HomeMy Public PortalAbout19860108 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 86-01 i
»
ke�tinig 86-01
I+ ML
AA.
I
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
i
REGULAR MEETING
Wednesday BOARD OF DIRECTORS 375 Distel Circle, D-1
January 8, 1986 Los Altos, California
AGENDA
(7:30)* ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE -- T. Henshaw
APPROVAL OF MINUTES (December 11, 1985; December 18, 1985)
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
BOARD BUSINESS
(7:45) 1. Election of Board Officers for 1986 -- T. Henshaw
i
(8:00) 2. Publicity Plan for Acquisition Policies Including Eminent Domain -- H. Grench
(8:20) 3. Use and Management Plan Review for the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Limekiln
Canyon and Kennedy Road Areas -- D. Hansen J
(8:50) 4, Award of Contracts for Skyline Ridge and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Pre-
serves to Complete Parking and Access Facility Plans and Specifications -- D. Hansen
(9:10) 5. Adoption of Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual -- H. Grench
Resolution Adopting Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual
(9:30) 6. Recommendation on Compensation Adjustments for Board Appointed Staff Members --
P J Board Appointee Review Committee (E. Shelley, K. Duffy, T. Henshaw)
(9:45) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiation and Litigation Matters)
ADJOURNMENT
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you'tce eoneetcned with appeau on the agenda,
you may addtce&s the Boated at that time. OtheAwize., you may additesS the Boated undetc
O,tat Communicationz. When tceeognized, pte"e begin by stdting youte name and addtee6,s.
Concizenzz .cis appneeiated. We tceque�sx .that you evmptete the ohw provided Aso .that
youte name and addteez s can be aceunate2y inctZLded in the minutes.
*Times are estimated. Agenda is subject to change of order.
Meeting 85-33
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965.4717
RESCHEDULED REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DECEMBER 18 , 1985
MINUTES
I. ROLL CALL
President Teena Henshaw called the meeting to order at 7 :35 P.M.
Members Present : Katherine Duffy, Teena Henshaw, Edward Shelley, Nonette
Hanko, and Richard Bishop. Daniel Wendin and Harr Turn
er ner arrived ed at
7 : 38 P.M.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, David Hansen, Mary
Hale, Stanley Norton, Del Woods , James Boland Mary Gunder
,
t Dennis
Danielson, and Emma Johnson.
II. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
E. Johnson stated the Board received the following written communications:
1) a letter from Warren and PattieAnne Hergerton suggesting that the
Baldwin-Wallace College addition to the Sierra Azul Preserve be
patrolled at least 4-5 times a day because of gun use, alcohol and
drug abuse, and off road vehicles on the property. They added they
looked forward to working with the Board to improve the area,
2) a letter dated December 11 from Guadalupe Land Company' s President
C. M. Dwyre, stating support of the Interim Use and Management
recommendations in staff's acquisition report for Baldwin-Wallace
College property but noting that the property line between District
and Guadalupe Land Company's property does not follow the creek
center and that use of the present trail would be mostly on private
property. He added that the Company supports the concept of
opening the trail to public use in the future but not at this time, and
3) an invitation to the Park and Recreation Commissioners ' and Board
Members ' Council installation and Awards Dinner.
Since Mr. and Mrs. Hergerton and Mr. Dwyre were in the audience, no
reply was required. Staff will respond to the invitation if a Board
member can attend the awards dinner.
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were no oral communications.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
T. Henshaw said the agenda was adopted by Board consensus.
V. BOARD BUSINESS ,
A. Final Adoption of the Interim Use and Management Plan for the Baldwin-
Wallace College Property Addition to the Sierra Azul Open Space
Preserve - Mt. Umunhum Area (Memorandum M-85-171 of December' 13 , 1985) :*,
D. Hansen outlined staff 's recommendations for short-term management
of the area, noting a- meeting has been scheduled for February 8 with
Herbert A.Grench,Genera/Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
Meeting 85-33 Page two
neighbors , Calizornia Department of Fish and Game , and the Coanty?
Sheriff' s office to outline the District' s policies and to solicit
help in- surveillance of District lands in the area. He said staff
recommends investigating the posting of "No Parking Dusk to Dawn"
signs at some pullouts along Hicks Road, the cost and desirability
of hiring extra patrol service from the County Sheriff, and possi-
bility of a resident caretaker in the area.
D. Hansen said long range plans that are affected by the Land
Management Staffing Study include a Ranger patrol and maintenance
unit in the area, law enforcement needs (either in-house or contrac-
ted) , and siting of a Ranger residence in the vicinity.
