,
since Assemblyman Sher was able to respond fully to the Committee.
H. Grench stated he had delivered the Board' s Resolution of
Appreciation to Dominic Cortese, and D. Wendin had presented
the Board 's Resolution of Appreciation to Byron Sher while
in Sacramento.
H. Grench noted one member of the Budget Committee would
not be able to attend the Committee's next three meetings
and asked if any other Board member would like to attend.
Dave Bennion, 1310 Bay Laurel Drive, Menlo Park, referring to
the incorrect date that had appeared on the agenda, stated
the Public Notification Committee might want to consider
procedures relating to inaccurate information included on
the material sent to the public about Board meetings .
S . Sessions reported that 2000 feet of the Monte Bello Open
Space Preserve fence along Page Mill Road had been destroyed,
costing the District approximately $1500 in materials and
labor to replace it.
S. Sessions stated he and D. Wendin had attended the St. Joseph 's
Avenue neighborhood workshop, organized by the Los Altos
City Council, on Tuesday, April 21. He noted that Santa
Clara County representatives were present, that information
gathered would be used by the Council in trying to solve
the parking problem, and that one of the solutions considered
was to prohibit parking except for the residents along St. Joseph' s
Avenue who would have a type of residential parking sticker.
S. Sessions said the next meeting of the newly formed trails
council would be held on May 4 and noted he thought represen-
tatives of the group would, at the next Board meeting, address
the Board and ask for District recognition.
C. MacDonald stated the next issue of Openspace would be
ready for distribution on Monday, April 27.
K. Duffy stated she and C. Britton had attended the April 20
meeting of the Los Gatos Town Council at which the Council
approved the Joint Powers Agreement with the District for the
acquisition of the proposed Los Gatos Creek Park. She stated
the Council, by a 4-1 vote , approved, at the same meeting, a
Resolution of Necessity for the acquisition of the Novitiate
property.
INFORMAT I-ONAL- PORTS
H. Grench_ re.ported on AB 597 which had been heard and passe-d
by the Assemb _..Local
Meeting 81-11 Page Thirteen
X. CLAIMS
Motion: D. Wendin moved the approval of the revised claims ,
C-81- 9 , dated April 22, 1981. E. Shelley seconded
the motion.
Discussion: D. Wendin stated Claim 2087 did not
include those personal expenses he paid for the trip to
Sacramento for AB 597's hearing. J. Fiddes pointed
out that the revised claims had been corrected to
indicate the period of litigation services for
S. Norton (Claim 2069) was from January 14 , 1980
to April 10, 1981. The motion passed unanimously.
XI. CLOSED SESSION
The Board recessed to Closed Session at 12 :10 A.M. , Thursday,
April 23, 1981.
XII .ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 1:08 A.M.
Jean H. Fiddes
Iris Youngs