The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About19800528 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 80-10 Meeting 80-10 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415) 965-4717 Regular Meeting Board of Directors May 28, 1980 7:00 P.M. * (7: 00) ROLL CALL EXECUTIVE SESSION - Personnel Matters (7 : 30) * WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ADOPTION OF AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (7 : 45) PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public Hearing on Hassler Health Home Buildings- D. Green OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (8 :45) 2. Use and Management Plan Follow-Up for Williams Property Acquisition - H. Grench NEW BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED (9: 00) 3. Presentation of Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 1980-81 - H. Grench (9: 20) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS CLAIMS EXECUTIVE SESSION -Land Negotiations and Personnel Matters ADJOURNMENT *Public meeting scheduled to start at 7 :30 P.M. TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you 're concerned with appears on the agenda , please address the Board at that time; otherwise, you may address the Board under Oral Communications . When recognized, please begin by stating your name and address . Conciseness is appreciated. We request that you complete the forms provided so your name and address can be accurately included in the minutes . Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin M-80-39 (Meeting 80-10 5/28/80 Agenda Item #l) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM May 21, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Hassler Health Home Buildings Discussion: As noted in memorandum M-80-36, dated May 5 , 1980, and as discussed at your Regular Meeting of May 14 , 1980, the staff received one request for consideration to use the Hassler Health Home buildings for recreational purposes. As part of the planning and review process for the Hassler project, the Board of Directors will be reviewing the American Youth Hostel use proposal during the May 28 , 1980 Public Hearing on the Hassler Health Home buildings. As of May 21, 1980, staff has not had an opportunity to review the American Youth Hostel proposal, since it has not been submitted in detail. Their proposed use of the buildings would be for a youth hostel, probably involving the two residential structures and perhaps the dormitory structure. Other members of the public may also be present at the May 28 meeting to discuss the retention and/or demolition of the buildings. To assist in the review process, staff would suggest that the Board receive public input, if any, and refer the subject to staff for analysis. The focus of the analysis would be toward establishing parameters to be utilized during the preparation of the required environmental documents. Areas to be considered during the review/analysis phase involve questions relating to cost/use impacts, long term site management, desirability of returning the site to open space, and the benefits of retaining the buildings for recreational use. Recommendation: Assuming that the American Youth Hostel does present a proposal on May 28 and that you feel the idea should be considered further, it is recommended that you refer the proposal to staff for analysis and a report to you. R-80-24 (Meeting 80-10 5/28/80 Agenda Item #3) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT May 22 , 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager CONTRIBUTORS : C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager, S. Sessions , Land Manager, C. MacDonald, Public Communications Coordinator, and J. Fiddes, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Presentation of Preliminary Budget for Fiscal Year 1980-81 Overview: The District' s basic property tax revenue allocation for the 1930-81 fiscal year will continue to be below that of 1977-78 (prior to the passage of Proposition 13) . The District receives no direct State bail-out to supplement property taxes. The diminution of revenue and escalation of land prices have combined to create a great loss of purchasing power for open space lands. The level of activity for District programs has not yet decreased, however, because of the land acquisition pro- jects that were underway and for which funds were reserved. The diagram shows how the budget expenditure dollar is allocated. As was true for the 1979-80 budget, over 90G of each expenditure dollar is allocated to the Open Space Acquisition Program. Al- though committed land purchases total over $5.4 million, the new land purchase budget is just $2. 5 million - a lot of money that doesn't buy many acres these days! Of the $2 . 5 million, $500,000 is specifically identified for opportunity (bargain) purchases brought to the District by the Peninsula Open Space Trust, similar organizations, or by land- owners. This budget item is intended to encourage such interest and thereby stretch the taxpayers ' dollars. The Public Communications and Open Space Management Programs are budgeted to encourage and accommodate somewhat increased visitor use this coming fiscal year. Nonetheless, the budget guidelines reflect a conscious strategy of acquiring as much land as possible before it is lost to development or escalates even further in price, while keeping each site open to the public and promoting site usage to the extent that such usage can be accommodated. I 0 0 I I 1 1 i i f 1 PROGRAMS New Land Open Space Acquisition Purchases (23. 