Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20030605 - Minutes - Board of Directors (BOD) Regional Open Space ----------- MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT I i' (, ',0 YLARS OF OVFN SPA(A PUFSLIRVATION Meeting 03-12 SPECIAL MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS June 5, 2003 MINUTES L ROLL CALL President N. Hanko called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Members Present: Jed Cyr(arrived at 7:04 p.m.), Mary Davey, Larry Hassett,Deane Little, Pete Siemens, Ken Nitz, and Nonette Hanko Members Absent: None Staff Present: Craig Britton, S. Schectman, Sally Thielfoldt, John Escobar, Cathy Woodbury, Stephanie Jensen, John Maciel, Mike Williams, Del Woods, Lisa Zadek, Anne Koletzke, Kristi Webb, Mike Newburn, David Sanguinetti, Mike Howard, Andrew Martin, Mark Cassereto, Tom Fischer, Carl Oosterman, Matt Freeman, Paul McKowan' Elaina Cuzick Consultants Present: Thomas Reid, Thomas Reid Associates; Patrick Miller, 2M Associates; Steve Spickard, Economics Research Associates; Richard Taylor, Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger; Mike Waller, Hexaagon Transportation consultants; Ray Moritz, Moritz Arboricultural Consulting and Landscape FIRES. U. ADOPTION OF AGENDA M. Davey moved that the Board adopt the agenda. K. Nitz seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0. N. Hanko described the process to be followed and procedural rules for the meeting. III. BOARD BUSINESS. A. Agenda Item No. 1 - San Mateo County Coastal Annexation Project: Certification of the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Final Program Environmental Impact Report and Adoption of Findings. Approval of the Mitigation Monitorinlst Program. Approval of the Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation 33cr Distel Circle 650-6gi-1200 info@openspace.org kk)AR[)C)[ [)Ikf,(10R5 Fletvyjemens,Mary Davey,led Cyr, GENERAL MANAGER: Los Altos CA 94022-1404 650-691-0485 fax www.openspace.org De aiw I(ft1r,Nooette/lonko,Larry Ha5sett,Kenneth C.Nitz L Craig Britton Meeting 03-12 Page 2 Area; A Adoption of the Willing ellers Approval of the Fiscal Impact Analysis, Ordinance, Adoption of the Annexation Policy, Adoption of a Resolution o Application for Annexation and Sphere of Influence Amendment, Adoption o Resolution of No Property Tax Exchange. and Consideration of Master Mutual Aid Agreement with the County of San Mateo, and Consideration of Other Related Project Documents—(Report No. 03-54 1 C. Britton introduced staff members and consultants. C. Woodbury gave a history of the process that began in 1997 and listed the actions to be considered at this meeting. She talked about the factors leading to the District's proposed coastside program, including a poll in 1998. She showed a map of the proposed coastal annexation area in relation to the current District boundaries. She talked about the benefits of the coastal annexation. Regarding representation, she noted that from I - 4 wards could be extended to the coast. S. Schectman talked about eminent domain issues, the 1999 Cooperation Agreement, and the willing sellers ordinance. She outlined the annexation policy. C. Woodbury noted that the proposed annexation does not include any new or proposed taxes. Staff will work to formalize a mutual aid agreement with San Mateo County fire Department. She outlined the next steps to be taken. Patrick Miller, 2M Associates, reviewed the changes to the service plan since the Board accepted it in June, 2002, noting that most were minor. He talked about the proposed mitigation measures. Thomas Reid talked about the final EIR and listed its contents. He said the final EIR before them tonight is a thorough and comprehensive compilation of both technical analysis and public input. Its purpose is to provide environmental information to inform the Board's action and that of LAFCo in considering the annexation. Steve Spickard provided an update on the fiscal impact analysis, noting that it had not changed in a fundamental way. N. Hanko referred to page 25 of the draft final service plan which talked about siting of trails. She asked where the setbacks came from. C. Woodbury said they were from the San Mateo County Trail Plan. N. Hanko read from page 31, second paragraph, guideline G6.29, and asked where the feral pig issue was addressed. C. Woodbury said that was discussed under resource management. The following people submitted speaker cards and chose to speak: Meeting 03-12 Page 3 Name Summary Comments/Concerns Yoriko Kishimoto Presented a resolution expressing strong and unanimous support for the ro osa1. Jack Olsen Farmland security zone; encourage to hold off with final approval for at least a week. Chuck Kozak This is the most positive EIR he has reviewed and addresses all issues raised during the comment period. Peter Daniel Expressed objections to the EIR. Fire hazard and risk appraisal not adequate. Recommended Board hold off until this can be done correctly. Carol Simon Need additional traffic analysis. PMAC has gone on record against the annexation. Omit south coast from any further consideration for annexation. Steve Simms He had never seen such total opposition to anything as with this annexation. Think we are good stewards of land. John Donovan Concerns regarding representation. Believe the District does not have money for land management. The