Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19830126 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) M ng 83-2 or 0 aw MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS JANUARY 26 , 1983 MINUTES I. ROLL CALL President Barbara Green called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 P.M. Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Barbara Green, Edward Shelley, Nonette Hanko, and Harry Turner. Richard Bishop arrived at 7 : 38 P.M. Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, David Hansen, Charlotte MacDonald, Jean Fiddes , William Tannenbaum, Del Woods, Alice Watt, and Mary Gundert. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A) January 12, 1983 Motion: E. Shelley moved the approval of the minutes of January 12 , 1983. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS J. Fiddes stated the following written communications had been received : 1) a letter, dated January 15, 1983 , from Ulrich Kaempf of Los Altos, favoring prohibiting dogs on District preserves; and 2) a letter, dated January 18 , 1933, from Henry R. Hayes of Woodside, favoring allowing dogs on District preserves and discussing specific field training requirements for retrievers. R. Bishop stated both letters had been forwarded to the members of the Dog Committee for their January 19 meeting, and B. Green requested both names be added to the dog notification list. IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA B. Green indicated the agenda was adopted as presented by Board consensus. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications. VI . OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED K) Program Evaivation for 1982-83 and Setting of Priorities for 1983-84 H. Grench reviewed the schedule for the preparation of the Action Plan for the 1983-84 fiscal year, and he, C. Britton, D. Hansen, and C. MacDonald, referring to memorandum M-83-3 of December 21, 1982 , discussed the changes in the proposed objectives and key projects and activities in their respective programs and subprograms for the 1983-84 fiscal year. B. Green stated the Board' s consensus that the last portion of the proposed objective for the Public Participation and Education Subprogram be amended to read " . . . to inform and educate the constituency about the District' s sites, programs and goals" . Meeting 83-2 Page Two Motion: E. Shelley moved the Board approve the progress report and tentatively adopt the key projects and activities for 1983-84 . H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The Board discussed holding a workshop for the Board and staff on the topic of the District' s next ten years. N. Hanko suggested the workshop be held in the summer. B. Green stated there was a Board consensus to hold such a workshop and said she would later appoint a sub-committee of the Board to work with staff on the format and content of the workshop. B) Notice of Determination for a Negative Declaration for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Demonstration Burn D. Hansen reviewed memorandum M-83-13 , dated Janaury 17 , 1983 , and he and A. Watt explained slides depicting the area to be burnt. D. Hansen noted the short term negative impacts were potential only during the burn period and that staff had determined that a Negative Declaration was warranted for the project. Discussion followed regarding the Environmental Assessment. Motion: H. Turner moved the Board approve the Negative Declaration for the project. E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. D. Wendin stated he felt staff should not allow visual impact to be the only reason for not conducting a second burn later in the spring on the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve. VII .NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A) "The Hill" Committee Requests 11. Grench, referring to memorandum M-83-14A of January 24 , 1983 , discussed the reasons he could not interpret the Board ' s policies regarding the acquisition of urban open space of regional significance as being ful- filled by the property known as The Hill. He recommended the Board support the local communities ' efforts to preserve The Hill as permanent open space, but, due to the land not qualifying under guiding District acquisition policies , the Board not appropriate any District funds for acquisition or maintenance of the property. H. Turner reviewed in detail his letter of January 26 , 1983 to the members of the Board regarding 1) endorsement and support of the efforts of local constituencies and political leadership in the vicinity of The Hill to assemble the resources and to buy the full fee title of the entire property from a willing seller at a mutually agreed upon fair market price; and 2) his suggestion the Board specify a grant amount in the range of $100 , 000 to $ 250 , 000 , according to what the Board believes would be the most cost-effective use of District funds. He said he felt the appro- priation of funds for the project was consistent with the Board ' s ex- ception policy for acquisition of urban open space of regional significance because of the uncommon public support to preserve the property, the property' s regional attraction for nature study, the property ' s regional access , and its unusual natural value. He proposed that in order for District funds to be applied, the seller of the property must be willing, the entire 38 acres must be acquired, and the use of the property must be publicly accessible open space. H. Turner stated he felt it would be appropriate for the District to assist in the preparation of a use and management plan for The Hill, but noted the implementation of the plan should be the responsibility of a local jurisdiction and suggested The Hill Committee look first to Menlo Park for management of the property. Page Three He added the District should send letters to Menlo Park and San Mateo County informing them of any District action and the reasons for such action. He stated that the Board should clearly explain to members of the public that its actions were consistent with established, previously existing policy regarding exceptional acquisition of urban open space and said the Board should strive to avoid the possible misinterpretation that the District was embarking on a new policy to participate in un- developed land acquisition in urban