6fi) Total (92 . 1G) Committed Land Purchases (51. 2�) i s0s (2.60) — I Open Space Management (5 .0G) � I Debt Service Public Communications & Governmental � I 'Liaison (0. 6�) tion )I (12. 3� General Management & Program Support 1 (2 . 3G) I'd m 0 ALLOCATION OF THE EXPENDITURE DOLLAR R-80-24 Page Three Introduction: The Board of Directors approves a budget and an Action Plan annually that guide the activities of the District' s staff during the coming fiscal year. In the past, the preliminary budget has been presented by staff, modified as appropriate, and adopted by you at the same meeting of the Board of Directors. This year, to allow the Board and interested members of the public a chance to review the preliminary budget for fiscal year 1980-81 prior to adoption, the budget will be presented by staff at your Regular Meeting of May 28 , 1980, but no action will be requested on your part at that time. At your meeting of June 11, 1980, the preliminary budget will be presented again for your consideration and formal adoption. In addition, you will be asked to adopt the Action Plan for 1980-81, which you prelim- inarily adopted with minor modifications at your meeting of April 23 , 1980 (see report R-80-19, dated April 17 , 1980) . As noted on April 23 , the Action Plan, which serves as the foun- dation for budget formulation, was developed by staff under the assumption that Proposition 9 would not be adopted by California' s voters on June 3 . The preliminary budget for fiscal year 1980-81 was correspondingly developed under that same assumption. If Proposition 9 does pass, I will still ask that you adopt the pro- posed preliminary budget for 1980-81 at your June 11 meeting; however, various policies, similar to those enacted after the passage of Proposition 13 , will be recommended for your approval to guide District expenditures until the direct financial effects of Proposition 9 are known. As you review the attached preliminary budget for fiscal year 1980-81, you should note that salary and benefit line items may change before your meeting of June 11. This is because proposed salary budgets only approximate funds needed for potential salary range adjustments for General Manager appointees. Also, potential increases for Board appointees are not yet budgeted. The preliminary budget for fiscal year 1980-81 was prepared in a similar manner to that done in prior years. Based on Action Plan activities that you preliminarily adopted on April 23 , staff determined projected expenditures for the various programs. The Budget Committee and staff met in many public meetings to review and justify the budgets in great detail, including review of sub-accounts for each line item that is presented herein, and compared the proposed budget for 1980-31 with the 1979-80 budget and with 1979-80 projected expenditures. The attached budget summary shows total proposed expenditures for each category by line item for each program. Contingency items are identified in the discussion. These are R-80-24 Page Four items which either (1) have come to mind and have been discussed but which require initial policy decisions before they would be budgeted, or (2) are preliminary visitor protection and site development costs connected with the acquisition of new sites. Funds are also included in the regular proposed budget for these latter expenses, but needs are difficult to predict. Contingency items are not budgeted; rather, they are only identified as potential expenses and would ordinarily require further Board action.This is not meant to imply that all budgeted items require no further Board action. The District' s Controller has been involved with staff and the Budget Committee in the detailed review of the proposed budget and will report to you on June 11 on projected revenues, cash flow, and debt service. The Budget Committee will also be reporting to you at that meeting. Discussion: 1. Open Space Acquisition Program . Funds available for new open space acquisition projects in 1980-81 have increased over the 1979-80 budget (see memor- andum M-80-16 of February 5, 1980 on the Revised Budget for Fiscal Year 1979-80) by approximately $500,000, and the passage of Proposition 1 on the June ballot could provide additional funds for land acquistion, perhaps as much as $1 million. However, the escalation of land values has the effect of lowering the District' s overall buying power in terms of acres of land. Also, the current cut back on Federal Land and Water Conservation Funds will inhibit the program' s potential . During the 1979-30 fiscal year, the District spent $1. 8 mil- lion on new land commitments and $0. 25 million for previously committed projects, for a total land expenditure of approxi- mately $2. 05 million. There are also several projects which have been approved (or on which the District currently holds options) which total an additional $0. 5 million; however, escrow will probably close in fiscal year 1980-81. The former Edgewood State college site project, which was budgeted in the committed projects budget category is close to a conclusion and escrow should close within the next several months. This will reduce the committed projects backlog by $0. 