Charles Dwyre, President of Guadalupe Land Company of Los Gatos
said the property line between the Company' s land and the Preserve
al
does not follow the creek center, and persons using the trail would
be trespassing on much of the 3-4 miles of trail. D. Hansen added
that staff had met with Mr. Dwyre regarding the boundary question
and the Company ' s possible interest in dedication of the land along
the creek in connection with development of their property.
Board members expressed support for cooperative management of the
area, including working with the Sheriff 's Department.
Motion: E. Shelley moved that staff return at the second regular
meeting in January with a preliminary report on potential
use of a Sheriff's patrol. D. Wendin seconded the motion.
The motion passed 7 to 0.
Motion : R. Bishop moved that the Board adopt the Interim Use and
Management Plan contained in reports R-85-53 and M-85-171
and that the property be withheld from dedication as public
open space. H. Turner seconded the motion. The motion
passed 7 to 0 .
After a ten minute recess called at 8 :00 P.M. , Vice President
H. Turner presided over the meeting in the absence of T. Henshaw,
who left the meeting.
B. Proposed Atwood Property Addition to the El Sereno Open Space
Preserve (Report R-85-57 dated December 12 , 1985)
C. Britton showed the location of the $100 ,000 29. 95- acre parcel
on the wall map, noting the site is contiguous to the western
boundary of El Sereno Open Space Preserve. D. Woods showed slides
of the property. Discussion centered on access to the property and
dedication status. Harry Haeussler, 1094 Highland Circle, Los Altos,
noted that the only access to the property is via a private road,
and D. Hansen responded that while access over the easement has to
be with permission of the property owners, there is potential for
access via the El Sereno Open Space Preserve. K. Duffy asserted
that all property does not have to be dedicated to active public use,
that some land has conservation and scenic backdrop value.
C. Britton added that the parcel has the highest composite rating
based upon scenic backdrop and habitat value.
Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board adopt Resolution 85-52, a
Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of
Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certi-
ficate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing
General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents
Meeting 85-33 Page three
Necessary to Closing of the Transaction (El Sereno Open
Space Preserve - Atwood Property) . E. Shelley seconded the
motion. The motion passed 6 to 0.
Motion : K. Duffy moved that the Board tentatively adopt the Interim
Use and Management Plan recommendations in report R-85-57
including naming the property as an addition to the El
Sereno Open Space Preserve, and indicate its intention to
withhold the property from dedication. E. Shelley seconded
the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0.
C. Annual Review of Relative Site Emphasis Plan and Use and Management
Plan Review Schedule (Report R-85-56 dated December 12 , 1985)
H. Grench explained that the Land Management Staffing Study and
the Land Management Budget Guidelines Study will relate considerably
to the goals presented in the plan.
D. Woods reviewed the changes in standing of preserves on the
relative emphasis chart. He said Long Ridge Open Space Preserve ' s
priority position had risen to #11 because of increased public
interest and use, the new El Corte de Madera Open Space Preserve
was placed at the 19th position on the list determined by the
criteria of public need, attractiveness, accessibility, manageability,
geographic location and regional significance. He said the La Honda
Creek Open Space Preserve had been moved upward slightly because of
the addition of the Darling property to the Preserve.
D. Woods said that the planning projects for the year have increased
significantly, that more specific site planning related to access
projects will occur and that as the District' s land spreads further
to the extremes of the District boundaries, planning, development,
and management programs have been significantly impacted. In view
of those facts, he said it may be necessary to modify the approach
to the Relative Site Emphasis Plan by decreasing site development
or creating a new category for minimal use and management encompas-
sing sites that are relatively low on the list. He added the later
approach would be to discourage public use by means of minimizing
improvements, not directing signing to recreation and not distri-
buting public maps or brochures.
Discussion centered on the proposed minimal use and management ,
category. N. Hanko said she would not support limiting public
access; she suggested using caretakers, volunteer rangers, and
docents as an alternative. E. Shelley stated his opinion that the
present policy is generally consistent with the proposal, and
H. Turner suggested continuing with present procedures. K. Duffy
expressed her concern with a three-year review schedule for rural
sites where problems occur which the Board needs to be aware of.
i
H. Grench said that while the Use and Management Plan reviews are
good management tools , they are time consuming. He said the pro-
poaal would discourage but not prohibit use by the public of certain
sites and would not encourage use on others.
D. Wendin said if patrol-type problems are removed from considera-
tion, there may be a way to de-emphasize sites without discouraging
use entirely.
Meeting 85-33 Page four
R. Bishop said that not all sites should be treated in the same way.
He suggested staff redefine the criteria of minimal use and manage-
ment.
H. Turner stated the Board ' s consensus that staff should return to
the Board with (1) a restatement of the rationale for creating the
new category, (2) definition of category and criteria for including
sites, (3) PR implications, (4) sites at the bottom of the list
having two identifications; (a) planning attention and (b) management
attention, (5) impact on the planning process of the three year review
cycle .
