Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19850424 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Meeting 85-10 IV MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS April 24 , 1985 MINUTES I. ROLL CALL President Teena Henshaw called the meeting to order at 7 : 37 P.M. Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Teena Henshaw, Edward Shelley, Nonette Hanko, and Harry Turner. Richard Bishop arrived at 7 :40. Personnel Present: Craig Britton, David Hansen, Jean Fiddes, Stanley Norton, Michael Foster and Lea Brown. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. March 13, 1985 T. Henshaw stated the motion to approve the minutes of March 13 had been tabled to allow members of the public to submit written statements to the Board for review and consideration. She said statements were to be submitted if members of the public felt their statements made at the March 13 meeting had been inaccurately reflected in the minutes. No written statements were submitted for the Board' s review and consideration. Motion: E. Shelley moved the Board consider the approval of the March 13 minutes. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: N. Hanko noted she had requested at the previous meeting that the word "use" be changed to "acquisition" on page 4, paragraph 2. The motion to approve the minutes passed 6 to 0. B. March 27, 1985 Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board approve the minutes of March 27, 1985. N. Hanko seconded the motion. Discussion: Jim Warren, 345 Swett Road, Woodside, said the name June Genis should be June Janis in the March 13 ` minutes under Oral Communications. e_ The motion was passed 5 to 0 with E. Shelley abstaining from the vote since he had not attended the March 27 meeting. C. April 10, 1985 Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board approve the minutes of April 10, 1985. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: N. Hanko questioned T. Henshaw' s response on page two under approval of March 30, 1985 minutes. T. Henshaw requested the words "agreed to the request" be replaced by "said individual Board members could pro- vide written statements. " Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin Page two K. Duffy stated the statement on page 5, "N. Hanko asked staff to investigate annexation procedures and report back to the Board with a written report" and the statement on page 6 "E. Shelley asked for a report from staff at the next meeting or two on what the Board' s options are now and what they would have been earlier in the process" should be amended to indicate they were consensus statements of the Board. The motion passed 7 to 0. Jean Fiddes informed the Board that there were no tapes available for the April 10 meeting. III. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS L. Brown stated the Board had received the following written communications : 1) letters from Earl Gilley, 110 Escanyo Way, Portola Valley dated April 21, 1985; James Goeser, 222 Frances Lane, San Carlos dated April 22 , 1985; R. Dove, 633 Palma,El Granada, dated April 22, 1985; and Cynthia Schwabacher, P. O. Box 620067, Woodside dated April 17, 1985 stating that the District should pur- chase land adjacent to Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve that is slated for development. Mr. Goeser also stated that the District needs to repair its political fences; 2) a letter from Leslie Wadsworth of 22400 Skyline Blvd. Box 22 , La Honda, dated April 16, 1985 regarding the Skyline Ridge Master Plan and urging staff to give priority to fire prevention measures and to establishing adequate water system hydrants in Phase 1 as a first priority. She asked staff to investigate alternatives which would eliminate parking lots along the Skyline Scenic Corridor and to study methods to mitigate traffic problems; 3) letter from Edward Nelson, P. O. Box 705, Palo Alto, dated April 17 , 1985 regarding his previous letter of March 26 , 1985 concerning a recorded easement of right-of-way of use of Grandview Drive and Espinoza Road. A response dated April 19 from David Hansen was included in the packet; 4) letter from Stephen Wolf, P. O. Box 322A, Star Rt. 2 , La Honda, dated April 11, 1985 requesting the District to address the weekend traffic problems on Skyline Boulevard and that the District work with various agencies including the California Highway Patrol and the Sheriff' s office on the problem; 5) a letter from Anthony Such of 22306 Skyline Boulevard, La Honda, dated March 29, 1985 stating his opposition to the District' s annexation of property, to the use of eminent domain, to Closed Sessions, and to the method the District used to implement the Brown Act. He stated he felt Closed Sessions should be limited to litigation matters. A reply dated April 18 from Craig Britton, Assistant General Manager addressed some of Mr. Such' s comments. N. Hanko stated she had received a memorandum from H. Turner regarding the Open Space Management Budget Guidelines. H. Turner clarified he had prepared the memorandum for consideration by the Budget Committee. Discussion centered on Mr. Such' s letter and whether C. Britton should have responded to the letter prior to its consideration by the Board. N. Hanko said the Board should address how such letters should be handled procedurally, and T. Henshaw stated she would write to