HomeMy Public PortalAbout19801210 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 80-27 Meeting 80-27
eAAw
%C
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
December 10, 1980 375 Distel Circle, D-1
Los Altos, CA 94022
(7 :30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 27, November 12 and 24 , 1980
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
(7 :45) 1. Resolution of Appreciation - B. Green
Resolution of Appreciation Commending Supervisor
Geraldine Steinberg for Her Assistance to the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and to
the Environment of the County of Santa Clara
(7 :50) 2. Review of 1979-1980 Legislative Session and Prospects
for 1981 - H. Grench and R. Beckus
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(8 :20) 3. Status of Thornewood Lease Proposals - S. Sessions
(8 :40) 4. Status of Picchetti Proposals - S. Sessions
(9: 00) 5. Issues and Questions from Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops - R. Bishop, N. Hanko and E. Shelley
(9:30) 6. Proposed Change in Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
Fire Management Plan Schedule - S. Sessions
(9: 35) 7. Use of Structures on Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve,
Mt. Melville Area - S. Sessions
(9 :40) 8. Assessment of the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve
Vehicle Access Bridge - S. Sessions
(9 : 50) 9. Declaration of Election Results - H. Grench
OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED
(9 :55) 10. Progress Report on Signs Along Skyline Boulevard -
S. Sessions
Herbert A.Grench,Genera!Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,NonetteG.Hanko,Richard S.Bishop,EdwardG.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin
Meeting 80-27
December 10, 1980
Page Two
(10 :05) 11. Long Term Office Space Needs and Location - H. Grench
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(10:10) 12. Updating of Master Plan for New Printing - H. Grench
Resolution Amending the Master Plan of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
(10 :30) 13. Date for Program Evaluation Workshop - H. Grench
(10 : 35) 14. Cancellation of Second Regular Meeting in December
H. Grench
(10 :40) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
EXECUTIVE SESSION - Land Negotiations and Personnel Matters
ADJOURNMENT
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 OraZ 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
accurateZy incZuded in the minutes.
FOR YOUR INFORMATIO"
Meeting 80-27
December 10, 1980
ROY E. LAVE, JR.
690 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, LOS ALTOS, CALIFORNIA 94022 USA
L-99
November 17, 1980
i
Mr. Herbert Grench
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, CA 94022
Dear Herb:
Thanks for the letter. I believe there are some creative ways of
providing access to recreational space without devoting that space
to parking.arkin . Let's talk about it.
Regards,
r
Roy E. Lave
REL/ls
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 80-27 _
December 10 , 1980 Mission Hospice
Mission Hospice, Inc. o t ySan Mateo o n
December 2 , 1980
Ms. Barbara Green, President
Mid Peninsula Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, CA 94022
Dear Ms. Green:
The Executive Committee of the Board of Directors
of Mission Hospice concurs with the idea of doing a
feasibility study of an in-patient facility accessible
to all hospice patients/families in the area.
Sincerely,
l
Pairs. John B. Lagen, r sident
Board of Directors
HL ht
cc Debbie Ridley
Sao El Camino Deal, Suite B, Burlingame, California g4010 (410 347—IZ'8
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meetinc `-27
December j, 1980
TRINITY PARISH
EPISCOPAL
MENLO PARK, CALIF. 94025
HOLY TRINITY CHURCH SAINT BEDE'S CHURCH
330 RAVENSWOOD 2650 SAND HILL ROAD
TELEPHONE 326-2083 TELEPHONE 854-6555
��.. e,. t� a� mac, /���-^-_-- �e�-n...-��� �• '��
`��-GL _ .a-,�it�y ��.�� � /h��-s-u.v�n*a� Cf-•zt�,Gc.•
/� 2-
oil e'C4-
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980
ow
VOLUNTEER EMOTIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES
November 24, 1980
Ms. Barbara Green
President
Mid-Peninsula Open Space District
Board of
Directors 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Theresa P.Wells,M.D. Los Altos, CA 94022
president
The Reverend Richard B.Ford
vice president
John D.Black,Ph.D. Dear Ms. Green:
secretary
Nora R.L.Klein
treasurer
J.Sewall Brown,M.D. Kara is a mid-peninsula organization which provides free
Donald H.Flaxman
Mary Goerz emotional support to persons living through life-threatening
Peter B.Henderson
William A.Hockett,Jr. illness, death or grief. I am, therefore, happy to see the
Dorothy T.Low
Richard J.Thesing,J.D. initiative of local individuals forming Friends of a Free
Program Consultants Standing Hospice.
Barbara August,L.C.S.W.
Katherine Godlewski,L.C.S.W.
Dayton S.Midfeldt,M.D. I would like to support studying the feasibility of the
Glenn T.Olf,L.C.S.W.
Fredric J.VanRheenen,M.D. Thornwood Estate being transformed into such a hospice. I
The Reverend Ernl@ W.D.Young
Executive Director hope that the Open Space District Board can delay their
Carol S.Lillibridge decision on the use of the Thornwood Estate until a feasibility
study can be completed. This study would be of use to Kara
as well as many other local hospice and hospice-related
organizations.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Carol S. Lillibridge
Executive Director
CSL:ss
cc: Friends of Free Standing Hospice
KARA is an independent,nonprofit,tax-exempt corporation.
457 Kingsley Avenue•Palo Alto CA•94301•(415)321-KARA
Kara is the Gothic root of the word"care'.It means to reach out,to grieve with,to care,to lament.
Health Center 7( Jebster Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301 ( 324-1940
Home Health Agency 385 Homer Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 945u1 (415) 324-1964
Administrative Office 457 Kingsley Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 (415) 327-5454
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980 November 23, 1980
Midpeninsula
Health Service
Ms. Barbara Green
Mid-Peninsula Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Ste. D 1
Los Altos, Ca. 94022
Dear Ms. Green:
We at Midpeninsula Health Service, Inc. Home Health and Hospice program are writing
to ask your assistance in an issue which will soon come before the Board of Midpeninsula
Open Spare District. (MOSD) . Specifically, we ask you to consider delaying your decision
regarding the settlement of the Thornwood Estate until your May 1981 meeting, so
that a feasibility study regarding the use of the estate for a free standing, in-patient
facility can be completed.
The hospice movement in this country began as a community response to the
technological approaches to dying in acute care hospital facilities. Similarly,
the thought of transforming the Thornwood Estate into a hospice care facility developed
in the Woodside community as a possible answer to a probable community need. So
the Friends of a Free Standing Hospice, born from this interested group of citizens,
proposes to fund and to undertake a feasibility study to look into the needs for a
hospice facility as well as how the Thornwood Estate meets that need.
The "Friends" have received the endorsement of the peninsula's Hospice Network, a
group of representatives from all the existing home and in-hospital hospice programs in
San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, to produce the feasibility study. The Network
members will provide resources to the study group, and will be consulted on the
various aspects of the study.
The resulting document from the feasibility study will benefit the Hospice Network
members, the community of people all along the peninsula, and the MOSD. The Network
members will become knowlegable regarding the financial, service, and functional
feasibility of an institutional hospice. And if the feasibility study can recommend
that Thornwood become a Hospice, the network will have a facility to which clients can
be referred. The community will have an understanding of who needs and uses hospice
care, the various services involved, and the varying approaches to the care of the
dying. Again, if Thornwood is recommended as a hospice, and becomes one, the community
will benefit from an excellent alternative to hospital care. Finally, the MOSD will
benefit from the feasibility study by public awareness of the estate's possible new
purpose, should a hospice facility be studied. In addition, the MOSD will have allowed
the opportunity and the initiative for a study to have taken place, showing interest
in the public's needs. The study will indeed be of use and interest to many organizations
and general interest groups all over the bay area.
In conclusion, please delay your decision regarding the use of the Thornwood
Estate so that this feasibility study may be completed and so that the Thornwood Estate
may have the option of becoming an invaluable facility for the terminally ill and their
families.
Sincerely,
Marla Namboothiri, RN, Home Care Coordinator eanne Ewy, xecuti e Director
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT COMMENDING
SUPERVISOR GERALDINE STEINBERG FOR HER ASSISTANCE TO THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AND TO THE ENVIRONMENT
OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
WHEREAS Supervisor Geraldine Steinberg has been a longtime
friend of the environment through her efforts to formulate planning
and zoning policies to protect the open space lands of the county and
WHEREAS, from the very beginning, Supervisor Geraldine Steinberg
has supported and assisted the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
in realizing its goal of providing a public recreational greenbelt for
the citizens of this region and
WHEREAS, Supervisor Geraldine Steinberg played a vital role in
the creation of what might well be named the "Rancho Steinberg Open
Space Preserve" , as well as in the planning of the Rancho San Antonio
County Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE to commend and express its appreciation
to Supervisor Geraldine Steinberg for her past and continued support
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and for her sensitive
concern for the land.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District on 1980, at a
regular meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES, and in favor thereof:
DIRECTORS
NOES:
ABSENT:
President Board of Directors
ATTEST:
Secretary
M-80-94
(Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 3, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Review of 1979-1980 Legislative Session and
Prospects for 1981
Bob Beckus, the District' s Legislative Consultant in Sacramento,
will attend your December 10 meeting to review the 1979-1980
California State legislative session and to discuss prospects
for 1981.
The Legislative Committee is scheduled to meet to develop
recommendations regarding the District' s 1981-1982 legislative
program and continuation of retaining an advocate in Sacramento.
M-80-97
(Meeting 80-27
le December 10, 1980)
0 1"W
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 3 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Status of Thornewood Lease Proposals
Introduction: Staff has been actively soliciting proposals for
the leasing of the Thornewood house and grounds, as authorized by
you at your October 8 , 1980 meeting (see memorandum M-80-74 ,
dated October 2 , 1980) . The deadline for submitting proposals
is December 5 , 1980 .
Discussion: Twenty-seven interested parties requested copies
of the lease parameters and toured the Thornewood complex. As
of the writing of this memorandum, staff has not received any
written proposals, although three individuals have indicated
that they would be submitting proposals based on the lease
parameters that you approved.
pproved. In addition, a request has been
received from, Health Service, Inc. to consider a hospice use
for Thornewood, and the American Youth Hostels, Inc. will be
submitting a proposal. The Board will also have the Gano trade
proposal to consider.
At the October 8 , 1980 meeting, you authorized staff to solicit
proposals with a due date of December 5 , 1980. At that time,
you indicated the Board would consider at the December 10 meeting
a course of action for evaluating the proposals, and staff will
present a summary of all proposals received at the meeting.
Recommendation: I would recommend that you form a Thornewood
Proposal Committee (or give the Thornewood Lease Parameter
Committee the charge) to review and evaluate the proposals.
This Committee would meet at its earliest convenience to review
the proposals and allow proposers to present their ideas to
the Committee. Recommendations or options for the disposition
of the Thornewood house and grounds would then be sent to the
Board by the Committee.
M-80-92
(Meeting 80-27
oe December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 2 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY : S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Status of Picchetti Proposals
Discussion: As authorized by you at your meeting of July 16 , 1980 ,
staff solicited proposals for the leasing of the Picchetti Ranch
complex (see memorandum M-80-50 , dated July 10 , 1980) . The
deadline for submitting proposals was November 14 , 1980, and seven
written proposals were received. All seven proposals expressed
a basic interest in the winery restoration, with some agricultural
use of the site, and all of the proposals followed the parameters
which you approved.
Staff is reviewing the proposals for completeness , and a list
summarizing the seven proposals is attached for your information.
Since some of the proposers have requested an opportunity to
present their proposals to Board members, staff would suggest
that all proposers be requested to present their proposals to
a Picchetti Proposal Committee for an initial evaluation. After
an initial review, the Committee may elect to review selected
proposals in further detail before presenting recommendations
to the full Board.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board request a
Picchetti Proposal Committee to set a meeting date at its earliest
convenience for review of the proposals. This Committee could
have the same membership as the previous committee, or membership
could be changed. The Committee would return to the Board
with its findings. Any proposers who wished to present their
proposals to the entire Board could do so at that time. You may
also wish to consider asking the Committee to return to you with
proposed criteria for evaluating proposals before any proposals
are actually evaluated.
