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.