HomeMy Public PortalAbout19800326 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 80-05 Meeting 80-5
t
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
Regular Meeting
Board of Directors
A G E N D A
March 26 , 1980 7 :30 P.M.
(7 :30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 27 , 1980
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(7 :45) 1. Rescheduling of the Monte Bello Parking Lot Study
Session - N. Hanko
(7 :50) 2. Long Ridge Open Space Preserve Parking and Trails -
S. Sessions
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(8 :00) 3 . Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
(Melton Property) - C. Britton
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Pur-
chase Real Property, Authorizing Officer to
Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to
District, and Authorizing General Manager to
Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary
or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction
(Melton Property)
(8 :15) 4 . Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
(Swanson Property) - C. Britton
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Pur-
chase Real Property, Authorizing Officer to
Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to
District, and Authorizing General Manager to
Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary
or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction
(Swanson Property)
Herbert A.Grench,Genera/Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G-Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
Meeting 80-5
Page Two
(8 :25) 5 . Proposed Addition to Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve (Williams Property) - C. Britton
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to
Purchase Real Property, Authorizing Officer
to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant
to District, and Authorizing General Manager
to Execute Any and All Other Documents Neces-
sary or Appropriate to Closing of the Trans-
action ( Williams Property-Parcel A)
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to
Purchase Real Property, Authorizing Officer
to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant
to District, and Authorizing General Manager
to Execute Any and All Other Documents Neces-
sary or Appropriate to Closing of the Trans-
action (Williams Property-Parcel B)
(8 :40) 6. Voter Education Program About the Possible Effects
of Proposition 9 on the District H. Grench
(9 :10) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
EXECUTIVE SESSION Land Negotiations
ADJOURNMENT
WRITTEN CCn4JNICATION
(Meeting 80-5)
March 26, 1980_.
Monterey peninsula regional park district Rudd Crawford,President
p.o. box 935 carmel valley, california 93924
659-4488 Linda Lee Bassett
Sean Flavin
John Sigourney
March 14, 1980 Clyde Varney
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, CA 94022
Dear President Green and Members of the Board:
The Board reviewed the proposed legislation contained
in your letter dated February 29 which would amend the
Public Resources Code.
Although the proposed changes would not directly affect
the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District, the
Board did vote unanimously to support the proposed amend-
ment.
We appreciate the opportunity to continent.
Sincerely yours,
Rudd Crawford, Pres dent
Board of Directors
cc: Board of Directors
I
I
I
M-80-29
A% (Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
100 Agenda Item #l)
9 MW
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
March 17, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Rescheduling of the Monte Bello Parking Lot Study Session
Discussion: At your Regular Meeting of March 12, 1980, you
decided to hold a study session regarding the location of the
proposed parking lot at the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve.
You also decided to invite the Palo Alto Planning Commission
to the Special Meeting on Saturday, March 29, 1980 , beginning
at 9 : 00 A.M. Since your last meeting, Director Hanko has
learned that the date and time you set for the study session
was not convenient for some members of the Planning Commission.
Recommendation: I recommend that you reschedule the Monte Bello
parking lot study session for Saturday, April 12 , 1980 , beginning at
1: 00 P.M. , if that date and time is convenient for you.
Director Hanko has been in contact with the Planning Commissioners,
and they would all be able to attend the April 12 session.
As discussed at the March 12 meeting, the initial portion of
the study session would be held at the District office, followed
by carpooling to the Preserve for on-site field study.
R-80-9
(Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
Agenda Item #2)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 19, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Long Ridge Open Space Preserve Parking and Trails
Introduction: At its meeting of November 28, 1979, the Board
directed staff to investigate the parking problems along Skyline
Boulevard near the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve and evaluate
the potential trail link to Grizzly Flat parking area (adjacent
to upper Stevens Creek Park) .
Discussion: In response to a joint request by local residents,
law enforcement authorities, and county officials, CALTRANS traffic
department posted No Parking signs along Skyline Boulevard to curtail
roadside parking. District staff, in discussions with CALTRANS
representatives, has secured a partial solution to the current
parking situation.
Turnout areas that abut District property will be re-signed from
"No Parking At Any Time" to "Limited Parking" during daylight hours,
and CALTRANS will install new signs at locations identified by staff.
Additional staff discussion with CALTRANS centered on the possibility
of posting signs along Skyline that were more appropriate to a scenic
corridor. CALTRANS' representatives stated that they must draw from
a standard sign inventory, and they do not have a sign specifically
designed for a scenic corridor. Any change in sign designs would
have statewide impact.
The potential trail link from Long Ridge Open Space Preserve to
Grizzly Flat parking area was evaluated, and it was determined that
individuals desiring to park in the Grizzly Flat parking area could
cross Skyline Boulevard and enter the Preserve immediately, which
would be safer than walking along Skyline to the Bridgeman property.
The Long Ridge Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan, approved
by the Board on April 20, 1978 (see R-78-15 , dated April 20, 1978)
recommended that the site should be open to hikers who can gain
access from roadside turnouts along Skyline Boulevard. Unmarked
existing roads and trails would be for hikers' use.
------------------- ------------------------------ ---
R-80-9 Page two
Staff feels that these trail conditions exist presently and that
construction of additional trails and/or any other improvements
would not be consistent with the approved Use and Management Plan
nor consistent with current policy for non-emphasized sites. Con-
struction of a hiking stile at this location should be deferred
until the policy question is resolved and use ramifications evaluated.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board authorize staff to
continue working with CALTRANS to remove No Parking signs and replace
them with a more appropriate Limited Parking sign and to work with
CALTRANS and other agency officials to design a sign that is
aesthetically consistent with the scenic highway element (a project
such as this might require new legislation and take several years) .
It is also recommended that no additional trails and/or signs be
constructed on the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve at this time
until the policy question on site emphasis, to be addressed as a
follow-up to the Goals Workshop, is resolved.
cC:";+T�S.`•.^•.;:•'• _ ��T• �•���j' ;rr.�� �:{�:"+�'� /�•:��.:`�• � `"ti,�•., ,�y��.��`,•��r�r;K':::�Sv `��.�';�:,v:•.�e:•d'«:i
rtola r Vle
�jyyuMpl
n` t �� ��•, Alq �' ARos •_. e..
-
.. bI I
vale
wooer 7 '�`'� ' UdlE ' ' n
.•ti-~1 7 \\� tqusr� - Eatw
.�y6 i 1 c 5
Permanence i, � (.Up@ftln0
•�(pp'� \aG` ` .jpp t .�p0 a 9 _ , --_ '°•.. itrror:('r / i i
V !" �,stevtas j 9•
Imo/�( (•�� t,w,�� �� � 1 • um '•r srcv
••�-t, \..,, \, 5"' ,_-_ 7 i .1 t..sE. cuEw(,
1� ``�iZ� �� ��—��� I \/ 1� ' g� tt xr " � _•.n:ca�.o;i O t� s� F1-
-fvt Sayratoga r:
`\�J' �.``` �� �P RK r` ii..t C9F•r.4�- 4 RD. w' V�
.-� � `� I `C95r`EJ ..�-••.rC..E awpa[ECY�
� � _ A -P. �\\t �� _ ,ROO/' .mac. � _N'AM..� • .I
`% �ti
�j�eta
%• ,* =_i�I ems` TeA
( j . '=erg spa , 1/ � •gel 2aj3 �. � '��'�j:
60
41
�•f�c{I�\��' `i�,' ,)) �f�Q /��u�' a ,��=-✓^� �� Q ;,ice ,—v L a� � � ��,-�''�.
Tf' 1�� �. �If��/ Q,'.a 9' a + �' �4 J`��• „g`, � �f� 11�^z.
ry l JR ater I -7
EXHIBIT A - SITE MAP ( USGS )
LONG RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
2000 North =#
�h�•, •.; 1s r{??.•�'•ti. -c. ' r. _>.f. ^:,�:�>f;r.: 'r 5:,mr!^• -:•:�4T .p;;"
Y •I ti•!. •f : .1} ..�fJ. .�'Zl•?"F%.'Y,'/��t .1d1'"^: {•tih YV:.':J: •:JY.:.�.• Cnt _i!::.:. •:r:}i•:3 y
.� :s:::•C- � ..4,:1t1.!=•1��s:%':�..�r:'.ti{';.u-,...',•'t /•��;i:..'� Z.
�::.�'ti.�� ::'::,rx�..�{•:•'"+.•.�„•.�-.�.•�r.ti•1::.•::•:�i�i:.r..�.}:t.i�:i •.�s-:-..^�
R-80-6
(Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
Agenda Item #3)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 17, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager,
S. Sessions, Land Manager , and C.
DiGiovanni, Environmental Resource Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
(Melton Property)
Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been
offered the opportunity to purchase 17. 5 acres of land on Monte Bello
Ridge in an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County .
Located between the Picchetti Ranch and Black Mountain Areas of the
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, this property represents part of a
potential trail link connecting the urban Cupertino area with recre-
ational lands on Monte Bello Ridge and Skyline Boulevard. A grassland
hilltop at a 2,000 foot elevation affords views of the Santa Clara
Valley to the northeast and the rugged Stevens Creek Canyon to the
southwest.
A. Description of the Site
(1) Size, Location and Boundaries. This 17.5 acre property is
located in an unincorporated area of Santa Clara County on
Monte Bello Ridge within the Sphere of Influence of the City
of Cupertino. It is bordered on all sides by private property.
The Picchetti Ranch Area of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
is located 0. 75 miles to the east and the former McCone property
is 0.5 miles to the south. Santa Clara County' s Stevens Creek
Park is situated 0. 75 miles to the southeast.
(2) Topography, Geology and Natural Resources. The site contains
a prominent hilltop and a steep-sided canyon formed by a
tributary of Stevens Creek. Elevation varies from 1, 700 to
2,000 feet.
The San Andreas Rift Zone is located 0. 75 miles away in
Stevens Canyon.
Soils are mapped as exhibiting medium runoff and are subject to
moderate erosion hazard.
R-80-6 Page two
Oak-madrone woodland, chaparral, and grassland found on the
property should furnish habitat for deer, coyote, bobcat and
numerous bird species.
B. Current Use and Development. A dirt road that forms a loop
connects with private property to the north, south, west and
east and is used by neighboring horseback riders.
No structures are located on the property.