District is not giving up the right to eminent domain. Leslie Fiering In favor of open space and management of open space. There are omissions from the plan including farm labor housing. Reject current document until issues can be addressed. Oscar Braun Added to Mr. Daniels' comments regarding the purpose of the CEQA review process. Invited Board to join Fire Safe committee members for a workshop on how they go forward since funding has ended. Not against open space and protecting environment. Asking to put off decision and get study done correctly. April Vargas Urged them to adopt the documents. Kirke Comstock Asked them to approval material before them. Chris Thollang Commented as Citizens Advisory Committee member on the issue of eminent domain. Disappointed we do not have support of south coast community because he felt their concerns had been met. Encouraged them to move forward. Ann Forrister Urged them to take actions proposed by staff. Alan Maranglia He said he wondered about the District's mission statement. He said he would rather look at million dollar homes hidden in the trees than look at parking lots and toilets. Hertha Harrington Reported on her experiences with MROSD, which were all positive. Urged annexation because it will benefit everyone. Thanked Board for patien e and dedication to serving and land. Joanne Joye Addressed comments regarding EIR traffic analysis. Her area not covered in that analysis. Supported Carol Simon, asked that they I reject EIR. Meeting 03-12 Page 4 Kurt Heiner Concerned about emergency medical care. Concerned about impact on community where his sons will grow up. Came from La Honda Pescadero Unified School District with a letter from Mr. Wilson, Supt., LHPUSD. Fire analysis incomplete and unconvincing. Concerns regarding potential adverse impacts to school district. Re uesting extension of review period. Dan Caughey Will not be impact on emergency response. Talked about response to incident in which his cousin died. Veronica True District is very poor neighbor. Serious trespassing problem. Talked about items on web page and in newsletter showing pictures of their ranch as being District property. Would like a written response. Nina Pellegrini Totally opposed to annexation because of inability to manage the lands they already have, their fiscal responsibility, and their disregard for the residents' survival as viable communities. Talked about Russian convent eminent domain issue. Wants answers to questions. Asked them not to do annexation. Meredith Folsom Urged Board to accept EIR. Irma Mitton Concur with colleagues from PMAC that they not accept the final resolutions and consider alternative of eliminating south coast from annexation area. She addressed some statements regarding agriculture in the draft final service plan. Do not need another agency to provide services that currently exist. Asked to consider alternative that does not include south coast. George Cattemole Final EIR disappointing to many. District is opening spaces that have been closed for a long time. It will impact habitats. District could do the work in a responsible manner, but hasn't. Need more time to look at the EIR. Ken Broome Representing himself as an individual who enjoys the coast side area. Stated why he was in favor of the annexation. Recommended to annex as ro osed. Bill Prince Resident of south Skyline area. Support expansion based on their research and consideration. Support adoption of tonight's agenda items. Believe protected open space increases property values for private landowners and presence of field rangers is beneficial to private landowners. Support contingent on three things: 1. MROSD will not use eminent domain. 2. Sellers will retain right to sell to whomever they want. 3. Increase focus on resource management including dealing with invasive non-native plants. Ken Hibbits Operates alpaca ranch. Encouraged them to address issues raised. Think it is important to look at traditional and non-traditional agricultural use. Urged them to be creative. Asked them to do best possible they can in representing the people here. Have lost 30 ercent of agricultural production. John Lynch In 30 years he had learned to love the coast. Six years since began, press on ahead. Jack McCarthyUrged to follow through on vision of this program. Meeting 03-12 Page 5 Gael Erickson Hoping they will approve. Sure there are things that will need to be changed. Concerned regarding number of properties for sale. Concerns regarding watershed. Accept and move ahead. Meg Delano Reaffirmed opposition to annexation. EIR failed to address issues we raised. Talked about several deficiencies. Do not understand why our area is not addressed under traffic issues or provision of visitor services. Audrey Rust Urged to accept documents and move forward with annexation. Talked about competence of District staff. Todd McGee Supporter of District. Spent lots of time on EIR. Commented regarding representation of coast. Proposed that part of annexation proposal be to establish a committee of coastsiders. The need of coast j side is to be protected from the rest of the Bay Area. There are lots of eo le and energy available and the District is not availing itself of it. Terry Brown Live by Portola State Park. Not in favor. A lot of us like being on our own. Don't think we need another bureaucracy or government