M-80-92 page two
Summary of Picchetti Proposals
1) Restore the ranch to a functional winery, including some
vineyard restoration. The objective is a revenue-producing
operation from 10 acres of orchard, a stable operation, and
restaurant.
2) Establish a wine-making museum associated with a production
winery, using all available area for a vineyard.
3) Work with local historical groups to restore the complex. A
museum would be developed and wine sales would be made on
the property.
4) Restore Picchetti to a working, economically viable winery and
vineyard. Some agricultural use of the land would be made for
orchard crops.
5) Develop 100 acres of vineyard and use the winery as a sales
facility.
6) Restore the winery complex, develop a museum, and establish
some vineyard area in addition to an orchard area.
7) Restore the buildings and vineyard as a winery, museum, and
conference center, including a restaurant.
M-80-93
(Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 2 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Site Emphasis Committee - R. Bishop, N. Hanko, E. Shelley
SUBJECT: Issues and Questions from Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops
The Site Emphasis Committee was charged with the responsibility
of formulating policy questions which arose from the Site
Emphasis and Program Evaluation workshops. Attached is a list
of the issues which have evolved from Committee and staff
efforts during three Site Emphasis Committee meetings.
The Committee feels that the magnitude of these issues cannot
be resolved within the time constraints of an agenda item
during a regular Board meeting. Therefore, the Board of
Directors may wish to refer this item to a committee, or the
Board may elect to sit as a special committee of the whole to
consider this item during a special Board meeting.
M-80-93
Issues from Site Emphasis and Program
Evaluation Workshops
For purposes of discussion, the Site Emphasis Committee
has defined emphasized and non-emphasized sites as follows:
Emphasized Site - a District site which is either a. ) actively
used by the public (example. .Rancho San Antonio) or b. ) pro-
moted by the District for active public use (example. . .Los
Trancos) .
Non-Emphasized Site - a District site which is either a. )
not actively used by the public (example. . .Costanoan Way)
or b. ) not promoted by the District for active public use
(example. . .Long Ridge) .
Budget Guidelines
Should any new policies on site emphasis and stewardship
fit within the existing Land Management budget guidelines?
Site Emphasis
(Questions 1-5 are related. Consider financial and public
impacts. )
1. Should some District sites be emphasized for public use?
If so, should they be limited in number?
2. * Should some District sites be non-emphasized for public use?
3. Should there be a system which defines various levels of
emphasis into which individual sites are placed?
4. Should the level of emphasis be decided for each site on
its individual merits?
5. Should the District establish classifications for each
site (wilderness, etc) ?
6. What criteria should be used in determining emphasis vs.
non-emphasis of sites and shoud such criteria be prioritized?
(Consider the following:)
a. manageability of site
b. public need
c. accessibility to public
d. geographic distribution
e. geographic location
f. attractiveness of natural features
g. costs
h. physical and psychological carrying capacity which is
consistent with classification
i. other factors affecting suitability of site
M-80-93
7. Does the Board wish to adopt guidelines which address
the following subjects:
a. restrooms
b. drinking water
C. level of trail development
d. provision of maps
e. parking areas
f. signs
g. provision of camping facilities
h. transportation (shuttle bus)
8. Is a master land management, plan needed to implement
adopted policies?
9. Should the District adopt publicity guidelines related
to a site emphasis policy? If so, how will the level
of emphasis be reflected in our publicity program?
(Consider the following District initiated) :
a. brochures (type and distribution)
b. press releases
C. newsletter
d. slide shows and presentations
e. radio/TV coverage
f. signs as a method of attracting people to sites
g. docent tours
h. other
(Refer to Site Emphasis Workshop survey for additional discussion)
10. Should there be a policy to influence level of external
publicity given to sites? (externally generated)
a. brochures
b. publicity
c. newsletters
d. slide shows and presentations
e. radio/TV
f. signs
g. tours by groups
h. other
11. Should the District have a public relations policy on
emphasis of sites not managed or owned by the District?
Site Stewardship
1. Do we need additional general stewardship policy statements
beyond those contained in the basic policies?
2. Do we need specific policies on level of maintenance and
patrol?
3. Should policies be established regarding influencing
stewardship of lands not managed by the District?
M-80-93
Ranger Ride-Along
Ranger Ride-Along is defined as a Board member riding along
with a member of the ranger staff.
1. Should a ranger ride-along policy be adopted?
2. What would be the advantages or disadvantages of such a
program?
3. If there is a ride-along program, should it be structured
or informal?
4. If it is a structured program, how should it be structured?
a. Ride-along arranged by office staff
b. By direct request of Board member to ranger
c. Arranged by senior staff member
d. Arranged and attended by a senior staff member
5. Should the ride-along program have a time limit or should
it be of an indefinite duration?
6. What mechanisms, if any, should be used to assess benefits
and disadvantages of the program?
Consolidation of open Space Management Policies.
1. Should it be sent to a committee or should it just be
referred to staff?
2. Should this item be considered as one of the activities for
the Open Space Management Program in the 1981-1982 fiscal
year?
M-80-90
(Meeting 80-27
is December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 1, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Proposed Change in Monte Bello Open Space Preserve
Fire Management Plan Schedule
At your August 13, 1980 meeting, you adopted the Monte Bello
Open Space Preserve Fire Management Plan as presented (see
report R-80-47 , dated August 5, 1980) . You also approved
implementation of the Phase I program which designated that
areas 1A, 1B, 5A, and 5B would be burned this fall and winter.
A request has been made by the District' s fire management con-
sultant to modify the Phase I burn program by deferring the
burning of the brush areas within the first phase burn zone
until spring 1981. The purpose of the proposed change reflects
input from the California Department of Forestry that, from
a safety viewpoint, it would be better to burn brush at a time
when the surrounding grass is green. This proposed change does
not affect the program plan or environmental assessment (see
report R-80-55 of October 2 , 1980) other than altering the
time schedule as indicated on the attached table.
It has also been recommended to staff that the 2A brush area,
scheduled for the fall 1981 burn, be included in the proposed
spring 1981 burn of 1B and 5B brush. Again, the factor which
precipitated the proposed change is the safety consideration
of burning brush when the surrounding grass is green.
Recommendation: I recommend that you approve the revised
Phase I Monte Bello Fire Management Plan to allow grass areas
1A and 5A to be burned in fall/winter of 1980 and to allow
brush areas 1B, 5B, and 2A to be burned in spring of 1981.
SUMMARY OF CONTROLLED BURNING PLAN
Fire Management Vegetation Winter Spring Winter
Area Number Type 1980 1981 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1983 1989
1A Grass X X x x
1B Brush X x
2A Brush x x
2B Forest x
3 Grass x x
4A Grass x x
4B Brush & Forest x x
5A Grass x x
5B Forest x
6A Grass X x
6B Forest x
7 Forest x
���7
HIKING ING TRAILS
HIKING Q EQUESTRIAN
&me am* � ROAD
PARKING
� e
` a �► -PACE MILL ROAD
R I D4I_TOP RANCH
� , i ?4 3ICYLltd CADIN
i DOCENT PARKING
•1« ..1a mod.. :: •..
yr V q
t"wa e�
SAN MATEO COUNTY �
e
'N
41
S}/YLINE CO
mile l PARK
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT: MONTE BELLO FIRE MANAGEMENT AREA
M-80-89
(Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 1, 1930
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Use of Structures on Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve, Mt. Melville Area
Introduction: At your meeting of May 28 , 1980 , you authorized
staff to secure the structures on the Mt. Melville Area of the
Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve and allow for caretaker presence
on the site by renting trailer space (see report R-80-24 , dated
May 1, 1980) . At that time, the property was undedicated as
open space.
Discussion: The question of dedication was resolved when the
Board dedicated the property on October 22 , 1980. The remaining
use question concerns the house and garage, which have been
secured but are without a caretaker' s presence because the
prospective short-term tenant changed his mind about renting
space.
To present a recommendation for the ultimate disposition of
this structure requires resolution of some outstanding questions,
i.e. the site emphasis policy question and the review of the
ranger residence program.
Recommendation: Therefore, I recommend that you defer action on
disposition of the house until staff is able to consider alter-
natives after site emphasis and ranger residence policies are
sufficiently resolved. Furthermore, I recommend that you autho-
rize the continuation during this period of the present status
with the structures - secured and no caretaker. It is difficult
to find a short-term caretaker with a trailer, and the water
supply is inadequate. However, if staff were able to locate
a caretaker who would be willing to live with the water situation
and on a short-term basis, then staff would like to be able to
move such a person in under the same interim conditions as pre-
viously approved by the Board.
R-80-67
(Meeting 80-27
0 December 10, 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
December 5 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions , Land Manager
SUBJECT: Assessment of the Rancho San Antonio Open Space
Preserve Vehicle Access Bridge
Introduction: At your November 12 , 1980 meeting, you concurred
with a staff request to defer discussion on the determination of
the integrity of the existing St. Joseph' s Avenue access bridge to
Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve until the December 10, 1980
meeting (see memorandum M-80-82 , dated November 7 , 1980) . The
Phase I construction plans for the Rancho San Antonio County Park
had included a new vehicle bridge over Permanente Creek from the
Cristo Rey Drive entrance, and this bridge would have provided
access to the Preserve for District patrol vehicles , Preserve
users with permits to park in the District's permit parking lot,
and individuals and groups participating in the various programs
provided by the City of Mountain View Deer Hollow Farm. The
bridge, however, was deleted from the initial project because of
time constraints related to the design of the bridge. Phase I
construction would not have been completed until the summer of
1981 if the County had decided to stall construction until the
bridge' s design was finished.
Discussion: The County' s decision to postpone the construction of
the new bridge continues to place the burden of access to the
Preserve via the St. Joseph' s Avenue bridge on the District, and
the bridge must, therefore, remain a part of the access route to
the Preserve for District vehicles, private vehicles, school buses
transporting children to Deer Hollow Farm, various emergency
vehicles, and utility trucks.
The St. Joseph' s Avenue bridge was installed several years ago as
part of a program sponsored by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
The structure is actually a modified railroad flatcar which was
converted into a bridge. During this past summer, repairs were
made on the bridge to correct a broken stringer, and staff feels
that the bridge is structurally adequate for District use and for
providing safe access to the Preserve for current Preserve users.
However, if there was an increased volume of user traffic on the
bridge created by people frequenting the County' s park, the bridge
might have to be replaced.
R-80-67 Page Two
In view of the facts that the District' s lease agreement with the
City of Mountain View for Deer Hollow Farm provides that access
to the Preserve is the District' s responsibility, that the St.
Joseph' s bridge will have to continue to provide access to the
Preserve until the County constructs its new vehicle bridge, and
that repairs did have to be made on the bridge this summer, staff
feels that the District should proceed with an assessment of the
bridge to determine the limits to the present structure. This
assessment, estimated to cost $500, will not be a formal certifi-
cation of the integrity of the bridge, but rather, it will consist
of an engineering evaluation, hopefully to reaffirm staff' s opinion
of the adequacy of the structure to support various types of
vehicles. This evaluation approach is consistent with the District' s
lease arrangement and obligation to provide a safe and adequate
access route to the Preserve.
Recommendation: It is recommended that the Board authorize staff
to have an engineering evaluation made of the bridge at a cost of
approximately $500 in District funds.