C. Planning Consideration. The property is zoned A-20S : agricultural,
20-160 acre lot size, depending on slope. Open space use is in
conformity with the Santa Clara County and City of Cupertino
General Plans.
D. Relationship to Existing and Proposed Trails. An equestrian trail
that connects Stevens Creek Reservoir with Monte Bello Ridge and
Stevens Canyon crosses the property.
E. Potential Use and Management. This site should be managed as a
natural area because it is an isolated parcel without access from
a public road. There is access to the property via the existing
dirt road which is sufficient for patrol and maintenance purposes.
F. Use and Management Recommendations.
(1) The site should remain open for continued use by individuals
who currently gain access from adjoining private properties
with permission from the property owners.
(2) Preserve boundary signs should be installed where appropriate.
(3) A gate should be installed if necessary to delineate the
site boundary from an adjacent resident.
G. Dedication. It is recommended that this site be withheld from
dedication as open space since it is an isolated parcel with no
public access. If Proposition 9 should pass and the District
were to face serious funding difficulties, the parcel could be
sold so that other higher priority land could be secured.
H. Naming. It is recommended that the property become an addition
to the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve and be officially known
by the same name.
I. Terms.The 17. 5 acre area which would be acquired is actually an
11.25 acre existing legal parcel and a 6 . 25 acre vacant portion of
an existing 13. 8 acre improved residential site. ThL 'remaining area of
the improved site would be further restricted under the agreement
so that no future residential construction or subdivision will
occur. The basis of the $135,000 purchase price includes the value
of the undeveloped site, the portion of the improved site, and the
restrictions on the remainder. This would be an all cash transaction
budgeted in the New Land Commitments budget category.
R-80-6 Page three
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board adopt the proposed
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real
Property, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of
Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and
All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Trans-
action (Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve - Melton Property)
It is further recommended that the Board adopt the use and management
recommendations contained within this report, withhold the site from
dedication, and adopt "Monte Bello Open Space Preserve" as the official
name of the site.
:.•:-i �. : ..v :.y•.•:•."e':5:;:::�?:si^i:.. ..�....<Sz:•:::�:;:;•:;��i.:::}•:!:_ .'2::•:�:�.�:::-"y.•:::.v'•"_�v'{r.;::-•.;:f{:
.v .�-:::•-1. :..�• :.�- �•::::�:•: Sv:::...};. :•::i'•-:-�•. ..:.is .•..... ..v,:..
:;v?e.�'�.�:•t:u>ti:�"'."tivJes.d::.!__._.3-:.-:.ti;.:�?:...__.�...�.:'s.�....:."a•::::::.:��:.. '`•tt• { .. •• ..
•-•�_ .•.��1�.•ri•:::.�::.�::::::r::J: .. `� :{'�Mr ::r� :�:�i ''tea'' v:�{•,� ((\ �
NZ
:i � EAo '/s.��r t �� G6 l; j L' 1 ,.'� G. , <\ _ �lr "6 ♦•. F:
•:g�'�: wr w �`i Y• � r ono gill _
'�.�• 2 'py Portola a w,yuum! s `s7rd Los �I 2 . - i -_!ti .•, 1 _r I 1
tia Valley
ptos
S Hillso --
o ` s F.
ij
s _
E:ins •\ "i-- -_�\ \ .`� Gc
r .oAr
Pennanente
:Z poi
�r'4
{ E.�
�SARAIOGA A •�`�l �Z
TA
3:PARK �vsAs .y ��°si:ir..9fy • no... � : y� /� ,Y�1 1`t �S � �� \��\I :•\Z �c'C� �-__;.
W
j•
�, �!\:/ \ 2°pp���{1��1'\ ,,o-ry--�'ta � •�'1� ( '�� 1\\\I`\�1` �}i �:
•; � �i � � �` 'U� �,r'f,. ��\ \1`�W T Sj►l `�(`;L%•4 � �.'�`-/��yO -"` .\�� l��f y':••
•}�'vlE` � \ �(�� � ��� ^ vv 1`lE.da Ola../_ fv �\\ I /1 :�✓o.� � � .. _� ti.
••''r\4 \ ��=\�=.\ - Li } 1 ;' ROP,OE;I?� - r� !(\ 1I \ - ^`'•�. '.
��
1.E1,Q' lln ty P�-r,
;:: ,, 1�� � 1 .o V ;�I \ � / /1`�,I�����- -�BE'I� �•-�i\`_" "1_4�_EE/P�y�
••X� / 111� y, a � f' ✓ / \ (:/ ����/���I 1`C�_=. - --� t ,��rig j���I/`�
� ! j �,. �� ,;ri ��' ;':- •� ����«oa/ P
Il .O � -� ..J .F+�,.�,�7�\/) •t,
1u)L I _ `J N�"�e��1 a_ O.l CC11G� r�Q•-'
C6F2EI�T
-C'_'`j; �/f�� `� �(��L,- � �� / ���•_���!'�j;� ,''�/J��''�-��\ ', ( �--�'��f. � ,��` � �.� ICJ �
iC� 1.\-.`��\ \\\ f `� \ /� '_'//' ✓EII ' rl \_, ",� ry �
�n1, — � V 1� -i
+r r
` 8101 573-a �
:at �oga�uxt.nl[: < 1 o u EXHIBIT A — SITE MAP (USGS)ara
Range/ tatlon t
B
ST X,, PROPOSED ADDITION
� . �—
� t / �M 2024' •j
J TO MONTE BELLO
as°° OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
—
1 2000 North
�---�7`.�ii�:s�'�7.'•1•:vt'fi' :47::+.'''.A�-�.:r:�i.r,...s!......r.I.._.!��,7✓�`.g�r� %f:. •:try: . .'~.�=..:_:......... _ "�..'.�•�-: _:.•'s
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY BY AND BETWEEN Richard B. Melton
and Margaret Mary Melton, husband and wife, hereinafter called
"Seller, " and MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, hereinafter
called "District. "
1. PURCHASED PROPERTY. Seller agrees to sell to District, and
District agrees to purchase from Seller, Seller' s real property lo-
cated in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, consisting
of seventeen and one-half (17. 50) acres, more or less, and commonly
referred to as Santa Clara Assessor's parcel numbers 351-24-03 (all)
and 351-23-08 (portion) and described on Exhibit "A" as attached
hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, and as outlined in
orange on the map labelled Exhibit "B" as attached hereto and incor-
porated herein by this reference.
2. PURCHASE PRICE: PAYMENT. The total purchase price shall
be one hundred thirty-five thousand and no/100 dollars ($135, 000. 00)
payable at the close of escrow.
3. TITLE AND POSSESSION. Title and possession of the subject
property shall be conveyed to District at close of escrow by grant
deed free and clear of all liens , encumbrances, easements, assess-
ments, restrictions, rights, and conditions of record except:
a. Current taxes shall be prorated as of the date of
close of escrow.
b. The Deed of Trust as above mentioned and typewritten
exceptions numbered 2 through 10 as listed in that cer-
tain preliminary title report no. 173139-CG, dated
December 8, 1978, from Valley Title Company, designated
Exhibit "C" as attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference.
4 . COSTS. District shall pay and satisfy all escrow, recording
and normal-title insurance charges incurred in this transaction.
Seller shall be responsible for and pay all costs of any reconveyance
of Deed of Trust, full release of mortgage or any legal costs or fees
incurred in order to deliver marketable title to District.
5. COMMISSIONS. The District shall have no obligation to
pay and real estate agent's commission or other related fees in
connection with this transaction.
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE _ t�AL PROPERTY -2-
i
i
i
6. LEASES. Seller warrants that there are no oral or
written leases or rental agreements on all or any portion of the
subject property, or persons lawfully occupying the property, and i
Seller agrees to hold the District harmless and reimburse the i
District for any and all liability, losses and expenses occasioned !
by reason of any such lease or rental agreement or occupancy of
the property.
7. RESTRICTION AGREEMENT, Seller agrees to grant and be
bound by all of the terms and conditions of a restriction agree-
ment with covenants in the form attached hereto and designated
Exhibit "D" , and incorporated herein by this reference; which
restriction agreement shall be recorded against Seller' s remain-
ing property as described therein, and District agrees to accept
said restriction with covenants.
It is specifically understood and agreed that the grant of
said restriction with covenants is an integral part of the con-
sideration for the sums to be paid to Sellers hereunder and that
Sellers are fully and fairly compensated for the voluntary
imposition of said restrictions. The parties specifically agree
and acknowledge that this paragraph is not, and does not, in any
way, constitute a restraint on alienation.
i
i
8. ACCEPTANCE. District shall have thirty (30) days from i
the date of execution hereof by Seller to accept and execute this
agreement, and during said period, this contract shall constitute
an irrevocable offer by Seller to enter into a contract with the
District on the terms and conditions set forth herein, in consider-
ation of which District has paid, and Seller acknowledges receipt
of the sum of one hundred and no/100 dollars ($100. 00) . This trans-
action shall close thirty (30) days after District' s execution hereof
as above mentioned, through an escrow with Valley Title Company, 300
South First Street, San Jose, California, 95113, escrow no. 173139-LG.
9. SURVEY. District agrees, that after the close of escrow
District will, at its own cost and expense and to Seller' s satisfac-
tion, locate the line described in Exhibit "A" (parcel two) as :
"thence leaving said Easterly line of the lands of Melton S. 700
00' 00" E. 793 feet more or less to a point. . . It being understood
that the existingtermini for said line are currentlyestablished b
Y
a good and sufficient survey of all of Seller' s property.
I
I
I
I
I
AvREEMENT TO PURCHASF nEAL PROPERTY -3-
I
(
10. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of
and bind the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of the
parties hereto.