land grab. Don't see overdevelopment happening. Understand there has been a net decrease in housing on the coast. Geoff Allen Agreed they ought to rescind the power of eminent domain forever, have not done that. Would like to withdraw name from petition. Asked not to certify EIR because there are lots of questions. Fiscal analysis is questionable at best. Traffic study—think safest way to protect land west of Skyline and south of Half Moon Bay is to leave it in the hands of people who have been caring for it for 200 years. The report on sudden oak death was hugely lacking. In favor of annexation north of highway 92. Mike Polacek Good process. True test will be what District will do with all this information. Adamantly against annexation proposal. Great deal of local opposition. Hope you do not ignore. Goals are good on the surface. Issue is how you achieve that. Personally concerned with economic impact. Think analysis is incomplete. Hank Modena Don't approve of what they are doing to the coast side. There are fewer homes and schools in area than 90 years ago. We have kept the coast the way it is and what you are trying to do is wrong. If you want to preserve the coast keep the rich people out and keep farmers and ranchers where they are. Kay Bell There are plenty of regulations to keep development down on coast and lack of water. Hope kids can have a home where they want. Shocked by decrease in population of the area. Urged them to consider rational land use that includes housing. Joan Kirkaldie Think what you are doing is very good and we need that new area. Don't see that it is an issue regarding eminent domain. Endorse what ou are doing. Jim Rourke Read excerpts from Grand Jury report. Urged them to adopt EIR and move forward with service plan. Meeting 03-12 Page 6 Jose Maes See this as piecemeal acquisition of privately owned property. Specific question regarding easements—to what degree will property through which easement go be compromised? Noble Hendrix Have used open space. He is an ecologist; you can maximize the usefulness of conserved land when you can link it with other pieces of conserved land. Should contact people regarding local agriculture practices and local preservation of frog. Ray Modena Talked about potential traffic. Can't build houses because of lack of water. Schools are hurting. Enough parks. Don't have enough eo le to take care of the ones they have. Joe Nixon No mystery to me that there are a lot of for sale signs. District will not have authority not to tax part of their area. Manipulation of issue of eminent domain, cannot trust government. Must get agreements in legally binding writing. Think this is a thoroughly corrupt proposal. Jan Snyders Think we have enough open land and parks. Plenty of hiking trails. Many reasons against annexation including fire hazards and introduction of diseases to agricultural crops. Completely against annexation. Pat Dixon Active in county politics, on ridge trail council. Understand how people want their area to stay. Once Highway 92 is widened the area will be high-density housing. Would like to see this proceed. Mario Pelle rini Opposed.osed. One reason is that in district's mission statement, one of g their missions is to acquire agricultural lands. With that statement you run into three Constitutional protections: right to own private property, farmers' livelihood is at stake, homestead exemption. District is enemy of those things. Talked about willing sellers. Board violating constitution of United States. Armin T. Borick Concerned regarding what you are doing. Taking land off tax rolls. Martini Ranch—what have they done with it. 1998 La Honda Road closed for two weeks. County EMS depends on local volunteers. You are going to put hikers on land who are dependent on volunteers for medical coverage. No one is opposed to open space,just opposed to District management. Peter Marchi Development on coast will not happen. Would like more time to review the EIR. Main concern is eminent domain. His attorney reviewed EIR and said it can be reversed. Goal in cooperative agreement was that it could never be reversed. Marta Sehnal Don't need more regulation. Think people want schools, police, and roads. Think there are enough parks in county. Terry Gossett Opposed to annexation. Final impact- $1 million lost tax per year from POST purchase. Discrepancy between your numbers and San Mateo county controller's numbers. Might be worthwhile to go back and confirm statements of less than significant impacts. District has taken 9 months to review responses, will then give public 9 days to res ond. Need 60-90 days. Meeting 03-12 Page 7 Mary Ann Heine Disabled on job, a farmer and educator. Need to protect habitat farmland and constitutional rights. Homeless because of eminent domain and theft. Asked them to defer and let it be a comprehensive EIR. Let us protect and preserve and uphold our rights. Listen to people. Bern Smith Agreed with lot of previous speakers. Have not had time to look at EIR. Specifics regarding building trails, agricultural issues. When it comes to managing land, things will come out of left field. Emergency response, think it was addressed to my satisfaction. All of the time that went into this will seem like nothing compared to the effort that it will actually take to manage the properties. Hope you can do it, support your attempt. Zoe