95 million. The land acquired during the 1979-80 fiscal year totalled approximately 548 acres, including the projects in process. Although the entire new land commitments budget was expended, R-80-24 Page Five this was a reduced amount of acreage acquired when compared to previous years. In addition to reflecting the increased costs of land, several strategic smaller parcels and in-holdings were acquired at finished-lot prices. These parcels, includ- ing the former Swanson, Bridgeman, Williams, and Fine properties, had all utilities, including wells, and varied in price from $9 ,500 to $20, 000 per acre. A heavy acquisition load is expected again this next fiscal year because of the continuing backlog of committed projects , the more difficult acquisition process associated with re- luctant sellers in a market of escalating prices, and the complicated nature of additional creative approaches to land acquisition (including the possibility of the exchange of density or property rights) . Two negotiations in 1979-80 ended in impasse and required the institution of eminent domain proceedings. It is anticipated that, as the focus of acqui- sition projects narrow, it will be necessary to exercise the power of eminent domain more frequently. On January 1, 1980 the District hired a temporary Land Acqui- sition Representative to help with the acquisition program for one year. The 1980-81 budget includes salary and benefits for this position for the remainder of this calendar year, and $12 ,000 in contingency funds in the event it is necessary to extend the land acquisition representative position for an additional six months. A total of $137,000 has been budgeted for direct expenses relating to land acquisition, such as appraisals, preliminary title reports, title insurance, legal fees, etc. This total is an increase of $36 ,000 over the 1979-80 budget and is mainly attributed to the costs of increased legal activity, engineering fees, and survey work associated with acquiring portions of larger parcels. Once again, in excess of $5.4 million is allocated to pre- viously committed projects. only $0. 25 million in previously committed projects was expended this past fiscal year (former Crist property) . The projects for which land acquisition funds have been previously committed are as follows : Project: Comments : Hassler Health Hcue Negotiations in progress Edgewood State College Site Expected to close escrow before November, 1980 Baylands Park Portion acquired. Mitigation parcels under condemnation by Caltrans. R-80-24 Page Six Stevens Creek-Shoreline Nature Foothills portion acquired Study Area Los Gatos Creek Park Negotiations in progress Bear Creek Redwoods State Park State Park project approved for Proposition 1 and AB 990 Rancho San Antonio Open Space Under eminent dcmain action Preserve/Windmill Pasture Area/ Peterson property Monte Bello Open Space Preserve/ Under eminent domain action McNeil property The Open Space Acquisition budget also includes almost $1. 3 million for debt service (principal and interest pay- ments) for retirement of notes and installment purchase con- tracts issued in exercise of the District' s borrowing power. Staff has been successful in negotiating several installment purchases this year, but the unusually high market interest rates have made negotiations for other than cash purchases more difficult than in previous years. Additionally, the uncertain income situation created by the passage of Propo- sition 13 and the possibility of Proposition 9 passage have made additional "bonded" indebtedness infeasible at this. It is hoped that the funding situation will be more settled in fiscal year 1980-81, and that it will be possible to con- tinue to borrow money in the bond market. The total Open Space Acquisition budget is structured for an aggressive program utilizing all of the financing resources available, and staff expects another active land acquisition year including additional cooperative projects and creative approaches to the preservation of open space. 2. Open Space Management Program. The District continues with a basic open space management policy of providing public access to open space preserves while maintaining a responsible level of stewardship. Increased public awareness of open space preserves and the successful Open Space Acquisition Program have required open Space Management to direct its emphasis toward providing for the health, safety, and welfare of the preserve user providing a maintenance improvement program to meet the in- creased user needs. Open Space Management Policies: The emphasis of previously adopted Open Space Management budget policies was to provide for continuing patrol and maintenance of open space preserves and to allow selected site development without impacting the Open Space Acquisition Program. R-80-24 Page Seven The Open Space Management funding guidelines provided for a budget base that would allow for a responsible level of operation and provide for annual limit increases which would amount to the greater of either a proportionate percentage change in property tax revenue or the Bay Area All Urban Consumer Price Index change plus 2% . Other adopted guide- lines allowed three-year