inform Mr. Such of the next public workshop. I Page three Tom Kavanaugh, 1726 Spring Street, Mountain View, questioned the Board about the use of District stationery by a member of the Board to express a personal opinion. T. Henshaw stated she would respond to Mr. Kavanaugh' s question later in the meeting. N. Hanko requested additional information regarding Mr. Nelson' s letter and the Espinosa and Grandview Road situation. D. Hansen said he would be mailing an informational report on the matter. T. Henshaw and N. Hanko expressed their support for the ideas expressed in Mr. Wolf' s letter. T. Henshaw stated she would send a letter of response to Mr. Wolf and would place an item on a future agenda to discuss the traffic safety issues and what action the District could take. T. Henshaw stated the Board had been handed the following written communications at the beginning of the meeting: 1) a letter, dated April 24, 1985 from Sandra Touchatt, P. O. Box 254, Redwood City, requesting that the District assure the Portola Heights Property Owners Association in writing that the Association governs the private road to Skyline Boulevard and that, if the District is unable to do so, a copy of a memorandum of leqal opinion that clearly established the District' s position be sent to the Association; 2) a letter, undated, from Cliff Jenkins, stating that he wanted to withdraw his remaining property from consideration for annexation by the District; and 3) a letter, dated April 21, 1985, from Cliff Jenkins, Jim A. and Judi Lohr, Barbara Jo and Robert C. Quinn, 22400 Skyline Boulevard, La Honda, stating that they did not wish to have their properties or residences annexed into the District. Bill Guenther, 22400 Skyline Blvd, La Honda, addressed the Board and stated that he did not want his property included in the District' s annexation. T. Henshaw requested that staff report back to the Board on the use of the Portola Heights Road and the District' s responsibilities regarding the road. She requested that Legal Counsel prepare a legal opinion for the Board on the matter and that the information be presented to the Board in Public Session for consideration. The material presented to the Board was to include a draft response to the Association for Board review and consideration. Discussion centered on the Midpeninsula Preserves 1985 annexation and the impact of the communications from Mr. Guenther, Mr. Jenkins, Mr. and Mrs. Lohr, and Mr. and Mrs. Quinn. C. Britton stated that the Santa Clara County LAFCO would be discussing the matter at their May 8 meeting, the same date as the Board' s next meeting. C. Britton noted that if the Board wanted to take any action concerning annexation they would have to place it on the agenda as an emergency item. Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board add the annexation matter to the agenda as an emergency item because of the impact of the written communications received earlier in the meeting and the timing of the LAFCO meeting. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Page four IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA C. Britton requested that an emergency item, Emergency Authorization to Purchase Materials for Rancho San Antonio Water Project, be added to the agenda under New Business with Action Requested. He said the reason for the request was that the cost of materials involved ex- ceeded $10,000 and that the order had inadvertently been placed by staff without Board authorization. He stated that the order could be cancelled if the Board did not want to consider the matter as an emergency item. Motion: H. Turner moved that the Board add the item concerning the purchase of materials for the Rancho San Antonio Water Project on the agenda for the reasons stated by C. Britton. K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 1 with N. Hanko voting against the motion. T. Henshaw stated that the amended agenda, including the two emergency items, was adopted by Board consensus. V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Sandra Touchatt invited the members of the Board to tour Portola Heights area on May 5. T. Henshaw stated that she had discussed the tour with Mrs. Touchatt and that she would be attending on May 5. R. Bishop and D. Wendin said they would also attend. T. Henshaw said that the afternoon would include a tour with representatives of the South Skyline Association. T. Kavanaugh requested that his property not be talked about without his being present and requested that his name be removed from the listing of property owners. J. Warren, 345 Swett, Woodside, said he was opposed to the eminent domain moratorium proposed by H. Turner in his April 23 memorandum. He distributed a copy of the Country Almanac to the Board in which he had a letter to the editor about the District and apologized to H. Turner about incorrectly referring to him as a Stanford attorney. Mr. Warren asked if all District employees were required to sign a disclosure agreement and asked if plans for the Skyline Ridge Master Plan had been submitted to the San Mateo Planning Commission for approval. He asked for comparables for the General Manager's salary for 1982 , 1983 and 1984. C. Britton responded that only certain employees are required to sign an employment agreement.