M-80-95
law
(Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 3 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes, District Clerk
SUBJECT: Declaration of Election Results
Discussion: The attached Certificates of Election Results from
the County Clerks of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties give
the official results of the November 4, 1980 General Election
for Directors in Wards 3, 4 , and 7. The results are:
Candidate and Ward Total Votes Elected Term of office
Barbara Green 19,672 x 4 years
Ward 3
Edward G. Shelley 18 ,832 x 4 years
Ward 4
Richard S. Bishop 22,121 x 4 years
Ward 7
Recommendation: It is recommended that you approve a motion
declaring the results of the 1980 General Election for District
Directors in Wards 3, 4, and 7 as set forth above. The Oath of
Office for Directors Green, Shelley, and Bishop will be administered
at the first meeting in January.
i
k
CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION RESULTS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss:
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA)
I, George A. Mann, Registrar of Voters and
Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, State of Califor-
nia, do hereby certify that at the General Election held
on November 4 , 1980 a General District Election, con-
solidated therewith, was held in the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District for the purpose of electing Directors
in Wards 3 and 4;
That the official canvass of the returns of
said election was conducted by the office of the Regis-
trar of Voters in accordance with the appropriate provi-
sions of the Elections Code of the State of California;
E.
and
That hereto attached is a full, true and correct
statement of the votes cast at said General District Elec-
tion.
WITNESS my hand and Official Seal
this 24th day of November, 1980
Regi§IraVo
f Voters and Recorder
PAGE 23.1
!GENERAL ELECTI. BOUNTY OF SANTA CLARA-NOVEMBER 4. 1980-n1L OPEN SPACE GIST WARD 3- VOTE FOR I-
ix
v, 0 i !
> U w !
w in aVf ! t 1 1
w v t- z .4
v~i 0 0 n a
Owc >
PCT 004001 SC 19 684 558 '81.5 366
PCT 004002 SC 22 91 Y,43 75:6 Odd
PCT 004004 SC 19 906 596 64.4 379 '.
PCT 004006 BC 19 591 483 81.7 309
PCT 004007 BC 22 5971 443 74.2 296
PCT 004009 $C 19 396 320 W 8 220
PCT 004010 $C 22 334 291 $2.2 282
PCT 004011 $C 22 "829 'S91 71.2, 344
'PCT 004014 BC-22 839j i:''442 74.6 308
PCT 004015 BC 22 263 209 79.4 149
PCT 004017 BC 19 589 408 69.2 257
PCT 004018 SC 19 746 559 74.9 347
PCT:004019 BC 22 3144 63475.1 418
PCT 004020 BC 22 460 376 81.7 219
PCT 004023 BC 22 :'842 425 74.2 `394
PCT 00402E BC 22 821 636 77.4 383
PCT 004034 BC 22 662t 523 79.0 343
PCT 004035 BC 22 452 340 75.2 202
PCT 004036"BC 22 472� 344 "72.8 200
PCT 004038 SC 22 i40 361 '62.0 250
PCT 004041 BC 22 .725` 190 .61.3 365
PCT 004042 BC 22 4521 388 80.4 267'' j
PCT 004046 BC 22 502j 4211, 83.B 2601 }
PCT 004047 BC 19 578, 455' 78.7 315, _ ±
PCT 004049 BC 22 352 69.3 300 1}
PCT 004050 SC 22 668t 4b8 70.0 297
( 1
PCT 004057 $G 29 +573+_ 494} .66.2� 323 }
PCT 00405E SC 22 j 615' 621 76.1 407 M
PCT 0040oC SC 19 391; 287, 73.41 190j j t
PCT 004062 BC 2Z 702: 541 77.0 374j 1 !
PC7:004064 SC 22 461 3301 71.4� 210}
PCT.004065 BC 22 746! 549� ..73.5 335
PCT 004067 BC 22 528� :425SSSSSS 80.4 .270
PCT 004C7C BC 19 4471 350 78.2� 226 i
PCT 004074 BC 19 649: 486� 74.8IIII 314
PCT 004075 BC 19 500 338. 67.6: 236
PCT 004076 BC 19 461 366 79 8 232 f
PCT 004083 $C 22 821 646 78.,9 4"
PCT 0040516 SC 22 - :496 402� 81.0} 2544
PCT 00408E BC 19 762, 6141 80.5i 3711
PCT 004049 BC 22 492; 334! 67.6; 226,
PCT 0041C1 BC 19 816: 614i 75.2; 381;
PCT 004112 SC 22 456! 336! 73.3`• 234
PCT 004113 BC 19 5531 456i 82.4 2771 1 ! I
PCT 004214 $G 19 61dj 473� 76.5� 3121
PCT 004114 BC 22 504' 417+ 91.9, 265
ACT 004121 BC 22 595! 457i 76.8, 2b6 1 i
PCT 004123 BC 22 829- 665 80.21 406' i 1
PC' 004129 BC 19 -649 79.91 i08.
PCT.004130 BC 19 313 74..3� 20
91
( t $ f
PCTL004131 BC 22 S371 1417i '77.6� 261 ttt f } }
PCT 004132 BC 19 529: 3981 75.2 ( 246 1 t ;
PCT 004133 BC 22 5511 425 77.1 267 I i
PCT 004136 BC 22 823! 629' 76.4 396:
PCT 004137 BC 22 379 298� 73 6 272` i }
PCT 004139 BC 19 545 432 79.21 302�
PCT 004140 BC 19 .499i 412i 82.5� 2491 I
PCT 004141 BC 19 ! 375' 290 .7.3, 175
PCT 0041,2 BC 19 ( 891 646' 72.5 <26' ! f I
PCT 004143 BC 22 13 576 450 78.1 I 260
PC7 004146 BC 19 i 579' 4081 70.4I 256 j
PCT 004247 BC 19 .4603i 471 78.2j 302� 1 1) t
PCT'00414B BC 19 430; 344 SO.ol 224� s
PCT 006011 BC 21 157; 225, 79.6 77
PCT 006222 BC 21 238 2C1 84.4 ill
i
I
4r# ABSENTEE TOTALS +��• "49 1387 4pi.0 83d
sx44 1
i O T A L'S +�abr 3834 30356 ,80.4 19672 1
i
PAGE 24.1
1GENERAL ELECTION COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA-NOVEMBER 4. 1980-KID-PEA OPEN SPACE DIST HARD 4- VOTE FOR 1-
c
p
3
t
r
w 0 >
w Ow
F- J
D taw J
> U w
N � {
w Vi to !
w U 1- Z
.N+ w Z d ce
0 1- a p 3
OL > w 1
PCT 002301 Be 37 472 371 78.6' I90 1111
PCY 002304 Be,37 445� 336 75:5f 176
PCT 002305 Be 37 426 350## 82.I 199
PCT 002306 Be 37 4751 396j $3.3 224�
PCT 002308 Be 37 7841 626 79.8 3401
PCT 002310 Be 37 534, 409I!I 76.5 2401
PCT 002312 Be 37 831 6551 78 8 383
PCT 002313 Be 37 683 538 78.7 328
PCT 002318'BG;37 r807 648 80.2 367.
PCT 002321 Be 37 635 475 74.8 267
PCT 002323 Be 37 452 358 74.2 177�
PCT 002325 Be 37 443 347 78.3 199
PCT'.002326 Be 37 %483+ 376 77.:8 21'2
PCT 002332 EC 37 440 355 -80.,6 '206 t
PCT 002340 Be .37 596 474 . 79"3 269
PCT 002341 Be 37 4351 346 79.5� 192�
PCT 002342 Be 37 8442 674 80.0 395+
PCT 002345 Be 37 322 261 $1.Oi 148i
PCT 002349 Be' '37 626 493 78:7� 252
PCT'002402 Be 29 601 497 62.0 275
PCT 002402 Be 24 4381 317 72J3 145
PCT 002403 Be 29 535 382 71.4j 214
PCT 002404 Be 29 6061 456� 75.2f 231)
PCT 002406 Be 29 538, 366I 68.0 194
PCT 002409 Be-27 B07{{' 5541 68.'S 2771
PCT 002410 Be 24 �182, 3321 68.8 1801
PCT 002411 Be 29 877r 624 72.1 304 E
PCT 002413 BC 29 780' 540 69.2! 306' i
PCT 002416 BC 29 526, 388 73.7 192� I.
PCT 002417 Be 29 772' 545 70.5' 281; i
PCT 00241E Be 24 7441 484� 65.0 268
PCT 002419 BC ,29 '533! 366 68.6 190•
PC3 002420 Be 24 453� 403 61.7 214
PCT 002423 Be 29 401i 275 65.5!!!!!! 141 i
PCT 002426 BC 29 857+ 602� 70.21 3211 1 {
PCT 002427 Be 29 594 4361 73.k 223
'PC?.002428 Be 29 467 3751 80.2 201�`
'PCT OD2431 'Be 29 4661 3681 78..9� 2061
PCT 002435 Be ,29 8661 678 78.2f 40b;
PCT 00243e BC 24 523, 436' 83.3! 233 i 1
PCT OC2437 BC 29 455 361' 79.3' ( 222;
PCT 002438 Be 29 725; 553 76.2' I 324' !
PCT 002439 Be 29 725; 5791 79.8i 302� i }
PCT 002440 Be 29 4841 3851 79.51 2231
PCT 002441 Be. 29 694= 5371 77,31 2981
PCT 002442 Be 29 604; 440 72.8, 236! I i + i
PCT 002444 Be 29 4721 342: 72.4! 189�
PCT 002445 BC 29 1 805' 600! 74.2 324; f
PCT 002446 Be 24 �595! 4611 77.4 266$
PCT<002451 Be 29 390 2711 69.4: 140 i 2
PCT 002455.BC 29 498i 4031 60.9j 2491
PCT 002457 Be 29 I 818, 611 74.6' 346E i
PCT 002459 Be 29 ! 446; 298` 60.Di 1601
PCT 002.460 Be 23 753' 562! 74.61 304 f ! M
PCT 002461 Be 748' 484 65.3! 2kb
PCT'002462 Be 24 483; 373 77.2j 213
j
PCT .002464 Be 37 447' 363 82.2; 1 98 !
a f
PCT 002465 BC 29 399 304' 76.1' 169
PCT 002467 BC 29 603 472 78.2 1 255
PC7 002469 BC 29 601: 475 79.0 ! 274' I
PCT 002470 Be 23 7571 395. 78.5 346p 1 i
f
i
PCT 00247 C 7 4 � T 4' 328� 1
5 B 4 6 580 5.2 ,
I
PCT 002476 Be 536,29 + '395+ 73.61 214,4
i
PCT 002471 BC 29 6341 407: 64.11 214; j
PCT 002474 BC 29 687i 478' 69.5 265
PCT 002450 BC 29 508 345; 67.9, 175;
PCT 002485 PC '29 445; 317, 71.21 245
PCT 002417 ]Be 29 837 571) 68.2i 3081
PCT'002429 Be 23 '551 3a5i 69.81 2061
PCt 002491 BC 23 805 615' 76.3i 320
PCT 002493 Be 29 6681, 4271 63.91 2391 1
PCT 00 8O2 BC 40 1 544 425, 75.11 237: it
v
PAGE 2+.2
GENERAL ELEC1 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA-NOVEMbER 4, 1980-M. A OPEN SPACE C:ST WARD 4- VOTE FOR 1-
"
to N
W O W I
U< _
a
w v ►- 2
F- O w O
N CAO tL Ix
w 2 <
a O 3
w O O " O
o: > F- W
*44 ABSENTEE TOTALS rar 4" 2188 492.7 1131
Azar T;O T,A 1 5 +�**+ 44OD5 34519� .78<k 18632
1
"
j
t
f
s
C
CERTIFICATE OF COUNTY CLERK
In the Matter of the Canvass of Votes )
Cast within the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL )
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT at a General Dis-
trict Election held on November 4, 1980 }
I, MARVIN CHURCH, County Clerk of the County of San Mateo, State of.
California, do hereby certify that a General District Election was held within
the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, WARD 7, within the County of
San Mateo, and consolidated with the Presidential General Election held on
Tuesday, November 4, 1980;
That in accordance with Section 17081 of the Elections Code I caused
to have taken off and recorded from the voting machines used at said election
the record of votes cast at said polling places within the District for
candidate for Member, Board of Directors, Ward 7; and I also caused to be
canvassed the absentee ballots cast at said election for candidate for Member,
Board of Directors, Ward 7; and
I HEREBY FURTHER CERTIFY that in the election to elect one member
to the Board of Directors , Ward 7, the candidate receiving the highest number
of votes was as follows:
MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 7 RICHARD S. BISHOP
That Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein,
is a full , true and correct recording which sets forth the results of the votes
cast at the polling places for Member, Board of Directors , and the results of
the canvass of the absentee ballots cast and voted for Member, Board of
Directors, at said Presidential General Election.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my hand and seal of office this
25th"day of November 1980.
i,
MARVIN CHURCH
County Clerk
s!