amortization of certain capital items and permitted major capital site development items and Enterprise Subprogram costs to be excluded from the budget limit. To be specific, you adopted the following new budget policies for the Open Space Management program last year. Recommended clarifications are shown in italics. (1) The open space management funding assumptions will be based solely on the basic property tax revenue aZZocation and not include State surplus funds, grants, or gifts , since tax revenue is the major predictable source of income. (2) The budget limit base will allow for responsible operation during FY 1979/80 with adjustments in future years which are proportional to increased operational obligations. (3) Budget base limit for future years shall be 1979/80 budget base plus the greater of either: a) proportionate percentage change in basic property tax revenue aZZocation b) Bay Area All Urban Consumer Price Index change 2% (4) The budget base limit is a limit, not a spending guideline, and it is intended that actual budgets be under the limit if feasible. (5) Individual capital equipment items such as trucks, which cost over $10, 000, shall be amortized over 3 years. (6) Costs of capitaZ improvements such as parking Zots and restrooms to implement adopted use and management pZans for given preserves which are not incZuded in normaZ site deveZopment and whose totaZ cost is more than $5000 for a given preserve are not incZuded in the budget Zimit. TraiZs, fencing, and grading of smaZZ vehicular parking areas are examples of normaZ site deveZopment. Costs of normaZ site deveZopment shaZZ be amortized over 3 years when they are more than $10, 000 in a year for implementing an adopted pZan for a given preserve. R-80-24 Page Eight The portion of the cost for a specific site deveZop- ment or Zand management project which is covered by a grant is not incZuded in the budget Zimit. The grant shaZZ be apportioned to the fractions of costs which are within and outside the budget Zimit. (7) A combined limit of $1,000 shall be placed on historic visual resource preservation. (8) The Enterprise Subprogram shall be independently accounted for as a revenue-producing program. Staff reviewed these policies with the Budget Committee to see where refinement or interpretation was needed. Issues centering around policies 1 and 3 received considerable dis- cussion. In 1979, at the time the policies were adopted, it was assumed that the District would receive about $1. 811 million from property tax revenue and $ 1 million from State bail-out funds. It was expected that the State bail-out would be phased out in subsequent years. As it turned out under the "permanent" AB 8 formula, the District received no direct bail-out from the State surplus in 1979-1980 but received a larger share of the property tax allocation than anticipated earlier. Under AB 8, some agencies re- ceived more in bail-out and less in property taxes than in the previous year. The District 's revised budget for 1979/80 showed $2. 932 million in anticipated property tax (including prior years redemptions and State tax relief subventions) . The reason- able evaluation of policy 3a , in light of the Board' s intent at the time of policy formulation, is that the statement should stand as is and for this year would lead to the following calculation: 1980-81 basic property tax allocation $3, 320, 300 = 1. 13 1979-80 basic property tax allocation $2, 932 ,300 The basic property tax allocation is the District's share under State law of the total Proposition 13 tax rate of $4 per $100 assessed valuation; it does not include the property tax necessary to service debt incurred prior to Proposition 13, which is a separate revenue item. Another point of discussion was the use of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to measure changes in operational costs. There has been renewed controversy recently about the way housing costs are included in the CPI, and the change in the CPI over the last year may overestimate the cost of living in- crease for the average consumer by two to four percentage R-80-24 Page Nine points. Some investigation by staff and discussion with the Budget Committee revolved around alternative published mea- sures for predicting inflationary changes in District oper- ational costs more accurately. The group concluded that it was not worth changing from the CPI in view of the com- plexities and lesser convenience of going to another measure. However, it was recognized that use of the CPI probably gives some real dollar growth in the budget base limit even without adding the 2%. Since, according to policy 4, the budget base limit is a limit and not a spending guideline, the addition of the 2%, or even the use of the full CPI change, can be evaluated each year. For 1980-81, the necessary data, which would give the CPI change from July 1979 to July 1980 is not yet available, of course. The February to February increase was 18%, however! The budget base limit for 1980-81 which corresponds to a 15% increase over that for 1979-80, plus the $34,000 maximum increase approved in concept by you to compensate for the loss of CETA personnel, is: 1980-81 budget base = ($405,277 X 1. 