areas throughout the District. B. Green stated the Board might want to attach strict criteria to any funds allocated for The Hill project so as to preclude other groups or organizations interested in preserving undeveloped urban land from assuming The Hill support was a precedent set by the Board. N. Hanko stated she felt The Hill was an exception to the policy of not acquiring urban open space because of its inherent open space nature, possible trail links from Menlo Park and Atherton to a Sand Hill Trail and perhaps connections to Stanford land. She said she felt the property had a regional significance since it was in an unincorporated part of San Mateo County and did not fall under any single jurisdiction. She said the Board should endorse the efforts to acquire the property, con- tribute up to 50 of the assessment amount or $250 , 000 to the project, and meet in brainstorming sessions with County representatives to determine the best way to have the property managed. Larry Jensen, The Hill Committee' s attorney on the establishment of the assessment district, discussed the financial aspects of the project. He noted more than $5 million was reauired to purchase the property and said that, if the assessment were done on a parcel by parcel basis , the assessment would be in the order of $100 per year for 20 years , or approximately $700 per parcel . Phyllis Cangemi , speaking in behalf of The Hill Committee, discussed her letter of January 20 , 1983 to the Board which requested the Board 1) consider endorsing the community effort to purchase The Hill; 2) consider a grant of $250 , 000 toward the purchase of the property should the formation of the assessment district be successful; and 3) consider very seriously the acceptance of The Hill into the District, with this acceptance being contingent upon a satisfactory arrangement between the District and the community purchasing the property regarding the manage- ment of the property. She noted the psychological effect of a contribution from the District would greatly boost the morale of the people in the communities involved who were interested in preserving The Hill. D. Wendin said he basically supported going ahead with the District making a token contribution to the acquisition since he felt the District should help promote organized citizens ' efforts to acquire appropriate urban open space. He cited the following reasons : 1) the passage of Proposition 13; 2) the inability of jurisdictions to tax themselves in order to purchase a piece of property like The Hill and thus having to rely on the formation of special assessment districts in order to raise the funds to acquire a piece of urban open space; and 3) the District was a relatively solvent agency at this time. He noted he did not know what the proper amount of money was to contribute to the acquisition of The Hill and suggested the District not makes its total contribution at one time. He said he was not afraid of any precedent the Board might be setting in support of the efforts to acquire The Hill since he felt the precedent the Board was setting was not buying lands like The Hill , but rather making a token contribution to a local group working on a well organized local project to acquire urban open space. He said since this was a local project the question of who would manage the property must be addressed, adding the District should not manage the property. A I 0000� b MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM Page Four E. Shelley stated it was too early to make any commitment on the specific amount of District funds for this project, noting that if the Board did approve funds for the project, the amount should be a certain percentage of the project money not to exceed a specific dollar amount. He added that if funds are appropriated for the project, tight limits should be set on use of the funds, and said, from the management standpoint, he was totally unwilling for the District to make any commitment for any- thing other than advise on possible management planning. R. Bishop stated his support for the District contributing funds for the acquisition of the property because 1) the property had been an important piece of land to the people of the area for many years , 2) it had a sub- regional significance to Menlo Park, Atherton, and the University Heights area, 3) it served to define urban form in the area as a divider of three communities; 4) the people in the area had supported the annexation of the area to the District, and 5) the property served as a visual backdrop. He stated he supported E. Shelley' s recommendation that a certain percentage of money, not to exceed a maximum amount, be allocated for the project, and that he did not feel the Board was setting a precedent regarding the acquisition of urban open space since he felt this was a very particular urban open space acquisition situation. He said he favored a total commitment of District funds at the beginning of the project. K. Duffy stated she could support the project, but noted she felt manage- ment of the property would be a problem and suggested the District funds appropriated for the project be used for management of the property and that the Board brainstorm to determine the best use of District funds . Phyllis Cangemi stated she felt the people in the communities were looking for a responsible body, like the District, to oversee what was going on with the project and stated that, in terms of management, a creative approach to co-managing the property with the people of the community was being sought from the District. Ernie Ramires, a District docent, noted The Hill property was very accessible to members of the community because of the proximity to a bus stop and said this was of particular importance to senior citizens in the area. Discussion then focused on holding a public meeting in Menlo Park in order for the Board to hear from members of the communities involved prior to making any commitment of District funds. Motion: N. Hanko moved the District Board endorse and support the efforts of local constituencies and political leadership in the vicinity of The Hill to assemble the resources and to buy the full fee title to the entire property from a willing seller at a mutually agreed upon price. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: N. Hanko moved the Board agree to contribute 5% , but not to exceed $250, 000 , for the purchase of the property contingent upon the successful formation of the assessment district. The motion died for lack of a second. Motion: D. Wendin moved the Board schedule a Special Meeting for a date to be selected by the President in Menlo Park to consider whether or not the District should contribute in some form up to 5% of the project not to exceed $250 , 000 and the role, if any, that the District should have in the management of the property after acquisition. E. Shelley seconded the motion. Page Five Discussion: H. -ench stated staff concer. were more directed toward an on-going management responsibility for the District rather than a one-time commitment of District funds for the project. K. Duffy questioned whether a public meeting to discuss The Hill was necessary. D. Wendin noted a public meeting was necessary in order to gather public input before making a commitment of public funds for the project and to discuss the Board' s immense concern for the management of the property. He noted he felt a majority of the Board members had indicated that the District should not take on the responsibility of the management of the property, and therefore, those individuals requesting the District ' s support should address the issue of how they propose the handle the management of the property. The motion passed on the following vote: Ayes : D. Wendin, B. Green, E. Shelley, N. Hanko, H. Turner, and R. Bishop. Noes: K. Duffy. N. Hanko noted a meeting was being held at the Peninsula Open Space Trust the next morning to discuss the formation of the special assessment district to acquire The Hill and said she felt staff should be directed to attend the meeting. B. Green noted a great deal of staff time could be consumed if staff were directed to attend all meetings concerning The Hill. H. Grench stated there would be staff in attendance at the January 27 meeting at P.O.S.T. Discussion then centered on the format of the staff report for the Special Meeting in Menlo Park. R. Bishop stated he felt the report should address possible options for management of the property. B. Green stated she felt the report should address what management alternatives and possibilities are, what needs to be done with the property, and what resources are available to do what needs to be done. D. Hansen noted that recommendations on the management of the property were dependent upon what type of activities the members of the community were interested in pursuing on the property. E. Shelley stated that, at a minimum, the report should address what staff felt the District could contribute in terms of management of the property and state the District' s position on management of the property. R. Bishop stated he agreed with E. Shelley' s recommendation for the staff report. N. Hanko stated the report should include creative thinking on ways the District could contribute a use and management plan for the property, but noted that the community itself should set up the endowment fund and pay for whatever management is necessary. She added she felt the individuals involved in the project were not looking to the District for financial support in terms of management of the property, but rather guidance in order to put together a management plan for the property based on what the members of the community wanted. The Board discussed the date and location for the Special Meeting. Phyllis Cangemi stated Las Lomitas School in Atherton would be a good location, and the Board decided the best date for the Special Meeting in Menlo Park was Wednesday, February 9 . Motion: D. Wendin moved the Board postpone its Regular Meeting of February 9 to February 16 . E. Shelley seconded the motion. Discussion: H. Grench noted it might not be necessary for the Board to hold two Regular Meetings in February. Motion to Amend: D. Wendin moved to amend his motion to cancel the February 9 Regular Meeting and to authorize the President to call a Special Meeting on February 16 if necessary. E. Shelley concurred with the wording change in the motion to amend. The amended motion passed unanimously. The Board recessed for a break at 10 : 27 P.M. and reconvened for the public meeting at 10 : 33 P.M. Page Six B) Authority to Negotiate for the Purchase of Surplus Federal Real Property Located on Mt. Umunhum and 14t. Thayer C. Britton reviewed report R-83-4 , dated January 20, 1983 , noting the Federal Government required the adoption of the resolution in order for staff to commence discussionsto purchase the designated property. Motion: K. Duffy moved the adoption of Resolution 83-2 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing the Commencement of Negotiations for Acquisition of Certain Surplus Real Property Located Within the District Boundaries (Manzanita Ridge Open Space Preserve - Federal Surplus Real Property (Almaden Air Force Station) Mt. Umunhum and Mt. Thayer) . D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. C) Los Trancos Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan D. Woods reviewed the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan (report R-83-3 of Janaury 6 , 1983) and showed slides to illustrate various points discussed in the report. N. Hanko noted the last paragraph on page two of the report should include the Arastra property when discussing regional trail connections, and questioned the description of the Preserve as a -site that was not highly emphasized. D. Woods responded the Preserve was in the middle of the range in the site emphasis scale that addressed potential for development, and he added staff considered the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve a "self-sustaining" preserve at this time. Motion: K. Duffy moved the tentative adoption of the revised use and management plan for the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve as contained in the staff report. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. D) Review of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Preserve Progress Report H. Turner, referring to memorandum M-83-15, dated January 21, 1983 , stated the Progress Report Review Committee had reviewed the draft text of the Progress Report, had given its approval to the basic content of the draft text, and had agreed to disband. N. Hanko requested the statement concerning pets on District preserves be amended to read "Preserve use by pets is restricted so wildlife can be observed under natural conditions" . The Board concurred with this wording change. Other changes mentioned by members of the Board included deletion of the words "pays off" , including the hire of the District' s first Land Manager and Land Acquisition Manager in the 1974 section, and minor wording changes . H. Grench stated the format and length of the ten year history section had not yet been finalized. Page Seven Motion: H. Turner moved the Board give its approval for the draft text of the Progress Report with the understanding there may be deletions or minor editorial changes. N. Hanko seconded the motion. Discussion: C. MacDonald clarified for the Board that the Peninsula Open Space Trust was planning to mail the Progress Report to all District residents. The motion passed unanimously. E) Appointment of Board Committees (Memorandum M-83-04, dated Janaury 14 , 1983) B. Green, with the Board' s concurrence, appointed H. Turner, D. Wendin, and E. Shelley to serve on the Budget Committee and R. Bishop,B. Green, and H. Turner to continue serving on the Legislative Committee. B. Green stated the Picchetti Winery Proposals Committee and the Thornewood Proposal Review Committee had previously been disbanded, noting K. Duffy and H. Turner had been appointed as Board representatives on the Picchetti Winery and Thornewood Restoration Committees . Discussion centered on whether the Structures Committee should be disbanded. N. Hanko stated she felt the Committee should not be disbanded so that it could review administrative guidelines for rental of District structures. D. Wendin suggested the members of the Structures Committee discuss among themselves whether or not the Committee should be disbanded, and E. Shelley requested the Board, at a convenient meeting in the future, address the question of whether to disband the Structures Committee. B. Green stated K. Duffy, N. Hanko, and E. Shelley should continue to serve on the Structures Committee until the question of disbanding the Committee was resolved. Motion: D. Wendin moved the Board disband the Redistricting Committee. E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. Green appointed D. Wendin to replace K. Duffy on the Office Space Committee. Motion: N. Hanko moved the Board disband the Windmill Pasture Liaison Committee. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: N. Hanko moved the Board disband the City Annexation Procedures Committee. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. Green stated she and N. Hanko would continue to serve on the Public Transportaion Committee. Motion: E. Shelley moved the Board disband the Progress Report Review Committee. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: H. Turner moved the formation of the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Upper House Proposal Criteria Formulation Committee. E. Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. Green appointed D. Wendin, E. Shelley, and N. Hanko to serve on the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Upper House Proposal Criteria Formulation Committee. Page Eight F) Revision of Authorized Signatoriesfor District Accounts and Safe Deposit Box J. Fiddes reviewed memorandum M-83-12 , dated January 17 , 1983, regarding the revision of authorized financial signatories as a result of the election of officers for 1983. Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-3, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Establishing Financial Instrument Signatories of the Dis- trict for Santa Clara County Accounts. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-4 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving Certificate of Authority of Officers (First Interstate Bank of California) . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-5, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Dis- trict Authorizing Signing and Endorsing Checks and Other Instruments for Savings Account (First Interstate Bank of California - Los Altos) . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-6 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Signing and Endorsing Checks and Other Instruments for Checking Account (First Interstate Bank of California - Los Altos) . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-7 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Establishing Signatories for Entering Safe Deposit Box (First Interstate Bank of California - Los Altos) . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. G) Renewal of Investment Authority (Memorandum M-83-10, dated January 11, 1983) Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of Resolution 83-8 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Certain Board Employees to Invest Temporarily Idle Funds in Securities Allowed by Government Code. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. VIII.INFORMATIONAL REPORTS K. Duffy stated she had made a presentation about the District to the Foothill Men' s Garden Club and had shown one of the District slideshows . She presented the Board with a $100 contribution to the District she - had received from one of the Club' s members. B. Green requested staff send a letter of thanks for the contribution. D. Hansen reported the District had been invited to participate in a Santa Cruz Mountain trails project by the Appalachian Mountain Club, discussed recent storm damage on District land, and said BCDC had approved the Lucky Acres subdivision in Menlo Park. Page Nine IX. CLAIMS Motion: E. Shelley moved the adoption of the revised claims 83-2 , dated Janaury 26, 1983 . R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. X. CLOSED SESSION The Board recessed to a Closed Session on land negotiation and litigation matters. XI . ADJOUR14MENT The Board reconvened to adjourn at 12 : 07 A.M. , Thursday, Janaury 27 , 1983 . Jean H. Fiddes District Clerk CORRECTIONS TO MINUTES OF II. APPROVAL OF :MINUTES January 26 , 1983 Motion: R. Bishop moved the approval of the minutes of January 26 , 1983 . E. Shelley seconded the motion. Discussion: H. Turner stated he would like to see the minutes reflect his recommendation that the District obtain an open space easement in order for District funds to be applied. The motion carried unanimously.