STATEMENT OF RESULT CF VOTES CAST GENERAL ELECTION, TUESDAY• kUVEMBER 4, t980
PAGE NUMBER 010.00001 R V F P H N S p J R S O E 17 L M R
1 E N p 8 8 h I Y O N I L U D C
S S 0 F F 8 5 O 0 1 A I 5 P A
T U I I I R.E N I S B A E E R
R A T T E E A M It O A L i M e N O
0 T X G R A H H R P 5
Y N P Y S S 0 8 F 8 R B
V M E 0 A C P O R E K I
O E S R B H D S I L S
T A K R E 0 M T T 1 M H
E S U N I A U L N E O
S R C E N 7 N R G g P
E H E
0 2 R
I
S
T '
2u8 -4 -�T 2.6 1 LA
SAN BRUNO _... ..... 1 41 292 70.0 12 9 .-.
S4V .3RUNO 2 454 352 71.5 104 15
SAN NRUNO 3 39E 287, 72.4 _. _ 1C 10
SAN BRUNO 4 224 155, 69.1 55�
6 43 324+ 75 S
SAk BRUNT .3 ..._..-. _...- 124 10
SAN 6PUNO 7 22 165' 73.0 6 5
SAN FOUN3 _ 8C 522 355E 68. --- -_. 15 7
SAN BRUNO 9 4531
SAN ARIINO to 392) 304 77.5 _. . .. S3 13
� SAN BRUNO -" `- it 4221 349 82.7 7 Ie
SAN BRUNO 12 470 337 71.7 .. 11 13
SAN RkUNO 13 23 3' 177� 75. -- -- --- 5 7
SAN BRUNEI 14 418 34O 81.3 ._ �._ _. _ 1G 15
1' SAN EIRUNO _-- - - 15 382 295) 77.2 9 11
SAN BRUNOT _._._. 16 416 337' 81. _ _-_ 97 _ 15
SAN BRUNO 17 20A 151� 74.3 4}} 6
SAN PRUNO 18 433 33B7 78. `__- __ .__. 99 15
SAN BRUNO 19 4046, 32T, 80.5 iC9 14
SAN ARUNO 2C 469� 350 74.6 S 17
.SAN RRtti.O `_` `__' 21 46 358' 77.4 ---- �-- 10 19
SAN BRU%O 22 46 357, 77.2 .. 11 15
SAN BRUNO -- -- 23 43 336 77.2 S 16
SAN BRUNO 24 461 3741 81.i -_ -_-
SAN BRUNO `��--- 25 193 146' 75.6 --_.... .- - 1�9 4
I' SAN HRUNO 26 45Z 325 71.9' 114 12
SAN APUND 27 410 338 82.41 i2 13 _
'SAN Rr)t1hD 28 433 319 73.6I 12.1
SAN P.kot O - 29 44;! 324 73.3 113 13$
SAN BRUNO 35 464o 325 69.7 _._ __ _ .. 13 4
SSAN AN BRuhO - 337 465 354 76.1� 14 13
424, 313; 73.8r - _-- S 13 __-
SAN H+tUNO " 42 44 307i 69.31 119 7
SAN euUNO _ 43C 419, 264 63.0 ..__ _. _-- _ S 6
SAN BRUNO 44C 452 282' 62.3 ll 6
FOSTFR CIT: ._ _ 2 4011 291j 72.5 _._ 4 87 6 7
FGSTER CITY 3 399 294" 73.6 2 53 53 53
FOSTER CITY 4 36yy' 2711 76.3 3 if 1�
FOSTER CITY 7 431i 327.i 74.7� 64 11 10 9
FOSTER CITC 8 43i 336i 76.8 _ . . _ .-.- -_.._ ._ 52 116 9 11
F STFR CIYY" - 10 444 345. 7'7.7 45 80:
FOSTFk CITY 11 485 352 72.5 _-__. 57 123' 11 8 _..
FOSTER CITY 13 50 361! 71.9 8>t 125, 1W 11
FOSTER CITY 14 349 2571 75.5 _ _ _ 57 88! 5 8
FOSTER CITY 16 261 157 70.9 t8 37' 3 3J�
FOSTER CITY 17 344� 244� 70.9 _._. _. 52� 16 6T T?±91{
FDSTFR CITY 19 404' 311 76.9 6
FOSTER CITY 20 349, 237; 67.9 2 �
FOSTER CITY 21 44a 313 11.1 _.-_. _.. 64 1A 91( 9
FOSTEk CITY 22 411+ 3131 76.1 .._. . __ _. .. . _... __... 2i 7I 4v1 ..
FOSTER CITY 23 48� 36, 75.3
12
FOSTER CITY 25 404, 305, 75.4 _.._.. _._ 7q 126 104� ll
FOSTER CITY 26 4371 303, 69.4 64 1111 15 93
FOSTER CITY 27 366 273 74.5 7�
FOSTER CITY 30 43 ' 3341 76.7 '- E5 123; 103 S7
FOSTER CITY 31 287 220 76.1 5T' 75 4a 6
FOSTER CITY 32 2 B 155' 12.0 36
SAN MATED 33 3471 236 68.0 _._ _ .
SAN MATEO - 34 393 258, 65.617; - -
5� 1 55 9
SAN MATEO 35 13 173 74,2 46 6B; 45' 6q
SAN MATEO 36 . 41 305' 73.4 ISl9j 19+ IN
ItELMGhI 1 45 344� 75.2 '
5Q 1331 106 11
pflkfNT - 2 693 480 69.2 7a 159, 120 14
RkLMCNT 3 47b 339, 71.2 6d 129; 97,
pFLMGhT 4 443 344 77.6 63 137j 125' 113
HFLMG 4 hT 5 40 317 78.4
HFLMCNT 6 4351 339! 77. - - 5 14 1! 109 123 1
tttt MGNT 7 399 266 66.6 fit{,
RfLhON7 8 417 314; 70.2 5 12T 114 III
2 '
RFLHONT 9 433 332' 76.6
HFLM(iNT t0 416 308. 74. 59 1171 116 111�
HE MGNT 11 424 336' 79.2` 67+ 13v) 104 120
it FLMCN1 12 475 332; b9.B 64 123 LU7, 11J7
HfIM1 13 482 380 78. 6T 1521, 8S 14,,E�
itELMt)NT 14 4494 345, 7b.8 5: 151, 12 ; 12d ,#
ItEIMtINT t5 484 3S6' 73.5 61t 1301 98 136
NFLMt.hi 16 4b4 361! 74.5 84 133� 1Ott 123f
HFLMt:NT i7 414 372a 78.
III LMENT 18 43y 333; 76.7 64 145� Ilu IWa
+III LMt)NT 19 444 323 72.4 7Qp.
H 1306
t Ff.MONT 70 47q 358' 76.1 l
6`.i 13 ; 9t>I03 L I I
I'll
MONT T I 40t� 35l 72.Z 41
7" 1411 8U l Iti
HFI Mt,IrF 22 436 292' 66.9i 4f 104, 79 V(#
lIff h+.NT - 23 511 3Y7,. 14.71 7A 150; Ica 151,
HI t Mt,NT T 4 441' 344i 18. 63 33 1 19 124
nti Ht.NT LS 314 254 61. 5 f 116 6" 7S
fit Ml:NI T6 3TS. T09 62..3 4ta� 9!
51, 75,
IaLM+tr.T 7/ 4/0 343` 110.1
7l7 t1Y, li'A llh,
ttl 1 MItNT 28 3041 221! 13.6 5O E6' 7U 7l
ntl M/+i 40 415 2V1 7Y.2 6.1 1t/ 9U 6ti
Hi i h+tr.t 0 49tq 3';,,, 79. 95i 10,8 114
1AT
I+flt..hF 3T 61h 45t+ 07./
1 V3 lia; 1UF 14T;
�Uf 1 r:•=NT 32 37} 2�Y' bV.4 WU 1C/. tlT, SU
all Fi hT I;t1TS10F I 72r A 80.'.
10 '3' 1 lW 2
rtltH+t.T td)1%1UE ? 467i 1711 1Y.3 nlf I�Yi V4
t A•)1 MA _._._ 1 -t6i._...'+i 4�_TY+1 .,- __•_-._ .,. ___ ._.._ Y.�..�..i 74i-'..laf__ZS!1.�_.__.
t
1
I
STATEMENT OF RESULT CF VOTES CAST GENERAL ELECTION. TUESUAY, NOVEMBER 49 1980
PAGE NUNPER 010.00002 R V T P H H S J R S 0 E M L M R
E 0 U R N M A 0 A E E L 1 0 l 1
G T N
U 8 8 h I Y O N 1 L U O G
I E N P S N U N 2 L I - H
S S 0 F F a S 0 a I A t S P A
T U I I 7 R: E N I S 8 A E E R
R As T T E E h M 0 A L T M a N O
0 T X O R A 0 M H R E A S
Y 1i P Y S S 0 a F 8 R 8
V N E 0 A C P O R E K 1
O E S R B H 0 S 1 L S
T A K R E O N T T I M H
E S U N I A U 2 N E 0
It u
S R G E N T N R G a P
E H E
0 2 R
I -
T
LADERA
3S 4. 64 102: 158 149
LAK 1 36 297, 81.8 .... -_.. _ . _ _. -..... 64 125, a4� 112 15
LAKR ._ _._.._. 2 291 2181 t4. 9 4'S, 83' 90, 95? 122 -
LAKE 3 42b�339! 79.5
LAKF 4 368 285 77.4 -`" _�. _.._ -_ - -- - 70 120! 188' 111 171
LAKE 5 _ 143� 114� 79.7 ....___ _� _-.__.-_ _ _._ 23 41. 21, 611 61
LAKE - _... 6 3961 311' 78.1 5BB;; I27, 69 115i 15
LOS TRANCOS 1 39 3031 71.2 _. i___ ._ .._ _ _ _ _ 5q 92t 68, 11
PGRTOLA VALLEY 1 49 37 76.5 66 110t 107 141
PORTGLA VALLEY 2 349 260 75.3 311 S9; 78 it
PORTOLA VALLEY `-- 3 39T 3111 78. '�- - -- - - 49,, 85, 1041 120E
PGAIGLA VALLEY - 4 43 342` 76.8 _ -.�_. _._..__ 69 109: 13 134{
PORTOLA VALLEY 5 29 2361 79.1 34 48, 6 81
�PnR7GLA VALLEY 6 419 306� 73. ..._ ._ 56 109: 123, 13
PORTOLA VALLEY 7 41 3131 75.7 57 79; 120 137� _
PCRTOLA VALLEY 8 196� 151) 77. __� ,___ ____. ____ ___. 40� 44; 47 69
REOwOnO CITY 60 42A 331 78.2 89,, 124 119. 13 20
RFOsGOO C1TY 61 290 244{ 84.1 _ 4i� 89. 84) 91 -. - 134
REC.(.OGO CITY 62 14 14 73. 61
kE0i.000 CITY 63 411E 335} 8L.5 _. _.__ _._-_ ___._ 93 130' 126� 1271 _. 19
RFCs.CCO CITY' 65 36 290, 74.6 _ 64 103, 126 116 16
RE DUC 41 CITY 66 395� 3151 19.7 ___ _-___ _ _________ _ 55 159 1 J4; 121� ._ _ ISb
�kFO6C.O0 CITY 67 415 308' 74.2 _ 65 115 120 12 181,
RFC:.600 CITY_ 68 414: 3L5; 76. _.T _ __ _. 86 101! 113 12w 17
,RFOwGCO CITY _" 69 40P 317r 79.0� '_' 73 112 129 12T, _ -
(kFCknCO CITY 70 385, 3121 St.tp __ _ _. 87 117; 116; 11T l761
AEO CG0 CITY TY 71 41 � 305, 13.61 71' 123 103 114, 172,
IYF("wLCO CITY - _ 72 40 295 13.31 _ 7T; 12C; S5 1054 17 ..._.-- -
jPFVWCCD CITY 73 47� 371i 7t1.I� - 86 142: 128 234 196
RrC tc CITY 74 254 175, b9.2 __.. 3T, 73; 59 7. 9 _
I SAN CARLOS - 1 525'. 388 73.9 __ __�._.. _- -. .._ _ _ BU 175; 124 138 10
SAN CARLOS 2 609 472a T7.5 __ _____ _ _ 88 208, 16S 20 287f _
SAN CARLOS 3 380 292, 76.8 6G 113, 9G 104 164;
SAN CARLOS __ _ _ _, 4 42TI 308 72.1 __._ _._ _ 49 138. 86 ILI 145+
I SAN CARLOS 5. 381i 287; 75.3 47 130, 66 99, 137.