D. Woods highlighted changes in the Funding/Staffing Priorities
for Fiscal Year 1986-87 which include Skyline Ridge , Purisima Creek
Redwoods, Los Gatos Creek Park, and Saratoga Gap Open Space Pre-
serves.
Motion : R. Bishop moved that the Board tentatively adopt the
Revised Plan for Relative Emphasis of District Sites and the
1986 Use and Management Review Plan and that staff be
directed to return with further definition of the reduced
use of sites category. E. Shelley seconded the motion.
The motion passed 6 to 0 .
H. Turner stated the Board' s consensus that the second reading of
the item be scheduled for the second regular Board meeting in
January.
VI. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
H. Grench announced that the President's Commission on Americans Out-
doors would be conducting a hearing in this area and that he has been
investigating how the District could be involved. He added that the
East Bay Regional Park District is hosting areception, and a District
Director and the General Manager have been invited. R. Bishop expressed
his willingness to attend if his schedule allows .
H. Grench reported that agendas and appropriate materials have been
mailed for the January 15 Special Board Meeting regarding eminent domain
policies - to be held in the Menlo Park Council Chambers.
H. Grench distributed information and an invitation letter 'far the Con-
ference of the International Institute of Park Administrators in .
Aukland, New Zealand and asked if the Board is willing to have two staff
members attend. N. Hanko asked how long the conference would be, and
H. Grench replied that it would be six days. Directors Turner, Shelley,
Duffy, and Bishop spoke in favor of the professional value to the indi-
viduals and the District of attending such a conference.
Motion: D. Wendin moved that the Board approve etxpenditure in the
appropriate amount indicated by H. Grench from the District' s
conference budget for two staff members to attend the conference.
R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion passed 5 to 1 with
N. Hanko voting no.
D. Hansen encouraged the Board to seek letters of support to the
State for the District' s grant applications for Skyline Ridge and
Picchetti Ranch. He said he would be meeting with a State represen-
tative at Picchetti on December 30 to review the historic renovation
proposal.
C. Britton reported that a lease has been signed for new office space
at the Old Mill Office Center and that the move probably would occur
around mid-March.
Meeting 85-33 Page five
D. Wendin stated he had read that the Board of Supervisors of Santa
Clara Count had authorized
d purchase of radar guns for the California
Highway Patrol which contradicts previous information. Staff noted
it would follow-up on the report.
VII. CLAIMS
Motion : - R. Bishop moved approval of Revised Claims 85-25. N. Hanko
seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0.
VIII. CLOSED SESSION
S. Norton announced that litigation matters to be discussed in Closed
Session fell under subdivision (b) (1) of Government Code Section
54945. 9 . The Board recessed to Closed Session at 9 :40 P.M.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 10 :50. P.M.
Emma Johnson
Secretary
CLAIMS m). 85-25
Meeting 85-33
MIDPENINSL.-,A REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: December *18.1
REVISED
C L A I M S
n Amount Name Description
3008 13.64 Americas __..I
Tank Rental
)009 32. 10 James Boland Reimbursement--Uniform Expense
010 235.03 Bruce Baker's Skywood Gas & Towing . Fuel for District Vehicles
)011 44.00 The Business Women's Training
Institute Seminar--Cecilia A. Cyrier
1012 98.95 California Water Service Company Water Service
1013 213.00 Communications Research Radio Service
014 89.37 Crest Copies, Inc.
Master Plan printing
IN015 300.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Service
IIL016 14.38 DRI Industries Field Supplies
IN017 20.42 E1 Monte Stationers Office Supplies
�018 100,000.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. Land Purchase--Atwood
F019 161 .95 First Place Awards Vehicle Permit Stickers
1020 32.20 The Frog Pond Meal Conferences .