I
NTDPENYNS A REGIONAL OPEN
SELLER:
SPACE DISTRICT:
CT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I
I
Stanley Norton, District Counsel Richard B. Melton
I
i
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
I
1
L. Craig Britton Margaret Mary Melton
Lard Acquisition Manager
I
Date:
RFCOMI ENDED FOR APPROVAL:
_ _ l
IIerbert Grench
General Manager �
I
I
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
Barbara Green, President
Board of Directors
Dated:
ATTEST:
_
Clerk of the Board
I
I
I
I '
I
I
i
f
RESTRICTION AGREEMENT
i
i
WHEREAS, THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a
Public District, hereinafter referred to as "DISTRICT" and
RICHARD B. MELTON and MARGARET MARY MELTON, his wife, hereinafter
referred to as "GRANTOR" , have heretofore entered into a purchase
agreement, dated , 1980, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to which agreement, GRANTOR agrees to
convey the property described in Exhibit "A" as attached hereto
i
and incorporated herein by this reference, to DISTRICT, and
WHEREAS, GRANTOR further agrees to restrict GRANTOR' s
remaining land, as described in Exhibit "B" as attached hereto
and incorporated herein by this reference, as to development
density and subdivision potential for the benefit of DISTRICT
and the lands described in Exhibit "A" as set forth herein, and
WHEREAS, it is now the desire and intention of DISTRICT and
GRANTOR that the lands described in Exhibit "B" be made subject
to certain limitations, restriction and covenants for the benefit
page
i
-2-
of DISTRICT, its succ�_sors and assigns and the icLnd described in
Exhibit "A" .
NOW, THEREFORE, in partial consideration of the substantial pay-
ment being made to GRANTOR, the public benefit to be derived therefrom,
and in order to assure that GRANTOR' s remaining property will be develop-
ed and maintained in a manner compatable with DISTRICT's maintenance of
the conveyed property (Exhibit "A") as park and open space land, it is
hereby agreed as follows:
1. The development of GRANTOR' s remaining property as described
in Exhibit "B" shall be limited to the completion and main-
tenance of the existing three (3) single family residences,
the construction of new garage for the main residence, and
the existing associated outbuildings, fences, etc. Nothing
herein shall be deemed a waiver of any Governmental permit
process required for the construction, completion or main-
tenance of said structures or improvements.
2. GRANTOR shall not divide or subdivide the property described
in Exhibit "B" or otherwise convey (other than under threat
of condemnation) a portion of such property less than the
whole to one or more parties or convey said property to two
or more parties any of whom acquires title to less than the
whole of the subject property. This does not preclude the
conveyence of one or more undivided interests in the whole of
said property. As used herein "party" means and includes
any person, corporation, partnership or other legal entity
capable of holding title to real property.
EXHIBIT,
page -z_ of '7
-3-
IT IS FURTHER AGREED, that this Covenant is made (a) for
the benefit of the DISTRICT, its successors or assigns; (b) for
the benefit of the residents of the midpeninsula area in which
this property is located; and (c) for the benefit of the lands
described in Exhibit "A" . This Covenant is expressly intended
by GRANTOR and DISTRICT to run with the land described in Exhibit
"B" , to constitute an equitable servitude therein, and shall bind
each and every successive owner of said land, or of any interest
therein, and shall be enforceable by DISTRICT, its successors
and assigns and all parties having any right, title or interest
in the land described in Exhibit "A" .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this
Restriction Agreement this day of -1 1980.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT, a Public District
By
President
GRANTORS:
Richard B. Melton
Margaret Mary Melton
EXHIBIT
page3 of
I
RESOLUTION NO.
i
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE
REAL PROPERTY, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,
AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE
TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (MELTON PROPERTY)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does resolve as follows :
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in the
attached purchase agreement between Richard B. Melton, et ux and the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated March 3 , 1980, a
copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof,
and authorized the President and appropriate officers to execute the
Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance to any
deed (s) granting title to said property. j
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause
to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The
General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other
documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the
transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized
to expend up to $5, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow
fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
R-80-7
(Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
Agenda Item #4)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 17 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager,
S. Sessions, Land Manager, and
C. DiGiovanni, Environmental Resource
Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
(Swanson Property)
Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been
offered the opportunity to purchase 10 acres of land on Monte Bello
Road within the City of Palo Alto. Located close to Page Mill Road
and adjacent to the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, the parcel would
become an addition to that Preserve.
Situated on a prominent grassland slope on Monte Bello Ridge, the
property is highly visible from Page Mill Road, Skyline Boulevard,
and the Los Trancos and Monte Bello Open Space Preserves. Currently,
there is only one house visible from most parts of both preserves.
If this parcel were to be developed, the structure and grading
could seriously detract from the wilderness setting which makes the
Monte Bello and Los Trancos Preserves so appealing.
The property is bordered on two sides by District land, and adding
the parcel to the Preserve would facilitate management of the site.
A. Description of the Site
(1) Size, Location and Boundaries. This 10 acre property is
located within the City of Palo Alto on Monte Bello Road,
0. 25 miles from Page Mill Road. It is bounded by the
Monte Bello Open Space Preserve to the south and east and
private property on all other sides.
The Los Trancos Open Space Preserve lies 0. 25 miles to the
west. The Foothills Open Space Preserve is 1.25 miles to
the north, and an 80 acre parcel owned by the City of
Palo Alto is less than an eighth of a mile to the north.
R-80-7 Page two
(2) Topography, Geology and Natural Resources. The site consists
of a moderate west-facing slope on Monte Bello Ridge with
elevation ranging from 2,200 to 2,400 feet. The San Andreas
Rift Zone runs through Stevens Canyon 0.5 miles to the south.
Soils are mapped as being of two types exhibiting medium to
very rapid runoff and subject to high to very high erosion
hazard.
The property is a uniform grassland community which should be
frequented by coyote, rabbits, hawks, and deer.
B. Current Use and Development. No structures or roads are located
on the property.
C. Planning Consideration. The property is contained within the City
of Palo Alto and is zoned Open Space with a 10 acre minimum lot
size. It has been determined that the acquisition of this land
for open space purposes would be in conformity with the General
Plan of Palo Alto.
The MROSD Master Plan evaluation, which rates lands according to
various open space values, shows the property as scoring in the
highest composite rating.
The entire 10 acres are under a Williamson Act Land Preservation
contract.
D. Relationship to Regional Trails Plan. The Master Trailq and Pathways
Plan for Santa Clara County shows three proposed trails intersecting
in the vicinity of the property: one affording access to Palo Alto,
one to Los Altos, and one to Skyline Boulevard.
E. Potential Use and Management. The property would be managed as part
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve.
F. Use and Management Recommendations.
(1) The site should be integrated into the use and management
plan for the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve when it is
presented for final adoption this year. It appears that
no specific recommendations pertaining to this site in
particular will be made.
(2) The site should remain open to hikers and equestrians who
can gain access from Monte Bello Road or the existing portion
of the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve.
G. Dedication. The property should be dedicated as open space land.
H. Name. The property should become an addition to the Monte Bello
Open Space Preserve and be officially known by the same name.
R-80-7 Page three
I. Terms. The purchase price for this 10 acre parcel would be
"�-215, 000, based upon its value as one of the best view lots in
the upper Page Mill area, with all city utilities readily
available. This transaction must close by March 31, 1980 in
accordance with the purchase agreement and would require all
cash from the New Land Commitments budget category.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real
Property, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of
Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any
and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the
Transaction (Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Addition/Swanson Property) .
It is further recommended that the Board approve the interim use and
management recommendations contained in this report, that Monte Bello
Open Space Preserve be designated the official name of the site, and
that this 10 acre parcel be dedicated.
.. .
...
a, ,.
y��� -'----:�-sue•- ,
X. _• -y '�- � �G� =T[ZAI�1C1\0 S X.
E2s \` }/�`, Gp, } Il '
.r �eoo
tar
;;�
f .\ � - / ✓—v�j � \' �a PRQJ,gSED' ° f� j
CNTEE.-
'Sorel
Mindego4�Wa�e, ��j iPl OP.OSiD
�; ; -- a `- ✓ o ES tzvE
ZiDdLeOS
''( "Z,Z' , ( � O� '.� Mlle �\ _• �~�• LJ�'W� �J( � �\ l ,::
\ yr °l `
115 BI
�� !
a \ �
`i�i '� ,�e la I �p .''` _ � � � a � .1• ill` �'
X MN
tO
:;
_--Lyof�Qo,'Jsr.ra 4. S`I�,•"`tio 2y US �; 1�� `� 1 � ` �\.�^� �� �\ 1 Nr"
Ap aA+rE t/y .� 4 M 1'' I I � ��t�-, l I �_/ 1 � \ �"`n.�•�/�� •
_.. ___—_ Anuorso GS 98:j `•'a � 1 a ��..,�� � l�� -� l�v tj ) �:;
2Q��t. Portola i rysvarol r $�� SOS Ule •' �+o L`�.` O� �i i`�i i)% ��k+FQ'-^/ �JV�G..ro � �+��
Valley Altos \r7 r \ y�r 00��)
Altos
X.
vale
+� 2 Moor- w00Dr 9 t E.los ��l ._-. r. 1t11.L�.1 j:.':•:
ei'tiF. r \MILLS .lRFM(IXse a `��
� Iy.lSrW i
EXHIBIT A - SITE MAP (USGS)
�.3 I a i e i ��- •va U � ,�
Permanent;
PROPOSED ADDI_IOPIS
"" .. >, ^ A� 1��� ��%� TO "40NTE BELLO
SiEV NS 'I 1`)1 OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
r� �,'� )) ..
.t
j u.Dfvv�!rr CREEK
4 ,, et�CO.PK.'
• ,NOy: I .^s i� ea:u. ' ___�'n' .wp.
GAP
2 0 0 0 ' North
►APof..\IARF�"_: _.. •-� - - SrAIE�'E^.. :.RO: - ] ~j6 1#i
�. \,` `� '
-- - - -- -- - - - - --- - - - - - - -
II
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE
REAL PROPERTY, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,
AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE
TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (SWANSON PROPERTY)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does resolve as follows .
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained
in the attached purchase agreement between Gary L. Swanson and the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated March 5, 1980, a
copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof,
and authorizes the President and appropriate officers to execute the
Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance to any
deed (s) granting title to said property.
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause
to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The
General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other
documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the
transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized
to expend up to $1, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow
fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
i
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
BETWEEN Gar L. Swans A PROPERTY BY AND BETS N on
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL 0
Y
hereinafter called "Seller," and MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT, hereinafter called "District."
1. PURCHASED PROPERTY. Seller agrees to sell to District, and
District agrees to purchase from Seller, Seller' s real property located
in the County of Santa Clara, State of California, consisting, of ten
(10) acres, more or less, commonly referred to as Santa Clara County
Assessor' s parcel number 351-25-14, as described in the property des-
cription referred to in preliminary title report number 173904 dated
June 14, 1979, from Valley Title Company (Santa Clara County) , de-
signated Exhibit "A" as attached hereto and made a part hereof by this
reference, and as outlined in orange on the exhibit map attached to
said preliminary title report number 173904.