15)+ $34,000 = $500,100 A 20% increase would lead to $520, 000. Note again that the projected basic property tax increase is 13% . There was also considerable discussion about policy 6 , which is being recommended for revision as shown, to clarify what "major" meant in the original policy. It was felt that fences, gates, trails, etc. , would always be done under use and management plan implementation, although for a large site, like the Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, the work might be done over an extended period, such as three years. The amortization concept allows major costs of such items to be spread over three years against the budget limit, even though the expenditures were made in one year; this concept is applied to trucks and other expensive equipment (see policy 5 ) . Policy 6 also keeps major abnormal capital development items outside the limit. The following table shows how one would apply these clarified policies to the 1980-81 open space management budget to determine a figure to be compared with the budget limit. R-80-24 Page Ten Open Space Management Budget Factors 1) Budget Line Item Total (Includes Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Development and Enterprise Activities) $528,650 2) Add: Vehicle Amortization from previous year $ 6,600 $535 ,250 3) Less: 2/3 Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Non-Exempt Items (Allocated to 1981-82 and 1982-83) -$ 9, 700 4) Less: Monte Bello Exempt Capital Improvement Items -$ 37,900 5) Less: Enterprise Subprogram costs -$ 15,000 $472 ,650 6) Add: New Site Protection Contingency $ 9,500 7) MAXIMUM AMOUNT WHICH MIGHT BE SPENT AGAINST BUDGET LIMIT $482, 150 As can be seen, if all contingency funds are encumbered, the projected expenditures counted within the budget guidelines would be about $18 ,000 (3. 6%) less than a budget limit of $500, 100 and about $38,000 (7. 3%) less than a limit of $520, 300. As developed by staff, the proposed Open Space Management budget not only keeps up with inflation (probably less than the CPI increase) for services and supplies and with projected salary increases, but also allows for real program growth over 1979-80, particularly in terms of site improvements which increase usability by visitors. It does not allow, however, for growth in the number of staff members in 1980-81. The coming fiscal year will be one of seeing I what can be accomplished by current staff, particularly field staff after the recent additions, and, as the proposed Action Plan indicated, a year of planning for a future staff structure to meet the District' s changing needs. Proposed Fiscal 1980-81 Budget: The proposed budget for fiscal year 1980-81 reflects a 20% increase in Open Space Management salaries and benefits over last year's budget level due to staff increases and regular salary adjustments. The services and supplies budget increased by 17%, and fixed asset accounts decreased some 31%, while the total Open Space Management budget proposed for 1980-81 fiscal year is 11.5% greater than the 1979-80 fiscal year budget. R-80-24 Page Eleven The Planning, Design and Development Subprogram has been restructured to include the Land Management Administration Subprogram. The major emphasis this year will be to im- plement, once final approval has been received from the Board, the proposed Monte Bello Development Plan. Project dollars amounting to $52 ,450 have been included within the proposed budget for both capital improvement items such as parking lot and restrooms, and site improvements such as trails, fences, and other amenities. A Land and Water Conservation Fund grant application was submitted soliciting a 50% matching grant for the Monte Bello development project. If the grant is not selected for funding, the Board may then have to decide to proceed with the project using alternate funding for this project. Open Space Management programs will be directed to assess and recommend use and management plans for new sites; accordingly, protection items such as fencing, gates, signs, trail connec- tions, and vegetation management have been budgeted at $5400. In addition, $9500 has been identified as contingency line items for site operation and improvements to be allocated, as approved, for new site protection. The Planning, Design and Development Subprogram also includes monitoring existing site use and recommending resource manage- ment plans such as vegetation restoration and fire manage- ment plans for open space preserves. Assessment of special areas include continued consideration of the Picchetti Ranch historic preservation, the Hassler Health Home project, and possible management recommendations for non-District owned sites, even though dollars have not been included in the proposed 1980/81 budget to implement any recommendations. The Operations, Maintenance and Volunteer Subprogram will continue as a program of responsible land management, and includes patrol of District open space preserves, provision of a viable docent program, and enlistment of volunteer support to aid other District projects. The first phase development plan of Santa Clara County' s Rancho San Antonio Park will be implemented in 1980/81, and the coordination of this project will be essential in order to insure compati- bility between the use and management of the Preserve and the Park. The Enterprise Subprogram budget proposes an 8% increase for the coming fiscal year. The Enterprise Subprogram was evalu- ated to compare revenues and expenditures for the current year versus next year. Fiscal year 1979-80 had enterprise expenditures of some $11,500 to repair and maintain the rental structures and their water systems. The proposed enterprise maintenance budget of $13,000 is based on projected structure maintenance programs and necessary road and utility maintenance. The $24, 000 in revenues received in the current R-80-24 Page Twelve fiscal year should be increased by about 20% in 1980/81. Additional revenue may be realized from other non-structure related enterprise programs. 