SAN CARLOS 6 567 411;. 72. 64 IC 11L' 16 227
SAN CARL0S _.__ .. 7 576. 4221 73.2 68 159; 11 17� 24Z
SAN CARLOS 8 44A 326i 73.5 __._ _-__ _ __ . _._ 54 124, 96� 13 7} 159q!�
SAN CARLOS - " ` 9 4V 305E 72.7 47 127! 74j S3 L4q
SAN GexLUS 10 3II3, 309; 80. 5if 132, L04 It% 17JI _.
SAN CARLOS 11 461! 357, 77. 6T 132! 107: 128 189
SAN CARLOS -__ 12 414 3371 81. _- _-_.__ ___ _. _ _.._ _ -.- 84i 125 10Z; 1421 191
SAN CARLGS 13 414 326! 78.7 73; 1311 1C1t 114' 17
SAN f.aRL05 14 432 322( 74.5 _. _ 58 i44' 109, 93t 17
SAN CARLOS 15 4C8 316' 77.4 50 129. 1OJ 1122, 17
SAN CARLOS 16 4271 344 80.5 _ _ - _ - 65 1444 M; 14T 20
SAN CARLOS - 17 3911,,E 307 78.5 55 115 125 1111 17
SAN CARLOS LS 450 3451 76.6 ....- . - __. : _ 67 136, 125i 130 23 _
SAN CARLOS 19 40yy 319' 78. 5� 134 115 106 17
SAN CARLOS 20 424I 3241 76.4 _ 711, 129, 124�j 108 174
SAN CARLOS 21 438 355 81. 67; 135' 17N 114 20
SAN CARLOS 22 407 338 83. _._. 5qq 136' 1488,, 134 L91
SAN CARLOS 23 450 369 82. 84 147; 1311 12441 21
SAN CARLOS 24 373 292 76.2 68 1Gb'. 119, 123 165�
SAN CARLOS 25 481r 364� 75.6 79 139 136 143 217
SAN CaRLnS 26 376 293! 77. 5 12G; 124 11 , 17
SAN CARLOS 27 .429 3431 79.9 44 128 138 129' 182
SAN CARLOS 28 415 314! 75. 67, 121: toy, 135 179
SAN CARLOS 29 284 204 7►.8 39 56. T2a 67 123
SAN CARLOS 30 574 426, 74.2 69, 196: 165. 147i 25"
SAN CARLOS 31 459, 339; 73. 54 166' lid 130 2J2G
SAN CAkLOS 32 380 305 80.2 46 113' 117. ICE 17L
SAN CARLOS 33 471, 374' 79.4 67 165 14L 131 20Z
SAN CARLOS 35 389 314' 80.7 5q 129, 12 3 180
ISAN GaRi05 36 195 164 86. 36 75 5� 14
70 lOq
SAN CARLOS 37 426 362 b4.9 85 143 153 138; 214
SAN CARLOS 38 35q 2M 79.7 70i 110' 111 132; to
SAN MATFO 72 416 3J4' 71.3 7
SAN MATFO 73 640 4821 75.3 47 131
5d 72
SAN MATEO 74 435 328' 75.4 1} 3, 1; 333,
SAN MATED 76 47A 346t 73.3 39, S2; 70 59
SAN MATED 77 328 239 72.8
484' 7
5
, 5, 9{
SAN MAIFG 45 414 302 72.4 41 4 ' 9 1 5 4 31
SAN M41E0 98 41H 318 72.6 ST 1221 BS 11
SAN MAT EO 99 7%1! 5b1E 7J.3 73 125' 101; 104,
SAM MAIEO 100 41 329; 75.1 6T 124' llt4 98
SAN MATFO 101 421, 28S 61.6 6 1C2• 60 99
lSAN MATLO 106 466 362; 77.6 6 139 1115 911
SKYVGOU 1 89 56! 62.91
4ttT 311' i t.1 5b( S9 13 14S IN5�
SunrTT 2 15 IZ1; 78.3 311 a0' S t 51, 84
1.f lIfR1)flE j 392 304' 11.!) 63 79 1031 92: 15qq
I.I;+it'C I()E 2 387 300 71.5 55 IC. 80 1G4' 114,
i.fit 1111,1OE 3 3941 3GS 16.4 74 101: 131i ff 169{
(.'f100%11)F 4 371' 219 15.2 64. b8 1C4 1Cb� 14
wu+f 1)E, 5 431 306 7J. 58 1CJ' 16 125
6"..l:SinE 6 2YO 215; II.5 37; 71 67 96; 12
++(:ID%IfIE 7 310 294. 19.4 TO V5, 1i 1117 i73
III% E R 74 1761 73. 33, ,4; 1+ blt vT-
w11+tuSIi+E
U 9 37 �70 11.44 4 64 IUL: b8l 13 '
(+UOS1AE 10 301, 'T; 73.9 33 et; 8ti 8J`
AL AMI(:A j 4P4 if i' 11.1) 6T 93- 104 1 2Y1
bi d+I.:A 2 35Q 'IN` 11.41 61l,,E IL6= 84 11�N
At AMI I:A 3 411 3 V. 80.1; 64 1 14' t 1. 111
4t AMI S,A 4 i6 t 210 14.! 4,0 91' 7� 1CIA
At A!'f IiA J4
STATEMENT OF RESULT CF VOTES CAST • GENERAL ELECTION, TUCSE:AYr NGVEMBFR 4. 1580
PAGE NUMBER 010.00003 R Y T P H H S J R S O E t, L M R
E 0 U R M M A G A E E L 1 0 1 1
G T R 0 b 8 N I Y O N I L U 0 C
1 E N P S M U N 2 L I - H
S S 0 F F B S O 0 1 A 1 5 P A
T U 1 1 I R E N I S 8 A E E R
E C T - R R U O A E M N O
R A T E E N M L I 8
E S A 0 A A H H R P S
D T x R O w E A
Y N P Y S S 0 8 F b R B
If E O A C P O R E K I
O E S R 8 H D S 1 L 5
T A K R E D M T 1 1 M H
E S U N I A U Z N E 0
R U S N 0 S N A G M P
S R C E N T R 8
E H E _ I E
R
0 2
2 -
S
i
TAPfEC _ 3�3I4-71,0 44 107, 88 S6$
_�. _ I .. _._.. _ v. 47j ..
AL AMFCA T 18 1321s 70.9 _ 25' 60; 4
ALAMEDA -` 9 372 286 76.8 _ 53 106' b 13P
ATHERTON I 58 451, 76.8 _ 7 I I V 220, 21ATHERTO5'
4THFATON 3 400 293 73.2 _ _._. 5ri 66. 100' 1271
ATHERTG --- y - 371 2261 60.9 -___ ---,__ 43 57 101 777f
ATHERTON 5 40 338' 16.4 __. ___ 6 87 107 104� .. _
ATHERTOH 6 374 269 71. 59 94F 124' 123
ATHFRTOFt -�_.�.---- 7 gT 2751 74.3 _ __ __ _ _ --�_._ _. 59 76' 99 loll
ATHFATON 8 57 431� 74.9 911 103 166� 176
ATHFRTON ----._- 9 446 321 71.9 ..___ -- -_-_.. ____. ..__ _ - _ 6t r.0 1471 144
ATHFRTO!`t 10 455 350 76.9 9 S2; 147- 148
d7HFRTGN _-_-. 11 _ 222 184 82.8 _._ _ _._._ _.__ 38# 59, 74l - 73:
ATHERTON 12 266 1871 70.3 44 53, 83, 75;
ATHERTON._--__ --- 13 4J 289 71.8 __� _ �_-- - ._ __ _- -- 63 TO 149 12Q
MAY 13 230 1771 7b.9 333, 73; 71 E4
iMFNLMEYLO OUTSIDE 1 29 215, 72.1 ___. ®. 5S I0. 6 72;
O
PENLO GUTSIDE 2 173 149i 86.1 11, 46' S8 73;MENLO PARR 2 415 335' 75.9 __ __ _ �_� ___.__ ___ _ 63, S8 134E 142 PARK 5 3299 2511 76.2� _ 41; 82' 51! 9z
IMENLQ
MFNLO PARK- _ 11 30d 233, 75.6 _ _. _ 4L 77j79� 89t --._._PFNLO PARK 13 343, 267i 77.d 49 72 764," S1MENtG PARK 15 498 360 72.2 _ � __ .._, - 60 a& 147, 14 PARK 16 408 3011 73. 4 " 50 11 11 89 105,
(Mft-LO PARK 17 385 299 77.6{ _ _ __ _ __ 43 70 123 126
H-KLC PARK - - 18 40!! 313 T8.0 56 82, 123 11T,
PFNLO PARK 19 439 323! 73.5' .__. ...___.-_.. . .____. _ ....__ - 58 104 14Z 14
r ,,
1Nr= LO PARK ----._-- ----- 20 40 292: 72.4? 60 92 7T 1011
1Mit40 PARX _ 21 411 33.7 72.9� ... -._--_ 54 63, 77, 10Tj
PENLO PARK _- 22 34 254; 72.91 34 80' 63 110t
KFNLO PARK 23 41 323; 78.3� _. .._--__- ____ _-- _ 40 112 IC5 137,
NFNLO PARK 24 37 294; 7S.0 49 88 123 117
AFhLG PARX 25 43 3421 76. 9
62 113' 142 15
(MFNLO PARK -` - 26 61 490 79.5 - 120 139. 173 1S6'
MENLO PARK 27 621f 4771 76.8 ___ _ _' .., _ ._ _ 84 127 1Sz 2241 _
MFNLG PARK "' 28 24 180; 74.0 22 60i 371 5T,
MFNLG PARK _ _ 29 44$ 3�9; 69.9 ._-_- 44 10I; 105 109 _
MF,NtO PARK 30 37 2771 74. 50 1Ca! 7% 110
MFNLG PAit, 31 51 373, 72. ... _._ ...- _ _ .._.___m BZ I10Q 124, ISO;.
MFNLG PARK 32 40 6 26 66.3 51, 7& 73 9S
MENLO PARK 33 44 339, 76.1 .._. ___. _ ._ __ 63 91j 134; 119
MFULO PARK 34 44 330. 74.1 69 114; 118, 124;
MFNLG PARK 36 17 139` 81.2 -. - 341 56 514 4T1
MFNLG PA2".t 37 459 338; 7366 62 iG4' 13O 124
MFNLC PARK 38 374, 265; 70.$ _ _... 44 871 51i 108,
MFNLG PARK 43 26 208 7T.6 4 82 71 71
MENLO PARV 44 1I 100. l� _.