2. PURCHASE PRICE: PAYMENT. The total purchase price shall be
Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($215,000. 00) , payable
at the close of escrow.
3. TITLE AND POSSESSION. Title and possession of the subject
property shall be conveyed to District at close of escrow by grant
deed free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, easements, assessments,
restrictions, rights, and conditions of record except:
a. Current taxes shall be prorated as of the date of close of
escrow.
b. Typewritten exceptions numbered 2 through 9 listed in said
preliminary title report relating to the subject property.
4. COSTS. Seller shall pay all escrow, recording and normal
title insurance charges incurred in this transaction. Seller shall be
responsible for and pay all costs of any reconveyance of deed of trust ,
full release of mortgage or any legal costs or fees incurred in order
to deliver marketable title to District.
5. COMMISSIONS. District shall not pay any real estate sales
commission or other related fees in connection with this transaction.
6. LEASES. Seller warrants that there are no oral or written
leases or rental agreements on all or any portion of the subject prop-
erty, or persons lawfully occupying the property, and Seller agrees to
hold the District harmless and reimburse the District for any and all
liability, losses and expenses occasioned by reason of any lease or
rental agreement or occupancy of the property.
I
i
7. ACCEPTANCE. District shall have thirty (30) days from and
after the execution hereof by Seller to accept and execute this
agreement, and during said period, this contract shall constitute
an irrevocable offer by Seller to enter into a contract with the Dis-
trict on the terms and conditions set forth herein, in consideration
of which District has paid, and Seller acknowledges receipt of the
sum of $10. 00. Title shall close within 30 days after the date this
agreement is executed on behalf of the District by the Board of Directors.
8. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and bind
the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of the parties hereto.
9 . This offer subject to closing by March 31, 1980.
. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT: SELLER:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stanley Norton, District Counsel Gary L. Swanson
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
Dated:
L. Craig Britton
Land Acquisition Manager
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Herbert Grench
General Manager
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
BY:
Barbara Green
President, Board of Directors
Dated:
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board
R-80-10
(Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
Agenda Item # 5)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 20 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: S. Sessions, Land Manager, and C.
DiGiovanni, Environmental Resource Planner
SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve
(Williams Property)
Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been
offered the opportunity to purchase 32. 3 acres of. land on Russian Ridge
which front on Skyline Boulevard in San Mateo County. The property
would be acquired in two separate parcels as shown on the attached map
and would become an addition to the 130 acre Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve. The southern parcel contains 21 acres and is the vacant
Mount Melville parcel. The northern parcel contains 11. 3 acres and
is improved with a residence that is currently owner occupied.
Located at the summit of the 2,190 foot Mt. Melville, the property is
one of three prominent grassland hills on the mountain skyline which
forms the scenic backdrop for the urban Midpeninsula. The site
commands spectacular views of the patterned development of Santa Clara
Valley to the east, as contrasted with the vast mountain wilderness of
large ranches and public lands stretching to the west.
A. Description of the Site
(1) Size, Location and Boundaries. This 32. 3 acre property is
located in an unincorporated area of San Mateo County on
Skyline Boulevard at the intersection of Langley Hill
Road. Approximately 8 acres are located outside the
District boundary.
The Peninsula Open Space Trust' s Windy Hill property is
0. 75 miles to the northwest, and the existing Russian
Ridge Open Space Preserve is 1.5 miles to the southeast.
The property is bounded by Skyline Boulevard to the east,
Langley Hill Road to the north and private property on
all other sides.
R-80-10 Page two
(2) Topography, Geology and Natural Resources. The site contains
the summit of Mt. Melville at 2 ,190 feet and slopes down to
Skyline Boulevard at a low point of 2,000 feet. The San Andreas
Rift Zone is less than a mile to the east.
Oak woodland dominates the northern half of the site and uniform
grassland covers the southern half. The property is part of a
vast expanse of forested ridges and canyons interspersed with
open grassland knolls, largely unbroken by development, which
is prime wildlife habitat. If the California mountain lion
still roams the Santa Cruz Mountains, this larger area could
easily be part of its range.
B. Current Use and Development. An uncompleted 700 square foot one
bedroom, wood dome structure, used as a residence, is located on
the northern parcel and is screened from view from Skyline and
the rest of the property by dense woodland. An uncompleted 4-car
garage and an operating 1,000 gallon gas tank are located near
the dome.
An unsurfaced road enters the southern Mt. Melville parcel from
Skyline Boulevard. Another unsurfaced driveway to the residence
from Langley Hill Road is the only other development on the
property.
C. Planning Considerations. The property is contained within San Mateo
County's Resource Management (RM) District, with a 5 to 40 acre
minimum lot size, depending on slope and other factors. Portions
of the property are also subject to the restrictions of the Skyline
Scenic Corridor designation.
The MROSD Master Plan evaluation, which rates lands according to
various open space values, shows this property as scoring in the
highest composite rating.
D. Relationship to Existing and Proposed Trails. The property rep-
resents a possible link is the proposed Skyline trail which could
ultimately run the length of Skyline Boulevard.
E. Potential Use and Management. Protecting the summit of Mt. Melville
from development and securing this prominent landmark, which is
part of the Skyline scenic corridor, as visual open space are the
most immediate values of this property. The impressive views from
the summit should attract picnickers and photographers, and the
windswept slopes are ideal for kite-flying.
Long range planning would include incorporating the property into
the Skyline Trail since the site could be an essential link in
the connection between Page Mill Road and Windy Hill.
R-80-10 Page three
F. Use and Management Recommendation.
(1) The site should be open to hikers, who can gain access by
parking at turnouts on Skyline Boulevard or Langley Hill
Road .
(2) Preserve boundary signs should be installed where appropriate.
(3) Staff should investigate alternative uses for the dome and
garage. The cost range of completing the dome as a ranger
residence or rental unit is estimated to be $20,000 to $50, 000.
This would be studied during the 60 days after the close of
escrow while the owner continues to occupy the dwelling. A
later report will specifically address this issue.
G. Dedication. It is recommended that this site be withheld from
dedication as public open space because it is a small, isolated,
partially developed parcel. If Proposition 9 should pass and
the District suffer further financial hardships as a result, it
may be necessary to sell or trade portions of the property for
other high priority open space.
H. Naming. It is recommended that the property become an addition to
the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve.
I. Terms . As mentioned above, this property is offered to the District
in two parcels with two separate purchase agreements:
(1) The 21+ acre Mt. Melville parcel has all utilities available
(including underground utilities and a developed well) , and
is a finished building site. The purchase price, as stipulated
in the purchase agreement, is $225,000 and is a fair and
reasonable price based upon its development potential, view,
access and amenities. The agreement requires that escrow close
on or before March 31, 1980, and the District would get
immediate possession of the property.
(2) The adjacent 11. 3+ acre residential site, located at the
corner of Langley Hill Road and Skyline Boulevard, is improved
with an owner-occupied 700 square foot dome structure. This
parcel is being offered to the District for $205 ,000, including
several thousand dollars worth of additional building materials
and fixture items. This parcel would also close escrow on
March 31, 1980, but the premises would remain in possession
of the owner for 60 days after close of escrow to allow for
an orderly clean-up and move.
The total cost of this property would be $430, 000, and assuming
that the two previous transactions on this agenda are approved,
all of the New Land Commitments budget category would have been
allocated ($987,000 budgeted/$1,008 , 979. 53 spent) . Therefore
the funds for this purchase would be from the Opportunity Purchases
budget category, leaving $570, 000 available for the balance of
this fiscal year in new land acquisition funds.
R-80-10 Page four
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board approve the attached
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real
Property, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of
Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and
All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction
(Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Addition/Williams Property-Parcel A) .
It is recommended that the Board approve the attached Resolution of
the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing
Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and
Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents
Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Russian Ridge
Open Space Preserve Addition/Williams Property-Parcel B) .
It is further recommended that the budget category of Opportunity
Purchases be used for this transaction, that the Board approve the
interim use and management recommendations contained in this report,
that Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve be designated the name of the
site, and that this 32. 3 acre acquisition be withheld from dedication.
�\w
'Athee
I Say REA UGE
Palo Alto
X.
sl
AV _1Z
R. 20SE -3
QVIS S7=0
Lobiles 0 aa
spy Londa
ti fm tv fie ep
1!WvWT_
7
L-A
San
13
7h
N
coo
N
�2- A
R
06
2
N, 245
-3
W� B w
P
\zj
L�f
-2,-1 ILI
c_
EXHIBIT A SITE MAP (USGS )
b,
PROPOSED ADDITION
RUSSIAN RIDGE
OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
2000 ' North
�`\'
0
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE
REAL PROPERTY, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,
AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE
TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (WILLIAMS PROPERTY-PARCEL A)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula OP P Regional en Space
g
District does resolve as follows :
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Re
gional Tonal Open Space Di g p pa strict does hereby accept the offer contained
in the attached purchase agreement between Donald Williams , et ux
and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated March 20, 1980,
a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof,
and authorizes the President and appropriate officers to execute the
Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance to any
deed (s) granting title to said property.
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause
to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The
General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other
documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the
transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized
to expend up to $5, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow
fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction.
I'
P RTY
NT TO PURL E AGREEMENT PURCHASE REAL PRO
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY BY AND BETWEEN Donald Williams and
Nona Williams, husband and wife, hereinafter called "Seller,! - and
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereinafter called "District. "
1. PURCHASED PROPERTY. Seller agrees to sell to District, and
District agrees to purchase from Seller, Seller's real property located
in the County of San Mateo, State of California, consisting of eleven
and three tenths (11.3) acres, more or less, and commonly referred to
as all of San Mateo Assessor' s parcels numbered 78-210-170, and -180,
as described in the property description referred to in preliminary
title report number 271340-REP dated February 15, 1980, from First
American Title Insurance Company (San Mateo County division) , designated
Exhibit "A" as attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference,
and as outlined in orange on the exhibit map attached to said preliminary
title report number 271340-REP.