* D. Hansen explained the reasons the Skyline Ridge Master Plan did not have to be submitted to the Planning Commission. T. Henshaw said she would raise the question of the General Manager' s salary comparables at a Budget Committee meeting. )C44�md ar, .-k - William Obermayer, 3200 Long Ridge Road, La Honda, saidsince there was a good spring and well at the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve, the installation of a water tank could provide fire protection. He said that he is working on a map of the Portola Heights area so that it could be marked on the Master Plan as a rural residential community and that he felt the District was receiving biased legal information regarding relocation aid to the Quinns. Page five C. Britton responded that the District had bought the property from Sandra Quinn and was not responsible for relocating her brother under the terms of the agreement. He said he had been working with both parties to reach some type of compromise. Bob Fisse, representing the South Skyline Association, requested information concerning the recall of directors. S. Norton responded that the Elections Code included a section on recall. VI. OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Resolution Disapproving Annexation Entitled "Sempervirens No. 687-A" (Memorandum M-85-65 of April 18, 1985) Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board adopt Resolution 85-30, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Disapproving the Annexation of Territory Designated as "Sempervirens Annexation No. 687-A" Into This District. E . Shelley seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. T. Henshaw requested that the cover letter to the Santa Cruz County LAFCO that would accompany this resolution detail the reasons the Board had disapproved the annexation at its previous meeting. B. April 17 Workshop Follow-Up (Memorandum M-85-66 of April 19, 1985) T. Henshaw stated the next public workshop would be held on Saturday, May 4 and the Board would be receiving comments on implementation of the Brown Act, acquisition of land outside the District' s boundaries, and annexation of land. She stated the Board consensus that the same format would be used as at the April 17 workshop. H. Turner stated that he, N. Hanko, and R. Bishop would be meeting on May 2 at 8 :00 P.M. to work on their Committee assignment of providing the Board with a range of alternatives regarding the use of eminent domain. Discussion centered on whether the Committee meeting should be open to members of the public and whether the public should be active participants or observers only. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board approve having the Committee meeting scheduled for May 2 an open meeting to members of the public for the purpose of observation only. H. Turner seconded the motion. Discussion: Discussion centered on the Committee' s exact charge. D. Wendin subsequently stated that since the Committee would be returning to the Board with a full range of alternatives he did not feel it necessary for the meeting to be open to the public. S. Norton stated that since the Committee was not a standing committee it did not need to be publicly noticed. H. Turner stated his support for having public observers at the meeting. Members of the public Jim Warren, Jay Thorwaldson, Beez Jones, and Tom Kavanaugh expressed their support for the Committee meeting being open to members of the public. Robert Fisse and Charles Touchatt stated they did not feel Page six The Committee meeting should be noticed and open to members of the public. The motion passed on the following vote: - Ayes: ,K. Duffy, D. Wendin, E. Shelley, N. Hanko, T. Henshaw and R. Bishop. tNoes: H. Turner,A AAk CA4111" T. Henshaw requested that the members of the Board receive a copy of Open Meeting Laws. Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board schedule a Special Meeting to be held at 9 :00 A.M. Saturday, May 4 , 1985 at Las Lomitas School, 299 Alameda de las Pulgas, Atherton for the purposes of discussing implementation of the Brown Act, acquisition of land outside the District' s boundaries, and annexations. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. T. Henshaw stated the Special Meeting would conclude at 11: 30 A.M. C. Search for Permanent District Office Headquarters - Financial Analysis of Mountain View Site (Memorandum M-85-64 of April 17 , 1985) C. Britton reviewed the staff report noting that the financial analysis indicated that building facilities at the Mountain View location became equal to renting about eight years after commencement and from then on increased its advantage. He stated that the additional staff time required to oversee the design and construction of a new facility could be handled at the current staff level. M. Foster discussed the issuance of certificates of participation to finance the office con- struction project and said such certificates would not count against the additional debt covenant in the District' s 1982 and 1985 Note issue. C. Britton stated the City of Mountain View would require an all-cash payment for the property at the southwest corner of Bailey and Latham Streets. ,4mc T. Henshaw stated the Cline School site on Ortega Street was for sale and suggested buying the site and selling off part of the land. T. Kavanaugh requested that all meetings of the Office Space Committee be open to the public. R. Bishop stated that as a matter of policy the District should continue to rent its office space for the following reasons: more flexibility when renting in terms of increases or decreases in the amount of office space required; District's money should be spent on acquisition; the amount of Board and staff time involved in con- structing a new facility; creating the image of building a monument; and the need for a construction superintendent during all phases of construction. Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board approve the recommendations in memorandum M-85-64 stating: 1) staff would continue to work with the Committee which would monitor progress and help to formulate recommendations to the full Board, 2) on first priority basis, District staff would pursue the purchase of the City of Mountain View site at the southwest corner of Bailey and Latham streets ; staff is to return with progress reports and necessary hiring of consultants Page seven if any contract were to exceed $10, 000, and 4) on a second priority basis, staff will continue to search for other possible office site locations or land and/or buildings for lease and/or purchase for permanent use. K. Duffy seconded the motion. Discussion: D. Wendin stated that from the policy and political point of view, no Board members should vote in favor of the motion if at a later date they were not planning to support the idea of the District purchasing the Mountain View site and constructing a facility. The motion passed on the following vote : Ayes: K. Duffy, D. Wendin, E. Shelley, T. Henshaw, and H. Turner. Noes: N. Hanko and R. Bishop. VII. NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED A. Appointment of Auditor for 1984-1985 Fiscal Year (Memorandum M-85-56 of April 19, 1985) M. Foster stated that he was not recommending a change in auditors for the coming audit. He said that Deloitte, Haskins and Sells' estimated fee of $6 ,200 for the 1984-1985 audit was a 10. 7% increase over the previous year' s standard fee and appeared reasonable compared to the competitive quotes obtained previously and to the level of service provided by the firm. In response to a question from E. Shelley regarding changing auditors, M. Foster stated that it was easier to fool a new auditor and that audit continuity was important. Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board appoint Delcitte, Haskins and Sells as the District' s auditors for the fiscal year 1984-1985. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. B. Emergency Item - Midpeninsula Preserves 1985 Annexation T. Henshaw stated that this item had been placed on the agenda as an emergency item because of the written communications received earlier in the meeting from the private landowners involved who were withdrawing their consent to the annexation. She said the Board needed to decide what it should do, as a result of the letters, relative to the Santa Clara LAFCO meeting on May 8 at which the annexation would be discussed. Discussion centered on what actions the District could take, including amending the application before LAFCO or asking for a continuation and rehearing of the matter. Directors Duffy, Bishop, Turner and Wendin said that the District should not annex private land when the property owners do not consent to the annexation. Bill Guenther and Bill Sorich stated that Peter' s Creek should be the natural boundary between the District and privately owned land in the area. William Obermayer stated that the District should not annex any land until the conclusion of the public workshops. Page eight Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board direct staff to amend the annexation request before LAFCO to include only land owned in fee by the District. R. Bishop seconded the motion. Discussion: Carol Doose stated that members of the public should be able to address the annexation subject before the Board took any action. D. Wendin responded the actual annexation would not occur until after the public workshops were completed since the Board could schedule when they would be heard. N. Hanko stated she would vote against the motion out of principle since she felt the matter should be continued by LAFCO until the District' s annexation policies were in place. In response to a question from Jim Warren, S. Norton discussed the questions regarding the enforceability of District ordinances on non-annexed land. In response to a question from T. Kavanaugh, T. Henshaw explained why Santa Clara County LAFCO had jurisdiction in the matter. D. Wendin stated that he supported N. Hanko' s decision, noting that it was not necessary to amend the annexation request until the public workshops were complete and that he favored a continuance of the item. E. Shelley spoke in favor of the motion since District-owned land was involved. Charles Touchatt said that the District should not buy land outside of its boundaries. H. Turner pointed out that if the Board did not decide to amend the annexation, LAFCO could hear the matter and vote in favor of it, thus annexing the private property. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board direct staff to request that LAFCO continue the matter until after discussions resulting from the public workshop were complete. N. Hanko seconded the motion. Discussion: R. Bishop stated he would vote against the motion since he did not feel there were objections to annexing land owned by the District. E. Shelley stated he would not support the motion. The motion passed on the following vote: Ayes : K. Duffy, D. Wendin, H. Turner, and N. Hanko Noes : E. Shelley, R. Bishop, and T. Henshaw C. Emergency Authorization to Purchase Materials for Rancho San Antonio Water Project (Memorandum M-85-68 of April 24 , 1985) D. Hansen stated that staff had inadvertently exceeded their purchase authorization limit when ordering the materials for the water , project, a part of the fire protection plan for Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve that was approved in the Preserve' s use and management plan. He noted that the order could be cancelled and said that the City of Mountain View will be reimbursing the District for approximately one-third of the project cost. Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board select the material bid from Roberts & Brune and authorized the Assistant General Manager/General Manager to purchase materials for the Page nine Rancho San Antonio Water Project in the amount not to exceed $14 ,000. D. Wendin seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0, with N. Hanko stating that although she voted in favor of adopting the motion, she felt that staff should secure proper authorizations in advance in the future. VIII . INFORMATIONAL REPORTS D. Wendin noted that Section 1. 43 of the Rules of Procedure stated that a written communication could be placed on an agenda for action. The members of the Board discussed procedural items they would like discussed at the next Board meeting, and T. Henshaw stated that the agenda item should cover distribution of written communications, use of District stationery by an individual Board member to express a personal opinion, and ways to shorten the length of a meeting so that Closed Sessions do not end so late in the evening. D. Hansen stated that he and H. Turner would be meeting at 7 : 30 P.M. on Thursday, April 25 at the Woodside Town Hall with the residents on Grandview and Espinosa Roads to discuss access and the road maintenance agreement. In reference to the written communication item earlier in the evening he briefed the Board on the contacts he had had with Mr. Nelson. D. Hansen stated that the Los Gatos Creek Park fence is 90% complete, but the entire project would not be completed for a couple of months because of surveying being done to locate an elusive property corner. C. Britton reported that the annexation matter before the San Mateo County LAFCO had been continued for 60 days. C. Britton reported on the May 21 field trip with the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors. In response to a question from R. Fisse, S. Norton stated that the District was not required to furnish transportation for members of the public. R. Bishop stated that he had represented the District at the 10th anniversary celebration of the Santa Clara County Trails and Pathways Committee. E. Shelley requested that staff report on the reasons so many of the trails at Edgewood County Park were closed to use. S. Norton announced that the litigation matter to be discussed by the Board in Closed Session concerned Hassler. IX. CLAIMS Motion: E. Shelley moved that the Board approve the revised claims 85-8 of April 24, 1985. R. Bishop seconded the motima. Discussion: In response to a question from T. Kavanaugh, C Britton stated that Charlotte MacDonald had been hired as a consultant and the amount on the claims list represented the work she had done as a consultant on the budget. The motion passed 7 to 0. Page ten X. CLOSED SESSION The Board recessed to Closed Session at 10 : 37 P.M. The Board re- convened to public session at 12 : 05 A.M. , Thursday, April 25, 1985, to announce that the Closed Session would be continued to Friday, May 3, 1985 at 1: 30 P.M. at the District office for further discussion of the Hassler litigation. XI. CONTINUED CLOSED SESSION The Board reconvened for the Continued Closed Session at 1:40 P.M. , Friday, May 3, 1985 at the District office. Directors Wendin, Henshaw, Turner, Hanko, and Duffy were present. XII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2 :20 P.M. , Friday, May 3, 1985. Jean Fiddes, District Clerk Lea Brown, Secretary CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF APRIL 24 , 1985 APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. April 24 , 1985 Motion: H. Turner moved that the Board approve the minutes of April 24 , 1985 . D. Wendin seconded the motion. Discussion: N . Hanko requested the following corrections : on page one, Item B, the name June Genis had been spelled correctly in the minutes of March 13 , 1985; on page four, paragraph 8 , the first sentence should read, "C. Britton responded that only those employees dealing with land acqui- sition are required to sign an employment agreement" ; and on page six, paragraph one , the vote for the April 17 Workshop Follow-Up should read "Aye: 11 Turner; and Noes : K. Duffy, D. Wendin, E. Shelley, N. Hanko, T. Henshaw, and R. Bishop. " T. Henshaw stated that the second paragraph of Item C on page six should be corrected to say that she suggested the District look into buying the Klein School site and selling off part of the land. She noted the school ' s name had been misspelled. The minutes were approved 7 to 0 as corrected.