OAKS 1 65 440; 67.6 ad 17b, 101� 14b
OAKS 3 62 399; 63.9 64, 167 110, 130
OAKS .- _ 5 332 228, 68.6 - -- .�. _-- 54 84l 42, 64
OAKS _ 6 352t 235� 66.7 ---- __ __ _ 6 I011 71' 7•J
OAKS 7 38 273 Iu.3 b 115 7>i 115
OAKS 8 40 3ECi 76 3 67 105' 73 111"
OAKS 9 44qq 330' 73.9 64 119; 79 13N
OAKS 10 407i 296 72.7 - 68 111, all It)71
FF06000 CITY 1 394 306' 76.6 77 122, 871 SOB, I7 ,
9FC',N,CO CITY 2 605 454� 75. .. _. _._. 112; 175 123 165i 254
FF1)tl.,G:) CITY 3 41 300 72.8 65 117f tOT 129165
RF0.000 CITY 4 35 256 71.5 _ 69 ICS, 86 73! 156
RFO..000 CITY 5 344 283 82.2 65 116 10S 90' 168
RFt,..;f10 CITY 6 400 266; 66.5 7d 10 7: 6& 69y 153
kFC.t:GO CITY 7 339 177; 52.2 36 62, 35l 63! 93
RF OwtiOO CITY 8 43d 296; 68.8 85 t i li 911 106 176
RFOB- CD CITY 9 39d 21,5 66.5 73 108 at 7h 147
RF Gwf)GO CITY 10 224 135: 60.2 26 55; 3& 4i�,,J 7S
�RCUI.LG1) CITY 1t 495+ 359 71.9 9h t43t 88 12Y 193
RF t:ut:GO CITY 12 453 33Tj 74.3 9Z 144 129 113, 1dS(
RFO.fiGO CITY 13 425 335p 78.81 6J1 133 13S 153 idt(
RF06ttr..1) CITY 14 4011 319' 79.5 6T 117, 1424 117j 183
Rf 0wiN:i) CITY 15 387 2911 7-.:t 70 103 Its l0O 144t
RFAtd:01) CITY !6 3771 300. 79.5 8y IG5' 113 I 17A
RF0):1.It.) CITY 17 21; 193' 65.2 53 68; 58 61fi 11L
RFCwt.01) CITY 18 40L 272' 61.8� 73 1Cb; 69 SA 137
RFh-tILO CCTV 19 37 294{ 77.9 7`7 117; 9f1 lull 154=
KF01.1 h0 CITY 20 41 326, 7v.3� 95 129, l0ti 117, 18h '..
RFf)M111b7 CITY 21 20 154' 74. -40 66 5Q btl= 95
RFturt.0 CITY 22 36JA 28a 77.1 58 94' 113 ICY 16G
kf O.t.tit) CITY 23 415t 301; 72.5 S6 1 19! 104; 1 35t 11 '...
Rf f.LGO CITY 24 42� 3441 8U.I 80 12U I3 t, 1 11` 18d '...
kiF Nwi d.0 CITY 25 431 338 76.4 7f; 132' IIH 1;5,
171
►.f Uwldll) CITY !6 4!7 3u5; 71. 73 Ill. IU4 55, 1 b L
1 kf t1.ta;O CITY 27 2Sf� I8G 12. 1 4_I 70 5rt I0; iJtq,�
ktU itO CITY l8 309 223: 7.1.►� 50 90` h3 Bq iltl
ki it teal) CITY 29 G5 4t9; 6..1 125 13G, 12t !29 2tM
kt 0.11,4) CITY 30 40A 31 it 19.1 T:T 14Y 1JG lib 204
itf le.. ilel) CITY 31 4'4 294` 68.5 74 1C'' 8y Ioty 144
HI IINI.UFi CITY 32 4551 310 7/.$ 110 11 6: lu 4,.t 1.- 117
kt i w A) (fly 33 447,, -fag. 1••. 7A 1O6` to,. l IZ 177
RI f 4 t.0 C 11Y 34 - 11y�y IZ`, 11.d 3.4 1, +y 31 72
`kluw nn CITY 15 66T if4' f.}. 11 t10, 1�4 ic5 24S
I!Pt 1 r.0 City 3h 314 )to, rS.41 7/� 1 ICr 9J 104 16 7
of n„...eu CITY 37 J)1'l 6 6t..i 4y 110 7. '.4 14U
I M,114:1 ,1 lift fH 22/, It t) I:.t)� J4 t6 •e T, %! 7r
RI 1`.r 11, CITY i9 Zl f If , 1ti.4 ay 11; 4N }�; fir
C I Ty 40 417 all! 61.2 _,___ __,_, �_ _______ _-.__ 74.._.__113; by___1?U._-_ .__1)U ._.-
STATEMENT OF RESULT CF VOTES CAST GENERAL ELECTION, TUESCAY• NOVEMBER 4, 1980
PAGE NUMPER 010.00004 R V T P H H S J R S D E N L M R
E 0 U R M M A 0 A E E L 1 0 1 1
G T R 0 8 8 N I Y O N 1 L
) E N P S M U N 2 L
S S O F F 8 S 0 0 1 A I S P A
T U 11 I R. E N I S 8 A E E R
R 4 T T E E N M D A L T M 8 N O
D T X C R A 0 M H R E A S
Y N P Y S S 0 8 F a R !8
0 E S 0 k 8 N P O K
S i L !
T A K F E D M T T 1 N H
E S U N I A U 2 N E 0
S A C E N T N R 6 8 P
E H E T ER
0 2
I
S
T '
RFD D`[ryy�� 295 C9�-7�4.2 46 89 82 81� 116
RECWO(,D PITY 42 145 116 80.0 ___. _ 2 15: 8; 30
REOwCGO CITY 43 3571 287 72.2 69 9% 73 7 143-,
REOw0f'D C)TY 44 45r1 326 72.4 _ 8 116' 101 106 16"
KED60r.0 C)TY 45 305� 251 82.2 63 E6 1G9 110' 146
NEW= CIT7 _ 46 39 294 75. ____._ -.__. _. _ __ __-_ __ 5T 121i 86 1171 16 - ---
RED.(60 CITE 37 38 243t, 63.2 48 99' 58, 80 10gi
RED►+OOD CITY _ 48 410I 298, 72.6 __ _ _ 6A tlli a-; Ic.1( 1341 ..
RFD7:I;(.D CITY - 49 417 320, 76.7 73 1U1! 80 99j 145
kEDI.(:f;D CITY 50 365A 282 77.2 _ _ _ _ _ - _ 5 t 120, 84 1066 16
RFD►O(:O CITY 51 73 . 57 T8. l4LL 1S& 1661 2101 32
RE(b(h�C CITY _ __. 52 21Q 159' 75.7 ____ _ _ _ __._ ..._._.. . _.. 441 48 641 65 a,
kE01.!109 CITY 53 448 351 78.3 6� 124' t33, 123' 18b
REDWOOD CITY _ 54 43Z 332� 76. ___ -_ __ __�__ .___ 8 124' 15R 126� __ . 19
RFOW-CC CITY 55 40 316 7d. 75 147 128, 131 1911
RED%GG0 CITY__._ 56 36 273a 74.7__.� -- _— _- _ -_- _-- 55; 1CO 99 LOS 15
RFOkL,(,D CITY 57 291 22bj 7T.6 60 '77, 641 80' 10
REOWCC;C CITY 58 40 3131 77.8 ._ _ _� __ _._ 72 11Z. 135 126! 18
RFO"CO C17Y 5S 41 323 78.3 a 121: 119 125j 17
SSELBYELBY _ 2 44 40 , 3331 75.0� -___ _ __ - _ _... 90 110 109' 12111 --- - --
SELBY 3 4461 354) 79.3 _ _ _ _.--_. _ __ .. ._ ___ -_ 80 138, 101 14
SELBY '`— 4 523 399, 76.2 10 14h 126 1333,
SELBY 5 377; 300` 79.SI_ _- _---- - ._- ..- ..- -_.--- 6 109, lU3 11Y
UPTON -'--`- 1 109 84 77. 25 35 26 3 5
FARALtORC- 3 250, lE0' 72.0 99 6
C.RANACA 1 353 263, 74.5 1481 7
GRANACA _ ___.__..�. 2 36S 261' 70.4y t57, 6 ---
GRANACA ..__ 3 355 258 7Z.6 138, 9
GRr.%AGa _ _ 4 3SO 303; 71.6 179 92
GRANACA `- 5 37Ai 266' 71.6 165' 7Z
HALF MCCN PAY _ 1 349 263, 75.3 1181 9 _
HALF rOGN BAY 2 48d 352 72.4 145� i7
HALF MCCN 84Y 3 434, 325' 74.8; 146� 14
HALF MCCN BAY 4 452 338 74. 131E IQ
HALF MOON SAY 5 457� 351! 76.1 168 14
HALF MCCN BAY 6 63A 490 77.2� 209` 21
HALF MOGN BAY _ 7 465 3511 75. 182 12
HALF MCCN SAY 8 456 336: 73.3 137 16
Hl.a OUTSIDE .----,_-. 1 20Et 147 70.' 45 _. . 6
HR8 CUTSID5 2C 177 110! 62.1 5
SKYLINE 1 32 237I 7l. _ _. _ _._. - -- --_._ _ 3 3
SKYLINE 2 124t 84 67.7 1, 1 2
SKYLINE 3 34C 253 74.4 12 34� 21 3
ABSFNTFE BALLOT-TYPE 2 639 21 22
ABSF..TF.E PALLOT-TYPE 7 43 . . .__. _ .... _._.- .. 8 155! 133 144
- --
ARSF,'.TEE P.ALLGT-TYPE 10 3 1 17, 15 I
ABSFNTFE 6ALLOT-TYPE 11 1003 _ _ __ __ __-. __-_ ... 193 334 300. 35 .. _
�ASSF.vTFE PALLOT-TYPE 13 1097 253 419, 393, 43 59
ABSENTFE BALLOT-TYPE 14 451 79, 12Z 113 151,
ABSFNTFE 6ALLOT-TYPE 15 493 IOU 156, 174 17 24
ar.SETFF EnLIOT-TYPE 17 26 _ _ __ _ 5 9F 74� 8
ABSFNTFE PALLOT-TYPE 18 1 t
ABSF.NIFF BALLOT-TYPE 20 1825 _ _ _. 353511 484. 622 611
ABSFNTFE bALLOT-TYPE 23 156 3a 48. 34 48
�ABSFNTFE BALLOT-TYPE 25 92 . _ 11 23 30 2d
ABSF;:TFE BALLOT-TYPE 26 992 275� 357'i 328 3701 53
tABSFNTFE FtLLOT-TYPE 27 133 3 4' 4 4 b
lABSFtlTEE EALLOT-TYPE 31 281 12 112 - --
�ASSFtuTFE BALLOT-TYPE 32 4 3 _
ABSFNTFE FALLOT-TYPE 34 23 1
ABSENTEE EALLOT-TYPE 38 5 1
aaA ABSFNTEE TOTALS •• 7937 127 11 2 13 224 11#96 2259, 226� 2453 145
n+ + T 0 1 A L S •+*• 13178 106446 80.7 2299 187 372f 4263 1797 31455 28819 31977 2212
f
M-80-96
(Meeting 80-27
December 10, 1980)
m4�4
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 3, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: S. Sessions, Land Manager
SUBJECT: Progress Report on Signs Along Skyline Boulevard
Introduction: At your meeting of September 10 , 1980, staff
reported on concerns regarding the types of signs and prolifer-
ation of traffic signing along Skyline Boulevard (see report
R-80-49 , dated August 29, 1980) . You directed staff to: 1) work
through appropriate avenues in Sacramento to attempt to obtain
a reduction in the total number of signs along Skyline Boulevard,
2) replace "No Parking" signs,where appropriate, with "Limited
Parking" signs stating the hours when people could park, and
3) work on attaining a better looking sign.
Discussion: Staff met with representatives of the State Department
of Transportation on November 18 , 1980 in Sacramento. After a
discussion about the District' s concerns over the scenic quality
of Highway 35, Cal Trans officials agreed to act on the District' s
requests to replace the larger "No Parking" signs with the
smaller version, to insure that all sign posts were of the least
obtrusive variety, and to remove excess signs to a "happy
minimum" level. This action would not jeopardize driver safety
or the regulatory enforceability required by public safety
officials.
Staff will prepare a report for Cal Trans identifying affected
areas and recommending sign changes. Cal Trans will assume the
responsibility for effecting the changes, plus reducing the
numbers of signs to a minimum level. A newer type of sign
portraying the international symbol for no parking will be
given to the District for evaluation.