2. PURCHASE PRICE: PAYMENT. The total purchase price shall be
Two Hundred Five Thousand and Nof100 Dollars ($205,000. 00) , payable at
the close of escrow.
3. TITLE. Title to the subject property shall be conveyed to
District at close of escrow by grant deed free and clear of all liens,
encumbrances, easements, assessments, restrictions, rights, and con-
ditions of record except:
a. Current taxes shall be prorated as of the date of close
of escrow.
b. Typewritten exceptions numbered 2 through 7 listed in
said title report relating to the subject property
(Exhibit "A") .
4 . COSTS. District shall pay all escrow, recording and normal
title insurance charges incurred in this transaction. Seller shall be
responsible for and pay all costs of any reconveyance of deed of trust,
full release of mortgage or any legal costs or fees incurred in order
to deliver marketable title to District.
5. COMMISSIONS. The District shall have no obligation to pay
any real estate agent' s commission or other related fees in connection
with this transaction.
I
I
I
i
6. LEASES. Sellerwarrants that at there are no oral or written
t
leases or rental agreements on all or any portion of the subject
property, or persons lawfully occupying the property, and Seller
agrees to hold the District harmless and reimburse the District for
any and all liability, losses and expenses occasioned by reason of
any such lease or rental agreement or occupancy of the property.
7. ADDITIONAL REALTY ACQUIRED. It is understood and agreed by
and between the parties hereto that the payment stipulated in clause
2 hereinabove, includes, but is not limited to payment for all of the
items listed on -Exhibit "B, " as attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, which items are considered to be part of the realty
and are being acquired by District from Seller as a part of this
transaction.
8. RELOCATION WAIVER. it is understood and agreed by and between
the parties hereto, that the payment stipulated in clause 2 hereinabove,
includes but is not limited to payment for any and all claims Seller
may have for Relocation Assistance Benefits, and/or payments pursuant
to California Government Code Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 16 (Secs.
7260 et seq. ) .
9. IMPROVEMENTS "AS-IS" . District is purchasing property on an
"as is" basis, with no warranty, express -or implied, except as to
marketable title. District acknowledges that any structures or improve-
ments on or a part of the property may not conform to applicable codes
and may not be suitable for apparent intended use. District acknowledges
that it has made an intensive inspection of the property and is purchasing
the property as a result of its own inspection and not as a result of
any representation of Seller.
10. POSSESSION. It is agreed that Seller shall deliver possession
of said .purchased property, and the improvements thereon, vacant, to
District on or before sixty (60) days after the date of recordation of
the deed conveying title to District, in good order and condition, with-
out further notice, and immediately thereafter deliver the keys thereto
to District at 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1, Los Altos, California 94022 ,
and also pay all closing utility bills up to and including the date of
vacation.
11. ACCEPTANCE. District shall have until Thursday, March 27 , 1980
is agreement, and during said period, this con-
tract and execute this to p g , g
tract shall constitute an irrevocable offer by Seller to enter into a
contract with the District on the terms and conditions set forth herein,
in consideration of which District has paid, and Seller acknowledges
receipt of the sum of $10.00. This transaction shall close on or before
March 31, 1980, through an escrow with First American Title Insurance
Company, 555 Marshall Street, Redwood City, California 94064, escrow
number 271340-REP.
12. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and
bind the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of the parties
hereto.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT: SELLER:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stanley Norton, District Counsel Donald Williams
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
L. Craig Britton Nona Williams
Land Acquisition Manager
Dated:
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Herbert Grench, General Manager
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
By:
Barbara Green, President
Board of Directors
Dated:
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board
ADDITIONAL REALTY ACQUIRED
(CLAUSE 7 - WILLIAMS PURCHASE)
1. All building materials needed to complete existing structures,
as follows:
a) Plans and specification for the buildings
b) Roofing materials; 300 pounds (tar) and
builders felt
c) Siding materials, 1 square medium shakes and 25 pieces
exterior siding 41 x 81 x 3/8"
d) Window material, 5 pieces 2' x 3' wire glass and 5 pieces
31 x 41 plexiglass
2. Florescent light fixtures (2 in home, 3 in garage)
3. Stove, kitchen sink and counter
4. Loft ladder
5. Wood burning parlor stove (in place)
6. Wall furnace
7. Pumps and water system intact including pump and piping
8. Stall shower and vanity
9. Water heater
10. Culverts
11. 1000 gallon underground gas tank, equipment and pump
Rage of—L�
ADDITIONAL BUILDING MATERIALS BEING
{ ACQUIRED AS A PART OF THE PURCHASE TRANSACTION j
(SEPARATE AGREED VALUE $3, 500.00 - INCLUDED. IN.
PURCHASE PRICE OF $205,000.00 AS SHOWN IN CLAUSE 2
OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY)
4 1. Approximately 3, 500 board feet douglas fir lumber
(2 x 10s 2 x 3s and 4 x 12s)
2. Approximately 800 board feed used 2 x 6 x 10 redwood
3. 50 pieces 1/2" drywall
f
4. 3 steel tanks; 2 - 4000 gallon and 1 - 2000 gallon
5. Approximately 300' PVC water pipe 1-1/2" , 3/4" and 1/2" x 10 '
i
schedule 40
6. 12 bags concrete, mortor and cement mix, bricks and blocks
i 7. Approximately 75 pounds of grass seed
8. 5 pieces 3/8 x 4 x 8 plywood
E 9. Refrigerator
i
I 10. Franklin stove
11. Portable construction site toilet
12. Approximately 500 square feet kraft insulation
13. 4 inside doors and door frames
14. 50 pieces 1/2" drywall
15. Miscellaneous pumping and electrical materials (in place)
i
EXHIBIT
Page%oof L.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE
REAL PROPERTY, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT,
AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE
TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (WILLIAMS PROPERTY-PARCEL B)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does resolve as follows:
Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained
in the attached purchase agreement between Donald Williams, et ux
and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District dated March 20, 1980,
a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof,
and authorizes the President and appropriate officers to execute the
Agreement on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute a certificate of acceptance to any
deed s granting title to saidproperty.
( ) g g
Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause
to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The
General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other
documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the
transaction.
Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized
to expend up to $5, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow
fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction.
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY BY AND BETWEEN Donald Williams and
Nona Williams, husband and wife, hereinafter called "Seller," and
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereinafter called "District."
1. 'PURCHASED PROPERTY. Seller agrees to sell to District, and
District agrees to purchase from Seller, Seller's real property located
in the County of San Mateo, State of California, consisting of twenty-one
(21.0) acres, more or less, and commonly referred to as all of San Mateo
Assessor' s parcels numbered 78-210-190 and -200 as described in the
property description referred to in preliminary title report number
271340-REP dated February 15, 1980, from First American Title Insurance
Company (San Mateo County division) , designated Exhibit "A" as attached
hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, and as outlined in
orange on the exhibit map -attached to said preliminary title report
number 271340-REP.
2. PURCHASE PRICE: PAYMENT. The total purchase price shall be
Two Hundred Twenty Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($225,000. 00) , pay-
able at the close of escrow.
3. TITLE AND POSSESSION. Title and possession of the subject
property shall be conveyed to District at close of escrow by grant
deed free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, easements, assessments,
restrictions, rights, and conditions of record except:
a. Current taxes shall be prorated as of the date of
close of escrow.
b. Typewritten title exceptions numbered 2 through 4 and 6
listed in said title report relating to the subject
property (Exhibit "A") .
C. As yet unrecorded underground utilities easement in
favor of parcel "C" (see Exhibit map) .
4. COSTS. District shall pay all escrow, recording and normal
title insurance charges incurred in this transaction. Seller shall be
responsible for and pay all costs of any reconveyance of deed of trust,
full release of mortgage or any legal costs or fees incurred in order
to deliver marketable title to District.
5. COMMISSIONS. The District shall have no obligation to pay
any real estate agent' s commission or other related fees in connection
with this transaction.
6. LEASES. Seller warrants that there are no oral or written
leases or rental agreements on all or any portion of the subject
property, or persons lawfully occupying the property, and Seller
agrees to hold the District harmless and reimburse the District for
any and all liability, losses and expenses occasioned by reason of
any such lease or rental agreement or occupancy of the property.
7. ACCEPTANCE. District shall have until Thursday, March 27,
1980 to accept and execute this agreement, and during said period,
this contract shall constitute an irrevocable offer by Seller to
enter into a contract with the District on the terms and conditions
set forth herein, in consideration of which District has paid, and
Seller acknowledges receipt of the sum of $10. 00. This transaction
shall close on or before March 31, 1980, through an escrow with First
American Title Insurance Company, 555 Marshall Street, Redwood City,
California 94063, escrow number 271340-REP.
8. The provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and bind
the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of the parties hereto.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL SELLER:
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stanley Norton, District counsel Donald Williams
ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION:
L. Craig Britton Nona Williams
Land Acquisition Manager
Dated:
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:
Herbert Grench, General Manager
APPROVED AND ACCEPTED:
By:
Barbara Green, President
Board of Directors
Dated:
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board
R-80-8
(Meeting 80-5
3/26/80
Iwo i am Agenda Item #6)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 18 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: C. MacDonald, Public Communications Coordinator
SUBJECT: Voter Education Program About the Possible Effects
of Proposition 9 on the District
Discussion: Attached is a statement about Proposition 9 and
its possible effects on the District. Also attached, for
your information, are several pieces of background material,
including Senator Albert Rodda' s report on the fiscal impli-
cations of Jarvis II.
Recommendation: I recommend that you approve the following
informational program:
1. Approve the attached statement, "JAWS II" AND THE OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT, for dissemination to the press and
the public.
2. Issue all or part of the statement in the form of one
or more news releases following the March 26 Board
meeting. Send copies of the statement to the regular
recipients of District news releases, as well as
officers and/or newsletter editors of such groups
as the Sierra Club, Audubon, Peninsula Conservation
Center, Committee for Green Foothills, Sempervirens,
People for Open Space, the Nature Conservancy, the
Trust for Public Land, League of Women Voters, etc.
and a request that the information be passed along
to the members of these organizations.
3 . Publish all or part of the statement in the spring
1980 issue of Openspace, which is scheduled for
mailing about May 15th.
4 . Use all or part of the statement as the basis for
comments by Board or staff to members of the press ,
and at slide show presentations to various citizen
groups.