Kersteen-Tucker Thanked Board and staff for energy and commitment. Talked about the community process and eminent domain. Urged them to adopt EIR and move forward in process. Oceans are in peril because of coastal development. J. Persson Live near Portola Park, representing self. Do reforestation work and volunteer in parks. Talked about paying visit to county for various things they did to property. Don't like overhead of all the government. Road is in bad shape. Will not hold additional traffic. Have not had enough time to review documents. Disturbed that comments were not fully responded to. Guy Coggins Would like to support Board in being conservationists. Concerns regarding timberland and mineral rights. Deborah Ettinger Development on coast is extremely restrictive. Wanted to address willing sellers issue. Talked about examples of government taking advantage of Pat and Sheila Bordi Strongly opposed to annexation. Heard of people being harassed into selling. The residents care for their lands. Think annexation would bring many people and change the area. Have plenty of parks, laws, ordinances, policies and permit requirements. Ask that you stay out. J The following people submitted speaker cards but did not choose to speak: 1. Jessica Agramont, Half Moon Bay 2. Judy Grobe, La Honda 3. Jim Norris, Pescadero 4. J. Marsh, Half Moon Bay 5. Joe Falcone, Half Moon Bay Planning Commissioner, Half Moon Bay 6. Len Erickson, Midcoast Parklands, El Granada 7. Jim Norris, Pescadero 8. William Young, Half Moon Bay 9. David Abrevaya, Half Moon Bay N. Hanko noted that many resolutions of support had been received, including those from Redwood City, the cities of Los Gatos, Cupertino, Saratoga, Los Meeting 03-12 Page 8 Altos, Half Moon Bay, Pacifica, Santa Cruz, Walnut Creek, Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, and Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors. Expressions of support had been received from Hon. Sally Lieber, Hon. Rebecca Cohn, Hon. Tom Lantos, Hon. Mike Honda; the National Park Service, East Bay Regional Parks, Marin County Open Space District, Midcoast Community Council, and Hon. Byron Sher. Recess: 10:05-10:33 P.M. Staff responded to questions as follows: Fire and EMS Services and wildland fire risk issues-J. Escobar addressed the EMS issues. He referred to page 32 of the EIR and said the entire area should generate only 15 EMS calls a year. Fire safe questions -D. Sanguinetti addressed how they approach fire safe issues on District properties with the use of staff and California Youth Authority. He will be representing the District at the workshop. Fire -Ray Moritz, urban forester, prepared study for this project. He talked about his experience and qualifications and addressed the use of Sonoma County study information. He said he was confident with the conclusion he reached using that data. He said he had worked in this field since 1975. Traffic—Mike Waller, Hexagon Transportation Consulting Fiscal— Steve Spickard—two principle issues: 1. Will there be an increase in the cost of providing services. 2. Is there a decrease in revenues? All agencies were contacted; they anticipated no significant service increases. He felt there was fundamental misunderstanding as to how the property tax system works with regard to tax revenue.. Agriculture—C. Woodbury referred to Permanent Policy PA-I on page 13 of the service plan, which addressed protecting agriculture's continued use. Farm labor housing was addressed in Permanent Policy PA-2 and Guideline G-6-3. Biological Issues- Tom Reid said the list of mitigation measures in the EIR covers special status species exhaustively. He did not think there was any inconsistency between the objectives as stated in the mission statement and the controls that the District will establish when the final service plan is adopted. Taxation— S. Schectman reiterated that the proposal does not include a tax measure and the resolution provides that the Board will not seek any reallocation of current property tax to the District. Special districts cannot impose property taxes without a 2/3 vote of the people. Representation was discussed on page 20 of the service plan, which stated that the Board will work with residents on this Meeting 03-12 Page 9 issue. The service plan does envision the use of advisory committees. The legislature has established very strong immunities so that landowners cannot be sued in the event recreational users are injured on their land. She thought they had covered eminent domain thoroughly in the document and the hearings. She was confident the prohibition on the use of eminent domain was a firm commitment. D. Little asked about the of the statement"comment noted." S. purpose Schectman said some comments were not on the EIR. Tom Reid said when they say"comment noted"they say we heard you. He thought the issues were well before the public. M. Davey asked about the super Williamson Act. S. Schectman said there is a relatively new statute that provides protections for farmland security zones. These restrictions would not apply to a district like MROSD. P. Siemens had suggestions of minor changes to the service plan: • Page 7, third paragraph, change "allow" to"encourage." • Page 8, third bullet at the top, say, "The opportunity for one or more local residents to be elected . . . ." • Page 8, third paragraph, after"acquiring