The unresolved item of concern is a more aesthetic type of
highway sign that would be consistent with the concept of the
scenic highway element. On this issue, Cal Trans cannot be of
assistance since the style , shape, and color of signs are
determined by State regulations which are in turn based on
federal guidelines. Signs are, therefore, standardized through-
out the nation, and it does not appear feasible for the District
to effect a change in the signs ' aesthetic nature.
M-80-96 page two
Recommendation: Staff is not recommending any further Board
action on this item except acceptance of this report. We
will continue to work with Cal Trans and other local agencies
to provide the most aesthetic signing conditions possible
within their respective constraints.
M-80-98
(Meeting 80-27
December 10, 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 4 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes, Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Long Term Office Space Needs and Location
Introduction: At your meeting of June 11, 1980, you accepted
the Budget Committee 's recommendation for the staff to re-
analyze the criteria Presented in earlier reports on the
issue of long term office space needs and location, and you
requested that a discussion of the issue be included on an
agenda before the end of 1980 .
Discussion: Due to the length of the agenda for your December
10 meeting and the preparation needed, staff felt it would
be more appropriate (and productive) to place this specific
agenda item, which will require at least thirty minutes of
discussion, on an agenda in the early part of 1981. Assuming
that you concur with this decisison, no Board action is needed
at this time.
M-80-91
'4 (Meeting 80-27
oe December 10 , 1980)
Aii wnr
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
December 1, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Updating of Master Plan for New Printing
Introduction: On December 14 , 1977 and January 11, 1978 you
adopted the Master Plan of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District. Some 2500 copies of the plan have been distributed
(in addition to the draft version) , and the supply is exhausted.
Therefore, a new printing is necessary, and funds are budgeted for
this purpose.
Discussion: A review of the text and map of the Master Plan
turned up no really substantive items which might be changed to
reflect new Board policies. Therefore, the attached list of
proposed changes represents a technical updating of the plan.
One substantive issue, having to do with Port of Redwood City
lands, was investigated, but no change is recommended. On .
January 11, 1978 you decided to designate the approximately 135
acres of marshlands owned by the Port north of Redwood Creek as
a green color (undeveloped and uncommitted) but to overlay the
words "Port of Redwood City" on this area and on their developed
lands across the Creek. At the same time you decided to re-
evaluate the Master Plan designation when the Special Area Plan
Study was completed (see minutes of the meetings and memorandum
M-78-2 of December 5, 1977) .
The Special Area Plan Study for the Redwood City Waterfront/Port
Area has been completed and approved by the Redwood City Council
and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The Special
Area Plan Advisory Committee January, 1979 Final Report did not
lay the issue to rest regarding future use of that marshland area
but said on pages 3 and 4 that:
When the Committee returned to its examination of Area
B-1, the subject was still controversial. The Committee
determined that development of this area should only
occur after all feasible dry land areas on the east side
of Redwood Creek have been developed for port purposes.
In an attempt to resolve disagreement over the designation
M-80-91 Page Two
of this portion of Bair Island in the Bay Plan, the
Committee adopted as policy, two additional statements.
First, BCDC should reconsider the existing designation
of this part of Bair Island only after additional analysis,
in addition to what has already been done by this Com-
mittee, through the BCDC/MTC Regional Seaport Planning
Study. Second, change from the priority use designation
should occur only for clear and compelling reasons. Thus,
the Committee recognized the desirability and priority
of first using existing land on the east side of Redwood
Creek for future port growth, while also recognizing that
a further factual basis is required before any final deter-
mination is made about the port priority designation on
Bair Island.
The BCDC/MTC seaport study has not been completed. It appears
at this time, however, that the marshland area is not planned
for development in the foreseeable future. The Port does have
a problem finding an economically acceptable spoils disposal
area for Redwood Creek dredging, however.
It is my conclusion that there have been no developments since
January 1978 which would indicate that a change should now be
made from the current Master Plan designation.
Recommendation: It is recommended that you adopt the attached
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District Amending the Master Plan of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District adopted the Master Plan of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by Resolutions
Numbers 77-45 and 77-46 of December 14, 1977 and Resolution
Number 78-1 of January 11, 1978 , and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District now wishes to update the Master
Plan of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
amends the Master plan of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District, dated April 1978 , a copy of which is on file
with the District Clerk at the District offices, in accordance
with Exhibit A attached which is incorporated herein by reference
and made a part hereof.
EXHIBIT A
I. Revisions to the Text Side of the Master Plan
A. Front cover-new publication date
B. Page 1 - see page A-2 of Exhibit A
C. Pages 2 through 7 - no change
D. Page 8 - see page A-2 of Exhibit A
E. Page 9 - no change
F. Page 10 - see page A-3 of Exhibit A
G. Page 11 - see page A-4 of Exhibit A
II. Revisions to the Map Side of the Master Plan
A. Identify Midpeninsula Regional Open Space preserves by name
where space allows
B. Add new areas and update boundaries for all public lands
C. Update District boundary and Urban Service Area boundary
Page A-1
BENEFITS
A"; vtl'EIVIEW OF THE MASTER P!_P.'1prvi e o d THE RING-i"19 a�t� OF OPEN sp. ,�=
,'yi
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District was cre- "Open space" is generally defined as any land or water
ated by voter:: in northwestern Santa Clara County in area which remains in a natural state, is used for agricul-
November 1972. In June 1976, residents of southeastern ture or is otherwise essentially undeveloped. One way to
San Mateo County voted to join the District. Since its differentiate among and evaluate opens ace areas is to benefits
creation, the District has been working to acquire open examine and com s they�es-
space lands,to plan and manage them wisely,and to pre- or have the potential to�r�ferm:Some o these rovide
sent to the public a clear and detailed statement of the lien include providing opportunities for low intensity or
District's basic philosophy and policies. intensive recreation, providing scenic, hPauty, providing enefits
habitat for wildlife, preventing urbalnSpraW-and protect-
In March of 1974 the District adopted its Basic Policy con- ing the public from natural or manmade hazards.
taining five major objectives to guide the MROSD in its
efforts to preserve open space. Each of these objectives Both the Open Space Acquisition Policies and the Open
is accompanied by additional policy statements which Space Lands Evaluation included in this Master Plan are
organized according to the various l9en.` `.eial .....':___
clarify and elaborate upon the objectives.The District also b o s . benefits provided
adopts an annual Action Plan which sets forth the specific y open pace
programs and sub-programs it intends to pursue to carry
out each of the objectives and their related policies.
Two of the objectives in the Basic Policy relate to the
acquisition of open space lands by the District, and to
working with other governmental agencies and private
organizations to preserve open space.The purpose of the
District's Master Plan is to aid the District in carrying out
those two objectives by providing guidance for the-La4d Open Space
Acquisitioryr.and Governmental Liaison programs in the s
District's Actions the Public Communications and
The Master Plan is organized into the following three t
major sections:
Open Space Acqu13ition Policies — Presents the -
policies which will help guide the District,in determining . '`"_.
the types of open space lands it will acquire.
Open Space Lands Evaluation — Aids the District rig` it
in identifying areas which have high composite open `` '
space value, as well as those having high value for{mac-provz z '
19msipq individual open space.#uasii-Q&of interest to the
District. benefits ..:
Implementation—Discusses the District's open space f
preservation powers and identifies some of the factors
entering into the District's land acquisition decisions.
Also discusses the open space preservation powers and 1, _
ions whose
roles
n help preservecies witnd hin nt the District.actions
can
The Master Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors
December 14, 1977 and January 11, 1978., and updated
Qn December 10, 1980.
The technical appendices to the Master Plan are available
"'
from the District office. M anQ ;
1
t
The preservation of open space is the principal objective Factors Affecting MROSD Land
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. This Acquisition Decisions
section describes the open space preservation powers of
the MROSD,other governmental agencies and private in- In addition to the District's Basic Policy and Open Space
dividuals and organizations whose activities may affect Acquisition Policies, there are a number of other factors
open space within the District. which enter into the land acquisition decisions of the
MROSD, including the following:
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL • Amount of public support for the acquisition. providing
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT • Composite open space importance of the area involve-✓,
+ Importance of the area iripef!BFo"�ndividu'—aTopen
1�enefi ts�ce# s�+e�s considered in the District's Open Space
Open Space Preservation Powers of the District Acquisition Policies.
• Costs of acquisition, with special attention given to
The MROSD has several means by which it can work to pre- gifts,bargain sales, installment sales and sales of open
serve open space. Its most effective tool is the acquisition space easements.
of open space lands,which may be accomplished through • Net costs of maintenance, including potential revenue
purchase or gift of fee title or of lesser interests. When from agricultural and other uses.
purchasing fee title or certain types of open space ease- • Degree of threat of loss to development.
rnents,the District has available to it the power of eminent • Location of the area involved relative to other publicly-
domain. In accordance with the District's Basic Policy, owned open space lands,including those of the MROSD.
this power will only be used in those instances when • Initiative or willingness of the owner(s) to negotiate
reasonable attempts at voluntary negotiations fail and the acquisition terms.
lands involved are of central importance to the District's • Prospects for preservation actions by other agencies.
program. • Opportunities for joint actions with other agencies.
To enhance its acquisition efforts, the District can seek The relative importance of each of these considerations
State and federal grants, issue bonds and borrow money may vary from one decision to the next.
to supplement its regular sources of funds. The District
can also solicit private gifts of land,open space easements
and money. Such gifts are tax deductible for income tax
purposes and in the case of open space easements can z ��
provide the landowner with property tax relief as well. ''� � ' • ,
The MROSD can employ various other acquisition tech- + � �
niques which may be mutually beneficial to both the Dis- , .^f,;. • 1
trict and the landowner. These include the use of install-
ment purchases, life estate arrangements allowing the �- �. •' -
landowner to continue to occupy the land for the re-
mainder of his or her lifetime and purchase-leaseback or 4L a - rr
purchase-saleback agreements. M` +s21
The District can participate in joint projects with other W
governmental agencies to acquire, develop or maintain
open space lands. It can also encourage these other;
agencies to use their open space preservation powers,
although there is no assurance that such efforts at per
suasion will always be successful. `
i.•<,s x
The District does not have regulatory power over lands
other than those it owns. Consequently, it cannot adopt
zoning ordinances or other such regulations affecting
privately-owned lands. The power to protect open space �` "� ✓� tea.
by regulating land use is held primarily by the cities and
the counties. �> � s "�• �+, ,
8
t
f.
F
e
i
The State Lands Commission has responsibility for the
lease, sale or disposal of state-owned lands, including
tide and submerged lands. The Commission has title to
800 acres on Bair Island and about 130 acres on Redwood
Peninsula. The State Department of Fish and Game is
responsible for wildlife management on these State lands.
The Department of Parks and Recreation and the Wildlife
Conservation Board administer programs providing
funds for local parks and open space projects.
Federal Agencies
The U.S. Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife
Service is responsible for planning, acquisition and man-
agement of the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Ref-
uge, portions of which are within the boundaries of the
MROSD. The Department of the Interior is also important
to the District because its federal Land and Water Con-
servation Fund program provides grants for open space
acquisition.
HVA ITEgryATIONS INDIVII:DU.ALS AND
Private individuals and organizations can play significant
roles in preserving open space within the District. They ? ;
can,for example, urge their city and county governments ,
to use their powers to protect open space and oppose
public and private projects which would adversely affect
a
open space resources.
They can also aid the MROSD by soliciting gifts of land or
donations of funds to the District. The Peninsula Open c
as been Trus tag formed to serve as an independent
organization to receive gifts of land and other assets on
behalf of the District.
Some private organizations, such as the Sempervirens
Fund, the Nature Conservancy and the Trust for Public
+' Lands, acquire open space lands with private funds for
subsequent re-sale or transfer to public agencies.
Private landowners can also play important roles in open
space preservation, particularly owners of large landhold-
ings,major portions of which are presently in open space
uses. Within the MROSD,these major landowners include
Stanford University,the San Jose Water Works Company,
California Water Company, Leslie Salt Company, Mobil ;
Oil Estates,Kaiser-Permanente,and the Catholic Church.