5. Print inexpensive copies of all or part of the state-
ment for distribution by docents or Rangers at District
sites and at special events such as Earth Day (April 19-22) .
"JAWS II" AND THE OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
On June 3rd, California voters will have the opportunity
to cut their personal state income taxes in half simply by
voting for Proposition 9, the ballot initiative also known
as Jarvis II after its author, Howard Jarvis.
A 50 percent reduction in income tax revenues would obvi-
ously have a tremendous impact on state finances and the programs
they support. Unfortunately, the extent and direction of this
impact is hard to predict. Howard Jarvis has claimed that Prop. 9
would stimulate the economy and thus reduce state revenues by
"only" $3 billion. And he suggests that the difference can easily
be replaced from the state' s surplus.
The state' s Legislative Analyst sees it differently, esti-
mating a $4 . 9 billion loss in state income in 1980-31 and a $4 .4
billion loss each year thereafter. Such a loss could be partially
offset by the state' s already dwindling surplus only once. After
that, the surplus would be exhausted, with no replacement in sight.
Some as yet untapped sources of state revenue--such as windfall
taxes on oil company profits, higher corporate income taxes, and
new sales taxes--have been suggested as possible remedies for the
losses that Prop. 9 would produce. But even the most optimistic
estimates indicate that these possible remedies would fall far
short of solving the problem. Furthermore, it is not clear that
any of these "solutions" will ever go into effect. There are some
recent predictions that state revenues may be higher than pre-
viously projected but again the possible totals are unknown,
What is clear is that a $3 to $5 billion reduction in state
revenues (depending on whose estimates one believes) has to
mean a reduction in the amount of money the state can return to
local government agencies such as schools, parks, health and wel-
fare departments, and special districts like MROSD, whether through
"bail-outs" or through allocation of property tax revenues.
At present, the Open Space District receives no "bail-out'
funds, relying instead on a percentage of the property tax deter-
mined by the state Legislature following Proposition 13 . Under
this allocation, the District is operating at about 75% of its
pre-Prop. 13 level , with the "fat" already trimmed from its
operations and ambitions.
There is no way to predict how the Legislature might re-allo-
cate property tax funds if the voters approve Proposition 9. It
seems almost certain, however, that the District would experience
a loss -- perhaps as high as 25% or even more. Such a decrease
in funding would force the District to consider some of the
following responses :
A reduction or levelling off in patrolling of District
sites. The result could be decreased public access to
open space. It could even mean closing some sites.
A decrease or delay in maintenance activities. This
could result in the deterioration of facilities and
equipment as well as in damage to the land itself.
A reduction of the budget for new land from $2 million to
$1. 5 million (based on an estimated 25% cut) . Such a cut
would have an even greater effect than the numbers suggest.
With land prices now rising at about 25% each year, the
District would need an equivalent increase in annual
revenue simply to continue its present pace of land
acquisition. A decrease in revenue could drastically
limit the District' s buying power as well as the amount
of public open space that future generations will inherit.
P
i
k
1
k
ATTACHMENT 1
AGAINST
ARGUMENTS AGAINST PROPOSITION 9
Proposition 13 cut property taxes on our homes and the sky didn't fall.
Why?
Beca.,se state government stepped In after Proposition 13 passed and helped local communities make sure the basic services we want like schools,
roads, police and fire protection were malntained without major cutbacks. Overall, the state replaced about 70% of property tax revenues cut from
local budgets.
Proposition 9 is very different story. ',..
Proposition 9 proposes to cut STATE Income tax rates in half. But who's going to replace the thousands of millions of dollars Proposition 9 takes
from the state budget? The federal government? The other states won't stand for that.
What if no one steps In? Will these thousands of millions be made up by reducing waste in government? No; One thing we learned from Proposition
13 is tlat just cutting taxes doesn't make government more efficient. The politicians are Just as likely to cut.the services we want Instead of
trimming the fat.
So, what will happen? We all know from experience that we can't get something for nothing. Somecnd must pay for Proposition 9. A few
Californians reading this statement will win. Most of us will lose.
We lose because Proposition 9 takes away state funding we need - expecially after Proposition 13 - to keep our communities livable and our
economy healthy. '
Most of all, we lose because Proposition 9 is a tax redistribution scheme that .shifts more of the costs of government onto average taxpayers.
Consider these Ifacts:
- PrcposItton 9 doesn't close a single tax loophole. Every tax shelter and tax avoidance device allowing a few wealthy Californians to ercape
paying their share remains unchanged.
- Forty percent (40%) of the money Proposition 9 cuts from the state budget this year goes to the richest five percent (5/100ths) of all taxpayers
This privileged elite will get a two thousand million dallar ($2,000,000,000.00) tax break.
- Proposition 9 only changes state income tax laws. It does not cut federal Income taxes OR social security taxes. IT DOES NOT LIMIT regressive
taxes like the SALES TAX or the GAS TAX which hit average working people, retirees and others on fixed incomes the hardest. When the time cc--Ito raise taxes, GUESS WHOSE TAXES WILL BE RAISED?
- Proposition 9 means higher state and local fees. Think what will happen to the cost of things like vehicle registration and weight fees, eoile;e
tuition, garbage collection and other charges if state Income tax rates are cut In half. WHO WILL THESE INCREASES HURT? The handful of auper-
rich with their $2,000,000,000.00 tax break? Or the rest of us?
Proposition 9 Is unfair and misdirected. IF IT WINS, WE LOSE. VOTE NO ON 9.
ATTENTION SENIOR CITIZENS
You worked hard and paid taxes all your lives. Now your Income Is lower and so are your Income taxes. Over 2,800,000 California seniors pay NO
income tax-and get no relref from Proposition 9.
Proposition 9 means BORE TAXES for seniors and less from government In return. VOTE NO ON 9.
Everett V. O'Rourke, Chairman, California Legislative Committee, American Association of Retired Persons/National Retired Teachers Association
Anthony Ra*7osa Executive Secretary, California State Council of Carpenters
Freda Thorlaksson President California State PTA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------
VOTE YES
i
BALLOT ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 9
TAXATION INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 9
Proposition 9 will cut your income taxes 491 or more.
Your tax Cut Is necessary because income taxes have been rising even faster than property taxes were before Proposition 13!
If your household intone Is $15,000. you will save 70.1%. That's $275.07 or $22.92 each month.
At $20,000 Income your saving Is 56.82, that's $364.88 or $30.41 monthly.
At $30,000 you saving Is 53.6%, that's $795.96 or $63.33 monthly.
! At $40,000 your saving is $53.6%, that's $1371.09 or $114.26 monthly.
i
At $50,000 your saving is 49.4%, that's $1807.45 or $150.62 monthly.
MORE
ATTACHMENT 2
• i
The&wmmento Bee "„` `"`�"e"S A"#%M n,.ri AiCH'r Nt WSIAKeS �
p lec+R1'eenel end op Al Ow1 22 yeas MANOR McCtATCHY,clair,eee OM"I n
G K.McOATCHY.editw
AMES OAaATCHY.edits,1157.1883 FRAM(WCUttOCH,~seviv.diro.
C.K.MCCtATCHY,WOW,pre.ideM,1I87.1036 PETER SCHRAG.edibrwr Pepe-w-
WAtTER P.)ONES,editor,1976.1974 RORERT MARKSON,opm pepe editor
VOL 34E-40,649 Rx HARD N MCCtURE,Eeenoi eser A«e
we&w"y,Febmary 18,ISM Editorials
I
J, I
i
The Uncertaintiesv'T Jarvis II
The true effects of Jarvis 11. the initia- improve public transit and impose conser-
tive that would slash personal income vation.Even in the most optimistic Jarvis
taxes in California in half,would probably II scenario,the state still would not have
not be as awful a;the prophecies of doom the revenues to do any of this.
that many in state government are now Local governments have already lost at
intoning.But the severe damage the initia-
tive least$6.9 billion per year through Proposi-
hen all the exaggerations of Jarvis'
Wwould cause cannot be discounted. tion 13, and the state is already spending
Wh
opponents and the uncertainties of eco- its surplus—that is.spending more than it
nomic prediction are acknowledged,a vote collects each year — to offset this loss.
Without Jarvis II,the surplus will be en-
tirely gone in,at most, a few years-, with
j dismantling of government programs and Jarvis II,it would disappear immediately.
services. When the surplus is gone,the full impact of
Howard Jarvis claims — without any Jarvis I finally will be felt. An additional
evidence —that massive tax cuts create annual loss of even$2 billion—the smal-
income and jobs which,in turn,will gener- test possible — out of a state budget of
ate new tax revenues.Thus,he expects his about$20 billion would be disastrous.
initiative to produce a loss each year of
"only"$3 billion in state revenues.This$3 he result might not be the full 30 per-
billion,he argues,can be almost entirely Tcent cut in government services for
compensated by:dipping into the large which Gov. Brown has asked each of his
surplus of money now in the state's coffers. departments to prepare.But even the most
That,however,could only be done once— optimistic estimate of revenue losses could
after which the surplus would be gone. not be accommodated merely by "trim-
The the fat.
"If ever state agency were
r The legislative analyst's estimate of the 8 Y g Y
state income that would be lost if Jarvis II simply closed down, that would only pro-
passed is probably much closer to the duce a direct $4 billion saving. A full 85
truth:$4.9 billion in 1980-81 and$4.4 billion percent of the state's money is spent on
in 1981.82.(The difference between the two local programs and services — mostly
years arises because the retroactive 1979- education—that have already been scaled
80 tax cut would have to be absorbed in the back considerably to accommodate Jarvis
198MI budget year.) At least$4.4 billion 1.These are services that most taxpayers
would be lost every year thereafter. are probably unwilling to forgo on the
scale that would be required.