land," add"and conservation and agricultural easements." The mitigation monitoring plan would have to be changed to be consistent. • Page 12, guideline GLI, add after"site" the words"agricultural operations," before"trails." S. Schectman said this was addressed in the hazardous impact section. • Page 23, underlined sections, middle of page, add", including" after "special board meetings." • Page 25, siting of trails, change recommended minimum setback for residential to 100 yards and agriculture to 100 ft. Following discussion, Patrick Miller said he would work on the wording and present it later in the meeting. P. Siemens said the mitigations would have to be changed as well in order to be consistent. • Page 26, G68, change"picnicking" to"picnic areas." Where it says, "prohibit smoking", the word"an" should be"and." Would need to change the wording in mitigation 7-14. • Page 39, paragraph 2 change to read, "The District would manage lands it acquires that are adjacent to land owned by another open space interest in a compatible way." After the comma, delete the words, "The District would manage its adjacent lands." Where it says recreation on District property, the word"where" should be "even though." • He added that he favored some or all of the recommendations made by Mr. Cattermole to be included in the EIR. L. Hassett asked staff to respond to the length of time issue. C. Woodbury talked about the notification and sending of documents. S. Schectman said the only i , Meeting 03-12 Page 10 legal requirement is that agencies that commented receive copies. The Board has gone beyond the minimum legal requirements. L. Hassett proposed a change to the service plan, Guideline G3.10 on page 15, first paragraph, stating that he thought it was important that the District recognize there is a trend toward organic or chemical free agricultural production. He wanted it made clear that the District would not use pesticides or herbicides in a buffer zone next to lands used for organic agricultural crops. C. Britton referred to page 18, B3 10. D. Little, saying that"the District shall abide by existing standards for organically grown crops at places where its properties are in contact with lands being used to produce such crops." C. Britton suggested adding, "including organic agriculture" after the words"do not adversely affect agriculture." P. Siemens asked that both herbicides and pesticides be included. Patrick Miller suggested saying, "where pesticides or herbicides are used" and deleting"for vegetation control including control of noxious weeds" Patrick Miller returned to the trail setback question, page 25. He said one option would be to restate the first four lines of that paragraph and strike the land use recommended setback table. It would read, "Trails shall be sited a minimum distance of 300 ft. from occupied dwellings unless site specific circumstances make this infeasible. Where a 300 ft. setback is not feasible, a minimum distance of 50 ft. shall be in force and potential noise and privacy impacts must be evaluated for any subsequent District action and shall be reduced by use of berms, fences, landscaping . . . ." P. Siemens asked about the inclusion of Mr. Cattermole's suggestions. C. Woodbury said some of those had been addressed in the responses to comments. M. Davey said when the District was established in 1972, they had a vision of preserving open space and the green belt around Silicon Valley. In 1976 they welcomed San Mateo County to the District. She thought this was a monumental achievement. They have an obligation to preserve national resource that we all love and the accompanying agriculture. They had excellent staff and consultant work in putting together the documents. She said she intended to vote positively. L. Hassett said his perspective was a little different from other Board Members. He moved to rural San Mateo County in 1973 and became active in the South Skyline Association and volunteer fire department. In 1976, the South Skyline Association supported the District expanding its boundaries, but with lots of apprehension centered around the issue of eminent domain. The Association worked with staff and the Board and came up with an eminent domain policy that satisfied the desires of the association. He said the District has honored that policy ever since. He pointed out the benefits because the open space District is there. The area has retained its rural character. There is an increased level of emergency response. He talked about the impact on resource management Meeting 03-12 Page I including feral pig control and star thistle control. Regarding representation, he felt he had worked hard to address the concerns of his neighbors. He said he would continue to represent the interests of his neighbors and would support staffs recommendations. I Cyr said that during the six years of bringing the project to this point,there have been major attempts to include the public. He said the EIR responds well to both written and oral comments. He was satisfied that the comments raised by the public regarding the EIR have been addressed and he would be voting for it. K. Nitz said he grew up in Los Angeles and has been amazed at the San Mateo coast. He thanked the farmers and others for doing what they were doing. He feared that the housing pressures would come toward the coast. He