3. Public Communications and Governmental Liaison Program. The Public Communications and Governmental Liaison Program for 1980-81 remains essentially the same as for 1979-80, with priority given to the clear communication of information about the District with the aim of generating greater public involvement (see Action Plan report) . This program' s total budget of approximately $60, 000 reflects the rising cost of goods and services of all kinds, rather than any change in the direction of the program. The major increases include the program leader' s salary (to cover a change in working hours from 2/3 to 3/4 time) , graphic design and printing. The increases of approximately $3, 200 and $3, 800 in the last two categories are for the revision and reprinting of the Master Plan. Smaller increases of $500 or less can be seen in the categories of photography, district displays, legislative consultant, and temporary office services. All but the last item reflect increased prices and fees. Temporary help has been increased by $500 and is to cover emergency situations and some anticipated overload periods. Two new categories have been included in the new budget: $400 for computer services (for the newsletter mailing list) and $600 for office furniture, to solve an increasing storage problem. The office furniture category also includes $1000 in contingency for additional audio-visual equipment to enable staff to produce a more pleasing type of slide show . All other budget categories remain the same as last year or have been decreased. Although not shown in the budget, the Public Communications program now has what amounts to an "enterprise account" for the contributions that come in for the Openspace newsletter. The estimated total for this fiscal year is $700, with a similar amount anticipated for the coming fiscal year. 4. General Management and Program Support. As noted in the proposed Action Plan for 1980-81, this activity area includes those general management and program support activities assignable to more than one District program, such as personnel administration, accounting, office planning, ordering of supplies and eequipment, and general legal services. Many of the expenditures in this program represent fixed costs, State mandated costs, and other necessary operational costs. R-80-24 Page Thirteen The proposed General Management and Program budget for 1980-81 is approximately 27% above the 1979-80 budget and about 19% above the 1979-80 projected expenditures . Two budget categories, specifically Elections Expenses and Rents and Leases, account for a large portion of the increased budget for 1980-81. Since elections will be held in Wards 3, 4, and 7 this year, approximately $15, 000 has been budgeted to cover Santa Clara County and San Mateo County election expenses, as well as miscellaneous election expenses, such as advertising, incurred by the District. The District' s current lease agreement for its office space on Distel Circle expires in November, and for the past three years, annual rental fees have been approximately $24, 800 (about 65� per square foot of office space) . Staff will soon be in the process of extending the term of the lease agreement, and annual rent may increase under the terms of the lease. The budget category of Other Professional Services has been increased to account for expected increases in the auditor' s fees and to cover personnel consultant fees. Mr. Foss' fees during the coming year will decrease, but $5000 has been budgeted in the category of Personnel Consultant to allow District staff to engage professional personnel consultant (s) who will enhance staff effectiveness through training in areas such as organization development, group process ,and time management or other skills areas. In addition, line items such as telephone, postage, advertising, computer services, and private vehicle expense have increased in the proposed 1980-81 General Management and Program Support budget to reflect increased and projected service costs and government approved rates. There are no contingency items for General Management and Program Support. Recommendation: As noted in the Introduction, no action is being requested of the Board at this time. The preliminary budget for 1980-81 will be presented at your meeting of June 11, 1980, and at that time, I will recommended that you adopt the prelimi- nary budget for fiscal year 1980-81 as well as clarification of Open Space Management budget limit policies. You will also be considering salary range adjustments at that meeting. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT May 22 , 1980 PRELIMINARY BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1980-1981 ,Fiscal .Year) Public Corununi- General Open Space Open Space cations & Management & Acquisition Management Governmental Program TOTALS Bud et Category Program Program Liaison Program Support (All Programs) II. REVENUES A., Basic Property Tax Allocation $ 3,018 ,600 !B. Debt Service property Tax 1,292,529 C. --ior Years Redemptions 68 , 000 D. Homeowner' s Property Tax Relief 119,100 E. Business Inventory Property Tax Relief 114 ,600 F. Interest 250,000 G. Grants 805,000 H. Enterprise Activities 31,500 I. Grant Anticipation Notes 11000,000 J. Other 1 ,000 TOT REVENUES $ 6 ,700,329 I. RESERVES A. General Fund Reserve ($1,302,518) B. Emergency Reserve 1,500, 000 C. Special Fund Restricted Reserves 4 ,068,582) TOTAL RESERVES ($3,871 ,100) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Page Two PRELIMINARY BUDGET BY PROGRAM t (1980-1981 Fiscal Year) Public Communi- General Open Space Open Space cations & Management & Acquisition Management Governmental Program TOTALS Budget CategoEy Program Program Liaison-Program Support (All Programs] III. EXPENDITURES A. Debt Service 1, Interest $ 311,932 $ -0- $ -0- $ -0- $ 311,932 2. Principal 987, 597 -0- -0- -0- 987,597 SUBTOTAL $1,299, 529 i0- -0- -0- $1,299,529 B. Salaries and Benefits 1. Directors ' Fees -0- -0- -0- 8,400 $ 8,400 a 2. Board Appointees -0- -0- -0- 47,700 47,700 3. General Manager Appointees 83,700 254,000 21,000 42,200 400,900 4 . Fringe Benefits 14,100 46 ,000 2,800 18,700 81,600 SUBTOTAL $ 97,800 $ 300,000 $ 23,800 $ 117,000 $ 538,600 C. Services & Supplies 1. Legal Fees $ -0- $ -0- $ -0- $ 35,200 $ 35,200 .^ Acquisition Services 25, 000 -0- -0- -0- 25,000 3. Professional r Services 2, 000 20,400 15,000 13,500 50,900 4. Other Outside Services 2 , 200 1,000 3,500 3,700 10,400 5. Library and Subscriptions 500 700 1,000 100 2, 300 6. Dues & Memberships 50 150 150 50 400 7. Election -0- -0- -0- 15,100 15, 100 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Page Three PRELIMINARY BUDGET BY PROGRAM (1980-1981 Fiscal Year) Public Communi- General Open Space Open Space cations & Management & Acquisition Management Governmental Program TOTALS Budget Category Program Program Liaison Program Support (All Programs) , 8. Office Rent $ -0- $ -0- $ -0- $ 38,200 $ 38 ,200 9. Equipment Rental -0- 11000 -0- -0- 1,000 10. Utilities -0- 9,800 -0- -0- 9,800 1' Telephone and -0- -0- 600 10,400 11,000 Postage 12. Printing and 600 51500 11,400 4,600 22,100 Duplicating 13. Insurance -0- 15, 200 -0- 1,500 16,700 14. Advertising 300 1,300 300 600 2,500 15. Maps/Aerials 1,500 400 -0- -0-- 1, 900 Services and Supplies 16. Private Vehicle 3, 000 3, 200 500 21600 9, 300 Expense 17. District Vehicle -0- 32,400 -0- -0- 32,400 Expense J " Conference Exp. 1, 400 11900 2,600 1, 300 7, 200 1, Training and 600 6, 000 300 300 7 , 200 Seminars 20. Equipment Repair -0- 4,200 -0- 800 51000 & Maintenance 21. Office Supplies/ 500 400 200 1,800 2►900 Small Equipment 22. Field Supplies/ -0- 6, 800 -0- -0- 6 ,800 Small Equipment 23. Site Operation, -0- 48,600 -0- -0- 48, 600 Maint. & Repair MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PRELIMINARY BUDGET BY PROGRAM Page Four (1980-1981 Fiscal. Year). Public Communi- General Open Space Open Space cations & Management & Acquisition Management Governmental Program TOTALS _-Budget Category Program Program Liaison Program Support (All Pro rams) 24. Miscellaneous 100 100 100 100 400 SUBTOTAL $ 37,750 $ 159, 050 $ 35,650 $ 129,850 $ 362 ,300 ID. Fixed Assets 1. Committed Land Purchases $ 51410, 000 -0- -0- -0- $ 51410,000 2. New Land Purchases 21000,000 -0- -0- -0- 21 000,000 3. Opportunity Purchases 500,000 -0- -0- -0- 500,000 4. Site Acquisition Expense 137,000 -0- -0- -0- 137 ,000 5. Site Preparation Expense 250,000 -0- -0- -0- 250,000 6. Structures and Improvements -0- 64,000 -0- -0- 64 ,000 7. Field Equipment -0- 5,100 -0- -0- 5 ,100 8. Office Equipment -0- 500 600 30,800 4 , 900 SUBTOTAL $ 81297,000 $ 69,600 $ 600 $ 3,800 $ 8,371,000 ? TOTAL OF ALL EXPENDITURES $ 9,7321079 $ 528 ,650 $ 60,050 $ 250,650 $10,571,429 ` TOTAL EXPENDITURES ! EXCLUDING LAND, DEBT SERVICE AND SITE PREPARATION $ 272,550 $ _ 528 ,650 $ 60,050 . $ 250,650 $ 1,111,900 M-80-40 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMOPAMUM May 19, 1980 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: Land Acquisition and Land Management Staff SUBJECT': District Owned Lands. The following table lists lands, partial interest in lands and approximate acreage owned by the District: OPEN SPACE PRESERVES ACRES Costanoan Way O.S.P. 2 El Sereno O.S.P. 1,036 Fremont Older O.S.P. 616 Los Trancos O.S.P. 274 Foothills O.S.P. 180 Monte Bello O.S.P. 2,604 Rancho San Antonio O.S.P. 1,024 Rancho San Antonio - 594 acres Duveneck Windmill Pasture Area 430 acres Saratoga Gap O.S.P. 492 Long Ridge O.S.P. 444 Thorneuiood 87 Russian Ridge O.S.P. 185 Manzanita Ridge O.S.P. 478 Fairweather - 188 acres Kennedy Trails - 290 acres Total 7,422 PARTIAL INTEREST ACRES Manzanita Ridge O.S.P. 137 (Laye Property) Interest Foothills O.S.P. 10 (Struggle Mountain Property) Right of First Refusal Long Ridge O.S.P. 40 (Pacific High School) Right of First Refusal and Design Review Summit Road Open Space Easement 20 (La Point) Total 207 Identical letters sent to the following : Senator Roberti Senator Nimmo Senator Briggs MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 