The state has potential revenue sources If Jarvis II passes,the Legislature could
that could reduce the bite of Jarvis II. enact a compensating increase in corpo-
An initiative on the J4 ne ballot to impose a rate income taxes But the heavy tax that
state windfall profit tax on oil companies would be required is dangerous to the econ-
could raise as mu as $400 million, ac. omy and certainly would be controversial.
cording to its proponents. California will If a redistribution of the tax burden be-
also reap its own windfall from oil price tween businesses and individuals were
decontrol,which will increase the earnings desirable, moreover, Jarvis II would be a
and thus the taxes paid by California oil most indirect. and ultimately deceptive.
companies, as well as the state's profits way of achieving it.
fmm its own oil fields.While the estimates
h simple reduction in per-
on
v
If it is.rather.a s
P P
of this windfall vary widely— relying on
sheer guesses about future oil prices and sonal taxes that the initiative's sponsors
even about how much oil will be drilled in are after.then they have picked the least
California—they do suggest that various appropriate state tax to attack — the in-
lest onerous
oil revenues could make up between one- came tax being the states a o e ous
fourth and one-half of the Jarvis II state
and most progressive. Indeed reducing
taxes b 50 percent would insure
_ income
i t - v 1 ar iY P
income losses over 0 e period.Y P
that the richest taxpayers will reap the
There are similar uncertainties in pre- biggest savings. although they obviously
dictions of future income and sales tax have not been suffering the most from the
revenues. Although .most economists ex. inflation that prompted this tax revolt,
pect little economic growth in the next two
years and lower ihflation rates in the long t is unfortunate that those who oppose
run, if both were to rise in California they 'Jarvis II have chosen to make dire pre-
would also increase government income.
i dictions, rather than air the teal and un-
Unfortunately, the most optimistic esti- specific range of its possible effects. If
mates of the state's future revenues are Californians really want government ser-
also the most inflationary. The highest vices severely cut, neither approach will
predictions of the state's oil income, for deter them.But if—as the polls preceding
example.assume a doubling of oil prices Prop. 13 suggest — the public simply
over the next decade. This would be so doesn't believe that government programs
! economically disruptive that Californians will suffer, then reciting oversimplified
would almost certainly want state govern- and overblown perils can only backfire.
ment to undertake new programs to moni- The financial implications of Jarvis II are
for prices, provide relief for the poor. ominous enough without exaggeration.
ATTACHMENT 3
Cos Ancics Timm Pub{nMr OTIS CHAN LER etw
end Chest Esetru.*Offcn
TOM JOHNSON
HARRISON GRAY OTIS,aMt•1911 P1NWI rsodOwlOPetanOiftca
IIARRY CHANDLER,I"?.14M WILLIAM A THOM"
NORMAN CIIANDI.PR,I'1M I'M Esetwi-V.,i+.wl.rr.nA FWi
r I/AN I.E!(..CI IASI:,V.e Yrerda,r-•Q�pw.t,rw
RODERT L.tLANNES,V..Pre.,Aent tad Auirw co the FUNuMt
JJAMES 9.GRIDER,Vice�;oo
RORERT C.LO9IaELI,Vw.Poe .d .rid Gem.l CoumA
DONALD S.MAXWELL Vrr Pres4wt—France
II •' } VANCE L SITCKELL.Vice Pre«iter--sets+
GEORGE).C(MIAR,MuaS(cmia Ednor
ANTHONY DAY.Edna of the Edrarl list.+
JEAN SHARLEY TAYLOR.Auocim Edra
4—PART VI SUNOAY.FEBRUARY 17. IWO
The Wolf Waits
award Jarvis is back hustling new bargains. fast week,for example,estimates of the state
One is a parlor game that he made up,Ax.the- stirous at the end of nest year—estimates worked
The other is not a game but an invitation to out so carefully only a matter of weeks ago—roes by
veterans of Califorma's property-tart revolt to 81 bWion, boosted by a level of prosperity that
lunch a new attack on government, this time continues to surprise state budget everts.
shooting the wounded. Jarvis adds to the Confusion with oft-the-wall
'7%invitation to Proposition 9,which will appear estimates of his own that have no bps in feet.
on the June 3 ballot as what Jarvis m4gests is a He armowtced,while he was gathering signaun"
bgicai next step after Proposition 13. which cut to qual y his initlativs for the ballot,that the state
property taxes by 89 billion In IN& had surplus of 88 billion.That is simply not true.
Proposition 9,also known as Jarvis 11,would cut He has said that Propoeition 13 gave a boat to the
the rate at which personal income is taxed in state's economy.and that Proportion 9 would give
California by 50%.carving another$5 billion from it an even bI'gger boost There is no evidence to
state government income this year and more than support either claim.
$4 billion each year thereafter. During the last full year before property taxes
Proposition 13 lifted an onerous burden from were cut by Proposition 13.Californias personal
thousands of California homeowners.it also forced income rose by 13.6%. During the year after the
reductions in xi vices at libraries and schools,hurt reduction,personal income rose by 118%.That is
the state's credit rating. crippled street-repair not a boost but a continuation of a trend that had at
rag �Fp
programs.
s, turned thousands of workers out of least as much to do with California'# balanced
government jobs,and left homeowners with a larger economy as with cuts in property tam.
pbs
from the
es that royalties
ehareof property-tax burden than businesses. Jarvis also ergo rasing
It also ted a crusade for rent controls because, production of oil on state lands will offset his
>Sef
contrary to what Jarvis promised, it provided no proposed tax cuts.Even at the highest estimate of
such relief for the hal of all Californians who do not royalties,the state will lose f30 billion in the nest
own homes but who rent. decade if Proposition 9 in approved.
Local governments and schools survived that The cuts that would be made by Proposition 9 are
massive cut in revenues largely because the state's Larger than the entire state government budget,the
booming economy generated enough income from budget that supports the University of California,
other sources to make up for most of the toes, the state colleges,the sine's entire parks program.
But Propcaiuon 9 would strip the state,almost to and the court system.It is more than 10 times what
the penny,of the extra income that it has shared California spends each year on prisons.
with schools and local governments to make it The cuts that Jarvis proposes would take one-
possible for them to keep going. third of the money that the state now diverts to
Furthermore,it would cut state revenues in ways local governments,half of which goes to schools.
that would benefit wealthy Californians far more
than those who just manage to make ends meet
More than half the tax savings would go to the 14% Proposition 9 is not wet of an overall pattern of
of taxpayers who make$30,000 a year or more. tax reforms designed to keep state income from
Viewed family by family,there is no question that running out of control as it did two years ago.
Proposition 9 would help many Californians cope Worse,it is not even necessary if its true goal is to
with the rising cost of living, although the help make certain that government colt"only what it
would not even approach the scale on which home- needs to function.
owners were helped by Proposition 13. In addition to the tax cut,the initiative would
Viewed in the broader perspective of society and index taxes so that Californians would not be pushed
rf Califnrnia's future as a state whose prosperity into higher brackets by pay increases that did no
depends in large part on remaining a superb place to more than keep them even with the cost of living.
live and play,and even work,the new Jarvis plan But the law already provides for indexing.
1 destructive h b inns-inventA tax
would likely be desru t would eliminate the usn rY
Y I ou
# But the Legislature already has repealed that taut
And the California Constitution,as amended last
The rhetoric supporting the initiative is anti- year,puts a ceiling on annual increases in state and
government,but it is not government that would be local spending,and requires the state to refund any
hurt by a S5 billion cut in public services. It is taxes that it collects beyond that ceiling,
people and the land. Business leaders and elected officials who
A cut on that scale would hurt people who depend campaigned hard against Proposition 13 have, by
on government—the poor who can get medical care and l:rge,been silent on the new proposal,leaving
nowhere else.the nine of every ten California chil- Jarvis a clear field.
dren who attend public schools,the mentally ill who The fact that government did not collapse after
cannot afford private psychiatric care,and others. Proposition 13, these businessmen and public
It would hurt by limiting the funds needed to officials say, damaged their credibility and made
expand public transportation and maintain parks, them appear to be crying wolf,
and perhaps by forcing up fees for students who As we have noted many times,this is a slow wolf
must attend state universities or none at all. that would have arrived long ago had it not been
It is that longer view that makes Proposition 9 distracted by surplus taxes that the state shared
seem ill-considered overkill,particularly when the with local governments to keep them going.
intent of holding state spending to levels that can be Take away that surplus, and lock it into the
justified by needs already has been addressed by a Constitution as Proposition 9 would do,and the state
wave of recent new laws. government might have no choice but to raise the
It is impossible to predict the effect of a$5 billion taxes that could be raised—oat business and sales.
i cut in income with any precision,and Jarvis counts In a Supreme Court decision years ago,Justice
on that lack of clarity to help his campaign. Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that"taxes are what
"People who decide elections don't read."he said we pay for a civilized society."A civilized society
in a recent interview with The Times.For a hard- also makes sure that it does not pay an uncivilized
core cynic like that,dangling the benefits of a tax price,and that has been the point of recent reforms
cut before California without mentioning any of the and adjustments in California tax laws.
costs of the cut shnuld be no ethical burden at all. What is needed now is time to let those reforms
The campaign also will be helped by the fact that take hold,and to make adjustments if revenues still
the most careful reading of the state's financial seem too high—not a blind swing of the ax of the
condition can he confusing on some days. kind that Proposition 9 contemplates. O
ATTACHMENT 4
MAR 1880
mLEGI"LATIVE BULLETIN
v.
r `f 11
A3 sank
1400 K STREET
League of California Cities (91604AE'VT095$14
(9 t 5)4=14-5?90
Calitor,nia Cities Work Together
9-1980
March 7, 1980
San Francisco Examiner Editorializes Against Proposition 9. California Taxpayers'
Association Analysis of Proposition 9 Will be Sent to All Cities Under Separate
Cover. On March 2, the San Francisco Examiner, in its joint Sunday Examiner and
Chronicle edition, called Proposition 9 an "extremely dangerous proposal" and urged
state and local officials to conduct a "thorough educational campaign that will
lay out the cold, hard facts." The editorial, which is enclosed, noted that accord-
ing to a recent California Field Poll, "60% of those questioned know little or noth-
ing about Proposition 9--what it proposes to do and what its impact would be."
In a related matter, the highly respected California Taxpayers' Association issued
this week Park I of its analysis of Proposition 9. While the Cal-Tax Board of
Directors will not formally consider a• position until April 17, the report articu-
lates eight major factual findings:
(1) The first-year revenue loss under Proposition 9 ranges from $3 billion to
$4.9 billion, depending on a number of factors.
(2) State-local expenditures will have to be cut if Proposition 9 passes, re-
gardless of economic and revenue variables.
(3) As a percentage of combined state-local revenues, Proposition 9 revenue
losses range from a low of 6.9% to a high of 15.4%, depending upon which
revenues are considered and which estimate of loss is used.