said what they are doing tonight is exciting and momentous. He thanked the District's founders for their hard work. He said they were embarking on a new journey to preserve and protect, and he was getting on board. D. Little said it was clear in listening to the comments that there is a gulf in perception about what the District is and represents. He understands that they are sincere. He asked them not to doubt the sincerity of the Board. He said he would speak as a user and an elected representative. The staff is so dedicated and sincere and loyal to the agency and responsive to neighbors and users. He believed the District had done an incredible job of preserving ecologically valuable land. He could see that they might perceive the District as outsiders and invaders. He asked them to be open to staff and the Board and the agency as a whole. He thought that in the future they would have come to a different perspective. Regarding eminent domain, he said he was certain the agency would never change that. He hoped they would have an open mind. P. Siemens said he thought the District would prove to be a valuable resource to farmers. He agreed regarding formation of a committee to advise the Board. The service plan contains a provision that if there is a significant issue affecting the coast, the meeting would be held there. He said the intent is to develop policies that would help us with any of the leased lands that they might own. He said he did not think District should be in the business of managing farm land. He thought the EIR was well done. N. Hanko said she thought the Board was ready to move forward. This is only the beginning of a long process. She said the District is improving because people like those present tell them their concerns. She said they listen and incorporate those improvements into their plans. She said she was concerned about the school district, and would like staff to pursue arrangements where there will be as little fiscal impact as possible. Meeting 03-12 Page 12 C. Britton said they plan to work with them and come up with a program, perhaps to fund environmental education, so there would be no net loss to the school district. N. Hanko talked about going to the coast with her parents when she was a child. She said to her, agriculture was part of the coast and she would continue to work toward the end of improving agriculture. Motion: M. Davey moved that the Board adopt Resolution No. 03-18, Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report as amended, that it has been completed in compliance with CEQA, was presented to and reviewed and considered by the Board prior to making its decisions tonight and reflects the Board's independent judgment and analysis. P. Siemens seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: D. Little moved that the Board adopt Resolution No. 03-19, Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District approving the Final Service Plan for the San Mateo Coastal Annexation Area (Service Plan) as amended; adopting the CEQA Findings as amended that potential significant environmental impacts have been avoided or mitigated; and adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Program as amended, which ensures that mitigation measures of the Final EIR will be implemented. L. Hassett seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: K. Nitz moved that the Board approve the Fiscal Impact Analysis. J. Cyr seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: N. Hanko moved that the Board adopt the Annexation Policy which provides that any lands annexed would be subject to policies of the service plan including no eminent domain. K. Nitz seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: P. Siemens moved that the Board adopt Ordinance No. 03-01, Ordinance of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Prohibiting the Acquisition of Property by Eminent Domain Within Specified Areas (Willing Sellers Ordinance), which prohibits the use of eminent domain to acquire any land or interests in land annexed to the District as part of the service plan. L. Hassett seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Meeting 03-12 Page 13 Motion:. M. Davey moved that the Board adopt Resolution No. 03-20, Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Requesting the San Mateo County Local Agency Formation Commission to Undertake Proceedings for the Annexation of Territory to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and Requesting the Amendment of the Sphere of Influence of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. K. Nitz; seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion:, J. Cyr adopt Resolution No. 03-21, Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Making a Determination of No Property Tax Exchange Pursuant to the Provisions of Division 1, Part 0.5, Section 95 et seq. of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. P. Siemens seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. Motion: P. Siemens moved that the Board direct staff to discuss entering into a Master Mutual Aid Agreement for fire services with San Mateo County Fire with the goal of developing and formalizing a mutual aid agreement. K. Nitz seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0. 1V. ADJOURNMENT At 12:14 a.m., June 6, 2003 the meeting was adjourned. Roberta Wolfe Recording Secretary