Use of Williamson Act contracts and open space ease-
ment agreements are means by which landowners can I.
mitigate the economic burden of maintaining their lands l
in open spaces uses. L..__. : _:>,: �..: •. _
10
i to be crmnleted with the number of
preser in District when this goes E
to pres-
i,�
Z.°a ••.
-
_ ufy
F ; : The Midpeninsula Regional n Lands Acquired:Although the District did not receive its
Space D .'!ict (MRC)SD) is an independent, special .•,rr- first tax revenues until December of 1973, it has already
pose disl :ct created by the voters of northwestern Santa aiguired almos &,309 acres of open space land,divided a
Clara Co:.. :°y in November of 1972 forthe purpose of pre- 9,000aTnongtPu_ t-sito&witW4 the-0as4r". (see above)
serving and acquiring open space lands in the foothills, r
mountains and baylands, outside the urbanized area. A BOARD OF DIRECTORS preserves
large part of southeastern San Mateo County was annexed
to the District in an election in June, 1976. Ward 1: Katherine Duffy Ward 5: Nonette Hanko
Ward 2: Daniel Wendin Ward 6: Harry Turner
Ward 3: Barbara Green Ward 7: Richard Bishop
Ar�,i Inv,!!t_�d: The MROSD encompasses the cities of P
Atherton,Cupertino,Los Altos,Los Altos Hills,Los Gatos, Ward 4: Edward Shelley
Menlo Park, Monte Sereno, Mountain View, Palo Alto, General Manager: Herbert Grench
Portola Valley, Redwood City, San Carlos, Saratoga,
Sunnyvale and Woodside, and adjacent unincorporated
areas.
MAP OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES j
Gov rning Body: The District is governed by a Board of
Directors consisting of seven members,each of whom is
elected from a separate ward within the District for a four
year term. The Board has regular meetings on the 2nd TS
and 4th Wednesday of each month at 7:30 p.m.in the Dis
trict's office in Los Altos. "`°�°
REDWOOD prY 3"'
yi`1�,s�QPW w.
The MROSD is empowered, acting through its
Board of Directors, to spend its funds to acquire land,
through purchase or gift,for open s ace,park and recre-
ational purposes. When necessary, theDistrict has the �`� ' �•-^ �;` � AL a
power of eminent domain.
The District is also empowered to create and maintain
recreational facilities. In or
der to maximize the effective vURtDIA r
CD
VALLEY a h�TU3 T f$�Nri!'YxLE
ness of its open space preservation efforts, however, it is , �« �w:
thn District's policy to allocate the vast majority of its funds f<. i
during the first years of its existence to the acquisition of N6
open space, rather than to the development and main x ,ART
tenance of facilities.
The MROSD does not have zoning or other regulatory : �. — a e
powers with regard to privately owned lands. '� un r
SAHATOOAL's
Fide a•r+c�a:�+�e-0+s#+'+ct:s pr+rwafy-so•u�c�e-o#fever}ue�s-a .
rD er -tax- f—-6ir m—$l f a�aS6'SSEL�VaflldtTOTrl7f-Te
P fJ tY P
a4-+d-p,ef-,eaa4-pfope41-wi#*4-t-he N
w ith_pro Rerty sax.lELief Payments SrDms fie_&tate-Di C a1 L
-facni•a-an�l�ateresi�ar+�ac�sr�Distcict-tu.ndsraot.��t�roai- � � ""�� ,.
-m4t-edl49 Aandf-pwsleases-dam eyaratir�g_�,cp�rases �s
-expeciotf-tt>-preuide-app�d>ximaiely-$,3rOC10,Dt10_is fiscal � � .;
_ FIg7zz78� (see below) Ward numbers {
Ward boundaries � x
The MROSD also seeks to supplement its regular revenues
with State and federal grants and donations from private
individuals and organizations. To date, the District has ;
received 24million in grants and over$1. illion in gifts
of land. 5, 5 2.8
The Master Plan was prepared by William Spangle b Associates
The District has the power to-�e-bondis, to borrow n actS�aHof the Midithe a Regional
P Open Space District, with the participation of the Santa Glare
money and to enter into installment purchases. County Planning Department. Photography by Carolyn Caddes.
Finances: The District's primary source staff
n e is a share of the Property tax levied
reve u ..
for local public agencies within the boundaries
of the MROSD. This, together with property tax _
relief payments from the State of California and _
interest earned on District funds not yet needed
for land purchases or operating expenses, is expected
to provide ap"oximtely $3 570 000 in fiscal gear 1980-81_
in addition to special revenues required to service debt..
;i�
M-80-87
(Meeting 80-27
December 10, 1980)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
November 17 , 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Date for Program, Evaluation Workshop
Discussion: At your meeting of November 12 , you discussed
possible dates for the Program Evaluation Workshop and tenta-
tively established Wednesday, February 4 , 1981 as the date
for the workshop. I indicated I would return at your next
Regular Meeting to request that you formally set the date
and time for the workshop.
Recommendation: It is recommended that you schedule the Program
Evaluation Workshop for Wednesday, February 4 , 1981 from
7 :00 P.1i. to 10. 00 P.M. at the District office. If necessary.,
the workshop might have to extend past 10: 00 P.M. or be con-
tinued to another date if all the evaluations are not completed
within the three hour period.
M-80-88
(Meeting 80-27
December 10 , 9180)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
November 12, 1980
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Cancellation of Second Regular Meeting in December
Since the second Regular Meeting in December falls on December 24 ,
Christmas Eve, it is recommended that the meeting be cancelled.
Since it may become necessary to have another Board meeting in
December, I suggest you discuss a possible alternative date on
December 10.
C-80-22
December 10 , 1980
Meeting 80-27
Revised
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Descri tion
1613 $ 296. 92 Abracadabra Typesetting Typesetting-Newsletter
1614 189. 00 Accountemps Temporary Office Help
1615 273. 98 Account Abilities Temporary Office Help
1616 9. 00 Administrative Management Subscription
1617 779. 70 Kathy Blackburn Conference Fee & Contract
Services for December
1618 300. 00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Services-December
1619 103. 53 CA Water Service Co. Utilities
1620 176. 00 Communications Research Co. Radio Equipment Maintenance
1621 400. 00 California Advocates Leaislative Consultant-Noveri:)er
1622 138. 29 CA Safety & Industrial Supply Ranger Uniforms
1623 6, 755. 00 Clevenger Realty Appraisal
1624 15. 98 Eric Mart Reimburse-Training Materials
1625 161. 18 E. D. Bullard Field Supplies
1626 20. 00 CA Park & Recreation Society Advertisement-Associate
Open Space Planner
1627 27. 06 Mark A. Deady Rental Maintenance
1628 222. 24 Dorn ' s Safety Service Vehicle Maintenance
1629 118. 22 The Dark Room Photography Service
1630 2, 000. 00 Deloitte Haskins & Sells Auditor Fees
1631 33. 80 John Escobar Reimburse-Training Expenses
1632 27. 23 Pete Ellis Dodge Vehicle Maintenance
''1633 95. 00 First American Title -
Guaranty Co. Preliminary Title Report
1634 200. 44 First American Title -
Guaranty Co. Title Insurance-Duffy/Barnes
1635 715. 90 First American Title -
Guaranty Co. Title Insurance-Schroeder
1636 32. 59 Foster Brothers Keys
1637 31 . 25 Joan Ferguson Reimburse-Ranger{+Uniforms
1638 550. 00 Foss & Associates Consultant Fees - September
& October
1639 1, 631. 75 Frahm, Edler & Cannis Engineering Study
1640 887. 14 Honeywell Protection Services Protection Services
C-80-22 Page Two
^ember 10 , 1980
ating 80---,' /
Revisedry�j- option V,-,c)u n Name
1641 198. 43 Hubbard & Johnson Field Suppl
1642 1, 526. 15 Jeda Publications Printing- NE.,,,,:.,-;!--tter
1643 400. 00 Jans K. Kroijer Deed of Trust Payment-Fine
1644 92. 13 Minton' s Lumber Field Supplies
1645 674. 75 Pacific Telephone Telephone" Service
. 164-6 292- 62 Mobil Oil District I Vehicle Expense'
.1647 31. 5-8 Norney' s Officd Supplies
1648 324. 39 orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies
1649 11, 83 Pitney Bowes Office EquipmentSupplies
16.50 40. 00 Postmaster Bulk Mailing Permit-1981
1651 50. 00 CPRS-NRPA Headquarters Conference Registration
J652 15. 00 Palo Alto Weekly Subscription
.1653 162. 96 P -IG & E Utility. Serv*ice
1654 8. 60 City of Palo Alto Utility Service
1655 3. 00 Peninsula Blueprint Printing
1656 15. 80 Stanley Norton September & October Expense-s
1657 244. 95 Pioneer Printing Office Supplies & Printing
1658 8,466. 99 Rutan and Tucker Legal Services
1650, 7, 949. 63 Rogo..rs, Vizzand & Tallett Loqa*11- Services
.1660 12. 57 Rancho Hardware Field Supplies
1661 3, 012. 00 Reitman & Associates Appraisal Work
1662 . 114. 87 San Francisco Newspaper Advertisement-Associate*
Agency Open Space Planner
1663 42. 12 San Jose I Mercury/News Advertisement-Associate
Open Space Planner
1664 379. 44 Shell Oil CO. District Vehicle Expense
1665 12. 00 County of San Mateo Bd. of SupQrvisors'AgenCas
1666 94. 89 'Scanners Unlimited Radio Equipment
1667 748. 10 Title Insurance & Trust Title Insurance/Cooley 'Landlni
1668 672. 00 Gene Sheehan Road Work/Saratoga Gap 'and
Monte Bello
669 192. 49 David Topley Reimburse-Peace officer
Training Expenses
1670 38. 85 Oakland Tribune Advertisement-Associate O*oen
Space Planner
1671 439. 38 U S Rentals Field Equipment Rental
1672 235. 41 Union Oil District Vehicle. Expense
1673 6. 25 Victor/California Field Supplies
1674 85. 27 West Coast Shoe Co. Ranger Uniforms
1675 595. 11 Xerox Corporation Duplicating & Suppli.es
C-80-22 Page 3
December 10 , 1980
�eeGina 80-27
ev ,e
i.rnoun L- Name escriptic)n D
1676 $ 243. 34 First American Title Guaranty Title and Esccow Fees-
Consigny
1677 98.00 International Right of Way- Seminar-Pat Starrett
Association
1678 46. 00 Pat Starrett Private Vehicle Expense
1679 103. 60 Steve Sessions Private Vehicle Expense .
1680 9 .05 Excel Pool & Patio,Inc. Pool Supplies
L681 39 .99 Sue Carlson Site Maintenance
1682 1,200 . 0-0 SGS Incorporated Road Maintenance-Manzanita
Ridge
1683 85.25 Los Altos Garbage Garbage Service
1684 . 68. 71 PG and E Utilities ,
1685 17: 79 ZZZ Sanitation Portable Toilets-Los Trancos
.1686 350.00 First American Title Guaranty Preliminary Title Report
1687 95. 00 First American Title Guaranty Preliminary Title Report
688 95. 00 First American Title Guaranty Preliminary Title Report
689 95. 00 First American Title Guaranty Preliminary Title Report
690 95. OG First American Title Guananty . Preliminary Title ReP rt
691 27. 85 Jennie George Office Supplies
692 58 . 77 Craig Britton Private Vehicle Expanse
693 30 . 40 Harfst Associates Computer Associates
1694 502 . 52 Pete Ellis Dodge District Vehicle Repair
1695 68 . 00 El .Camino Hospital Treatment- for Injured
Volunteer
1696 105 .00 Dr. E. R. Galvez Treatment for Injured
Volunteer
1697 134 . 67 Petty Cash Postage, Meal Conferences,
Xeroxing, Office Supplies ,
Mapping Supplies and .Private
Vehicle Expenses.
e