May 19, 1980 Senator Bill Greene State Capitol Room 4031 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Greene: The Senate Finance Committee is scheduled to hear Assemblyman Naylor' s bill AB 859 on May 26. The bill, as it has been amended, represents an excellent compromise between the needs of our communities to purchase, with limited funds, surplus school sites; and the needs of the schools to receive a fair return for their programs. Tra- ditionally, the school playgrounds have been used for community recreation and are quite often critical open space in our urban environments. on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Midpen- insula Regional Open Space District, I urge your favorable consideration of AB 859. Sincerely yours, g.IA�� 4AA`�� Barbara Green President Board of Directors BG:jg cc: Assemblyman Naylor MROSD Board of Directors i ' Herbert A.Grench,Genera/Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,_Nonette G.Hanko,_Richard S.Bishop.Edward G.Shelley,Harry A Tumer,Daniel G.%vendin SACRAMENTO ADDRESS COMMITTEES ROOM 5164,STATE CAPITOL Elections and Reapportionment SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814 Vice Chairman (916)445-8188 Revenue and Taxation DISTRICT OFFICE �lBExYC � Ways and Means 621 MIDDLEFIELD ROAD fill REDWOOD CITY, 65-142CALIFORNIA 94063 x1alifornt (415)365-1426 ` ► ROBERT W. NAYLOR ASSEMBLYMAN,TWENTIETH DISTRICT MINORITY WHIP .6t�ZLb 13 May 16, 1980 Barbara Green, President MROSD Board of Directors 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos, California 94022 Dear Ms . Green: Thank you for your letter of May 8 . I was happy to co-author SB 1550 and to be of assistance for such a worthy cause. Si-ne rel RWN:dl ROB RT W. O C-80-9 May 28, 1980 Meeting 80-10 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S # Amount Name Description, 1034 $ 800.00 First American Title Guaranty Cmpany Preliminary Reports 1035 1,644.00 Gregory Archbald Professional Services 1036 155.47 West Coast Shoe Ckfipany Ranger Uniforms 1037 604.50 Olsten of Palo Alto Temporary Secretary 1038 100.00 Valley Title Company Preliminary Report 10.39 48.00 Warren, Gorham & Lamont, Inca Subscription 1040 128.92 Signs of the Tires District Signs 1041 1,140.00 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett Legal Services - April 1042 46.91 San Jose Art, Paint & Wallpaper Office Supplies&District' Display 1043 216.20 Ace Fire Equipment & Service Company Field Equipment 1044 30.42 San Jose Mercury Classified Ad - Accountant 1045 800.00 California Advocates Legislative Services - I9ay 1046 94.45 Alvord and Ferguson Ranger Uniforms 1047 26.78 Graphicstat, Inc. Photograph Reproduction 1048 400.00 Ms. and Mrs. Jens Karl Kraijer Deed of Trust Payment - Fine Property 1049 2,294.00 Sam Skropanich Discing-Fremont Older, Picchetti, and Rancho San Antonio 1050 1,400.00 -Peninsula Open Space Trust Professional Services - April Revised C-80-9 May 28, 1980 Meeting 80-10 (AS APPROVED) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT C L A I M S # Amount Name Description 1034 $ 800.00 First American. Title Guaranty Company Preliminary Reports 1035 1,644.00 Gregory Archbald Professional Services 1036 155.47 West Coast Shoe Carpany Ranger Uniforms 1037 604.50 Olsten of Palo Alto Temporary Secretary 1038 100.00 Valley Title Company Preliminary Report 1039 48.00 Warren, Gorham & Lamont, Inc. Subscription 1040 128.92 Signs of the Tines District Signs 1041 1,140.00 Rogers, Vizzard & Tallett Legal Services - April 1042 46.91 San Jose Art, Paint & Wallpaper Office Supplies&District Displav 1043 216.20 Ace Fire Equipment & Service Company Field Equipment 1044 30.42 San Jose Mercury Classified Ad - Accountant 1045 800.00 California Advocates Legislative Services - May 1046 94.45 Alvord and Ferguson Ranger Uniforms 1047 26.78 Graphiestat, Inc. Photograph Reproduction 1048 400.00 Mr. and Mrs. Jens Karl Kraijer Deed of Trust Payment - Fine Property 1049 2,294.00 Sam Skropanich Discing-Fremont Older, Picchetti, and Rancho San Antonio 1050 1,400 .00 Peninsula Open Space Trust Professional Services - April 1051 992.58 Jeda Publications, Inc. Newletter Printing 1052 976.00 Flinn, Gray & Herterich Insurance 1053 17.43 City of Palo Alto UtilitiesUtilities 1054 366.82 Monte Vista Garden Center Site Operation Maintenance Supplies 1055 346.81 Shell Oil Company District Vehicle Expense 1056 93.72 P.G.& E. Electricity - Sites 1057 5.03 Pacific Telephone Phone Services 1058 50.66 Steven Sessions. Private Vehicle Expense 1059 133.13 Pioneer Printing Printing -1-a68------- 51---Ka 3ne -fy-------------------------Prr -Veh±c-1e Expense--------- 1061 419.16 Mobil District Vehicle Expense 1062 7.10 Stanley R. Norton Phone, Travel & Duplicating- April 1063 392.73 Union Oil Company District Vehicle Expense Page Two Rev1i0 (AS APPROVED) Amount Name Description -1064 194.03 Herbert Grench Out of Town Meeting & Meal Conference 1065 4,100.00 Allan and Julie Iandh Relocation- Monte Bello Open Space Preserve 1066 51.23 General Printing Ccnpany Printing. 1067 101.71 The Dark Room Photo Processing I068 100.00 Jean H. Fiddes - Advance for Postage Machine 1069 400.00 U.S. Postmaster Postage Machine 1070 143.01 Petty Cash Office Supplies, Meal Conferences, Postage, Private Vehicle Expense, Training & Seminars, MR06D Display and Slide Library I