(4) Unanticipated revenues of as much as $500 million in the current year and
$1 billion in the budget year may flow into the state treasury.
(5) 55% of California's federal income taxpayers would send $1.1 billion to
Washington because of Proposition 9, according to one estimate.
(6) The case for revenue regeneration (the "Laffer Curve" effect) under Proposi-
tion 9 has yet to be completed.
(7) State-local public employment has rebounded strongly after an initial
post-1.3 slump, with public education leading the way.
(8) An announced loss of $200 million in federal revenue-sharing funds under
Proposition 9 is far from a certainty.
In a special mailing next week, the League will summarize the 12-page report and
forward a copy to each city.
3/7/80
I
I
C-80-5
March 26, 1980
Meeting 80-5
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
n Amount Name . Description
843 69.00 James Boland Training Expense'
844 70.00 California Consortium Seminar Registration for .:
DiGiovanni, Mart and Woods
845 225.00 Clevenger Realty Appraisal Corp. Engineering Services
846 154.28 Construction Materials Supply Co. Site Maintenance
847 98.01 El Camino Dodge District Vehicle Expense
848 8.07 Emergency Vehicle Equipment Service Equipment Repair
849 215,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. New Land Expenditure- Swanson
850 430,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. New Land Expenditure- Williams
851 223.65 Foster Bros. Security Systems, Inc. Field Equipment Locks
852 36.74 Gail Mincey Printing - Ranger Decal
853 147.35 Mobil Oil Credit Corporation District Vehicle Expense
854 47.30 Nebs Office Supplies
855 3.54 Patton Bros. Inc. Site Operation Supplies
856 47.93 Pitney Bowes Postage Meter Rental
857 160..98 Steven D. Sessions Out of Town Conference Expense
858 381.96 William P. Murphy, Tax Collector Property Taxes - Long Ridge
859 135,000.00 Valley Title Co. New Land Expenditures - Melton
860 8.40 Victor, California Field Supplies
861 100.00 Western Title Insurance Preliminary Title Fee
862 171.73 Xerox Maintenance Agreement
863 47.93 Carolyn Caddes Photographs
864 188.60 Lawrence Tire Service District Vehicle Expense
865 289.80 Harbinger Communications Computer Services
866 529.31 Jeda Publications Printing
Revised
C-80-5
March 26, 1980
Meeting 80-5
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
Amount Name Description
843 69.00 James Boland Training Expense
844 70.00 California Consortium Seminar Registration for
- DiGiovanni, Mart and Woods
845 225.00 Clevenger Realty Appraisal Corp. Engineering Services
846 154.28 Construction Materials Supply Co. Site Maintenance
847 98.01 El Camino Dodge District Vehicle Expense
848 8.07 Emergency Vehicle Equipment Service Equipment Repair
849 215,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. New Land Expenditure - Swanson
850 430,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. New Land Expenditure - Williams
851 223.65 Foster Bros. Security Systems, Inc. Field Equipment Locks
852 36.74 Gail Mincey Printing - Ranger Decal
853 147.35 Mobil Oil Credit Corporation District Vehicle Expense
854 47.30 Nebs Office Supplies
855 3.54 Patton Bros. Inc. Site Operation Supplies
856 47.93 Pitney Postage Bowes os Meter
er Rental
g
857 160.98 Steven D. Sessions.. Out of Town Conference Expense. .
858 381.96 William P. Murphy, Tax Collector Property Taxes - Long Ridge
859 135,000.00 Valley Title Co. New Land Expenditure - Melton
860 8.40 Victor California Field Supplies
861 100.00 Western Title Insurance Preliminary Title Fee
862 171.73 Xerox Maintenance Agreement
863 47.93 Carolyn Caddes Photographs
864 188.60 Lawrence Tire Service District Vehicle Expense
865 289.80 Harbinger Communications Computer Services
866 529.31 Jeda Publications Printing
867 170.57 Birnie Lumber & Fence Co. Site Operation Supplies
868 7.99 The Dark Room Photography
869 21.97 Dorfman Pacific Co. Inc. Field Supplies - Uniforms
870 168.54 I.B.M. Office Supplies
871 18.9.0 City of Palo Alto - Utilities Electricity
872 196.39 PG & E Electricity
C-80-5
r Amount Name Description
873 237.78 Shell Oil Co. District Vehicle Expp-nse
874 58.58 West Publishing Co. Books
875 659.95 Accountant Bookkeeper Temporary Exchange Temporary Bookkeeper
876 61.54 Kathy Blackburn Out of town trip expense,
Books
877 36.00 Research Institute of America Subscription
878 266.25 Signs of the Times Signs
879 33.00 General Telephone Directory Co. Advertising
880 18.14 Charlotte MacDonald Slide Show Supplies
881 500.00 U.S. Postmaster Postage Machine
882 930.00 Susan M. Fell Consultant Fee
863 1604.00 Gene Sheehan Trail Constructiotr and Parking
Lot :Repair
884 130.69 Petty Cash Mapping Services, Private Vehicle
Expense, Slide Library, Meal
Conferences, Office Supplies,
Drafting Supplies and Field
Equipment Rental
if
b
NIIDPENINSUTA REGI(XkML OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: For Your Information
DATED: 3/21/80
i
COUNTY OF MARIN
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
CIVIC CENTER, SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA 94903 PIERRE JOSKE
TELEPHONE 479-1100 EXT. 2515 DIRECTOR
March 14, 1980
Mr. Herb Grench, General Manager
Mispeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle Suite D-1
Los Altos, California 94022
RE: Legislation
Dear Herb:
This is to notify you of our Board of Director's action on March 11 , 1980,
in support of your proposed legislation that would amend Public Resources
Code sections pertaining to regional park and open space districts.
Please feel free to use this information in any way you want, and let me
know if you need more support.
Sincerely yours,
PIERRE JOSKE, GENERAL MANAGER
Marin County Open Space District
PJ:cw
MAILGRAM SERVICE CENT,
MIDDLETOWN# VA. 22645
4-0004065074002 03/14/80 IC5 IPMRNCZ CSP SFOS
1 4159654717 MGM TURN LOS ALTOS CA 03.14 1223A EST
HERBERT 6RENCH GENERAL MANAGER MID PENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CR SUITE D1
LOS ALTOS CA 94072
THIS MAILGRAM IS A CONFIRMATION COPY OF THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE#
4159654717 NL TURN LOS ALTOS CA 43 03w14 1223A EST
PMS SENATOR 5 1 HAYAKAWA
6217 DIRKSON SENATE OFFICE BLDG
WASHINGTON OC 20510
WE UNDERSTAND THAT PRESIDENT CARTER HAS PROPOSED A CUT IN LAND AND
WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS AND A FREEZE ON UNCOMMITTED MONIES, PLEASE
DO WHAT YOU CAN TO CONTINUE THIS VITAL AND HIGHLY-SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM
WHICH HAS IMMENSELY BENEFITTEO RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA.
RESPECTFULLY#
HERBERT GRENCH GENERAL MANAGER MID PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT
00:23 EST
MUMCOMP MGM
IDENTICAL COPIES SENT TO SENATOR
CRANSTON AND REP . MCCLOSKEY
04
in
TO REPLY BY MAILGRAM, SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR WESTERN UNION'S TOLL - FREE PHONE NUMBERS
f
I �
I N
N
I
O
C4
O
O
P�
CJ
U
W
J c0
cY
0.
7 r..
• Lf
ry ram! a-
6l 1 _
fry C)
17
1 LL
�.J
1
1
I '
F— L-
AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 12, 1980
SENATE BILL No. 1550
Introduced by Senator Dills
(Principal coauthor. Senator Marz Garcia)
(Principal coauthor.- Assemblyman Naylor)
February 25, 1980 4
An act to repeal amend Section 3 of Chapter 792 of the
Statutes of 1978, relating to state lands, and declaring the
urgency thereof, to take effect immediately.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 1550, as amended, Dills. State lands: mineral rights.
Under existing law, the Director of General Services, with
,the approval of the State Public Works Board, is authorized
to sell all or any part of two specified parcels of real property,
j and any water company stock held in connection therewith,
I to the County of San Mateo or the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District,or to both the county and the district,for
current market value, and in accordance with specified
conditions, including a reservation to the state of all mineral r
deposits.
This bill would delete sty eendition thftt the Pireeter of
Getteral Sert4eeg resert'e to the stette a4 minereJ depesits ift
Oie property eetweyed limit such reservation of mineral
rights to mineral deposits 200 feet below the surface of such
lands, and would limit the right to enter such lands to reach
such .depth to a total area not exceeding I acre and to 2
locations along the boundaries of the lands, to be selected in
accordance with prescribed procedures.
The bill would take effect immediately as an urgency
statute. t
Vote: %. Appropriation: no.- Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
I
98 30
i
--2
sso -- I
SB 1 I
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
£ref See 3 of Cam M of the£rat
2 of 4-9g8 is repel-
3 SECTION 1. Section 3 of Chapter 792 of the Statutes
4 of 1978 is amended to read.
j 5 Sec. 3. As to any property conveyed pursuant to
' 6 Section 1 of this act,the Director of General Services shall
7 reserve to the state all mineral deposits, as defined by
8 Section 6407 of the Public Resources Code, 200 feet
9 below the surface of such lands The right to enter such
10 lands to reach such depth of 200 feet shall be limited to
11 a total area not exceeding`one acre in size, and to two
12 locations along the boundaries ofsuch lands,such location
13 or locations to be selected by the Director of General
14 Services from a list of locations submitted by the
15 .purchaser or purchasers of such lands which will have
16 minimum impact on purchasers' intended
se of the
days of
17 property. Such selection shall be made within Y
18 submittal of the list by the purchaser or purchasers.
19 SEC. 2. This act is an urgency statute necessary for
20 the immediate preservation of the public peace, health,
21 or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the
22 Constitution and shall go into immediate effect.The facts {
23 constituting the necessity are:
24 The purchase of the property subject to Chapter 792 of
25 the Statutes of 1978 is contingent on the availability of
26 federal funds. These funds cannot be released until the
27 issue of ownership of mineral rights is resolved between
1 28 the county and the state. In order to resolve such issue at
29 the earliest possible time,it is necessary that this act take
30 effect immediately.
R
h{(k
f ,
G
98 60
I
R
�J
i