iO21 58.48 Goodco Press Office Supplies
1�022 86.72 Mary E. Hale Private Vehicle Expense
1023 12.83 Hubbard and Johnson Field Supplies
1024 281 .99 Lawrence Tire Service Tires for District Vehicle
'025 775.00 Los Altos Garbage Company Dumpster Rental
1026 76.50 Robert McQuillan Field Supplies
1027 379.66 Minton's Lumber and Supply Field Supplies
1028 49.00 National Seminars, Inc. Seminar--Mary E. Hale
u029 68.66 Noble Ford Tractor, Inc. Parts for District Vehicle
l030 2.41 Norney's Office Supplies
1'031 9.80 Stanley R. Norton November Expenses
1032 345.07 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies
5033 9.85 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Utilities
L034 480.00 Park Management Club
West Valley College "Legal Update" Seminar--Rangers
�035 17.42 Peninsula Blueprint, Inc. Map Reproduction
.'036 998.88 Peninsula Oil Company Fuel for District Vehicles
'!037 44. 14 Pitney Bowes Postage Meter Rental
1038 1 ,232.00 Thomas Reid Associates Revegetation Plan--Hassler
w039 14.22 Skyline County Water District Water Service
i
i
CLAIMS No. 85-25
Meeting 85-33
Date: December 18,198,
REVISED
Amount -
Name
Description
040 1 ,875.00 John H. Tallett
�41 54.00 The Travel Place Legal Services
1042 50.00 United States Postmaster Out-of-Town Meeting--Herbert Grench
Bulk Mailing Permit
�43 6.44 Unocal
344 140.95 West Coast Shoe CompanyFuel for District Vehicles
Uniform Expense
C45 250. 13 Del Woods Reimbursement---Professions
�46 119.03 Yardbird Equipment Sales 1 Conference
Parts for Field Equipment
47 210.50 ZZZ Sanitation Company
Sanitation Services
48 2,500-00 Metro Real Estate Rese-
arch Appraisal Services
ip 3 44.16/ Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Out-of-Town Meeting
1150 157-75 Petty Cash
Office Supplies, Permit Renewal,
Field Supplies and Meat Conferences
I
Meeting 85-32 Page 3
Committee spent much time in selecting and defining the words in
section 10.
D. Wendin pointed out a new section (section 6) for Board consid-
eration, concerning road access for patrol purposes.
He stated that the eminent domain exemption contracts concept
needed further discussion and that staff will be returning at the
next Board meeting with initial recommendations on publicity of
the policies .
E. Shelley asked if a definition of "development" could be included
under item 10 , Definitions. R. Bishop stated that it was the opin-
ion of the Committee that item f, "clearly threatened by develop-
ment" , was a sufficient definition of the term.
Discussion centered on the location and scheduling of a Board
meeting specifically for public discussion and tentative adoption
of the eminent domain policies .
Motion : H. Turner moved that the Special Meeting be held on
January 15, 1986 at a facility which is centrally located
and provides sufficient room for the size of the antici-
pated crowd. R. Bishop seconded the motion. The motion
passed 7 to 0.
D. Wendin asked what instructions the Board wished to give the
Committee on the remaining policy issues, most importantly the
Brown Act, and the disposition of Mr. Haeussler 's letter concerning
the response from Assemblyman Ernest Konyuls office.
Motion: E. Shelley moved that Mr. Haeussler 's letter be sent to
staff without a specific deadline for a report to the
Eminent Domain Committee, and the staff report would be
included with the Eminent Domain Committee 's report to
the Board. N. Hanko seconded the motion.
Discussion: D. Wendin stated his support for the motion
with the understanding that staff contact the legislative
counsel 's office to ascertain the background of the letter
from Assemblyman Konyuls office. The motion passed 7 to 0.
H. Grench asked if it was the Board 's intention to have this item
on the agenda for the meeting of January 15. T. Henshaw stated that
the motion did not contain a date. In response to a further ques-
tion from H. Grench regarding the date for the presentation of the
staff report on the publicity question, D. Wendin recommended that
this item be postponed until staff is ready to make its report.
D. Wendin also asked that a special notation be made on the agenda
for the December 18 meeting that the Publicity Plan for the Eminent
Domain Policy will be considered at the Board meeting of January 8,
1986 .
C. Proposed Two Phase Planning Process for the Hassler Property
(Memorandum M-85-168 dated November 20 , 1985)
H. Grench discussed the background information which led to the
presentation of the memorandum containing suggestions for a two-
phase planning process for the Hassler Open Space Preserve. M. Hale
showed recent slides of the Hassler site.
H. Grench said the site was opened to the public on October 31
Meeting 85-32 Page 4
and that publicity on the site had been prepared.
D. Hansen reported on his meeting with Don McFarland, the Director
of the Redwood Center located near the entrance to the Preserve.
He said the Center closes the gates at night, and noted that their
main concerns are increased traffic , the need for privacy, and
possible trespass on the treatment site. He stated there was con-
sensus for cooperation in the areas of signing, visual improvement
of the area, and -improved access , and said that the Center is very
interested in working with the District in long range planning.
H. Grench reported he met on-site with Margaret Taylor, San Mateo
County 's Health Services Director, and said their discussion cen-
tered on location of trails , especially as they would impact the
Cordilleras Center. He said there was potential for cooperation
with the Health Services Department in locating trails and a fire
road.
H. wench reviewed the proposed two phases of planning and imple-
mentation noting that a more detailed Use and Management Plan would
be presented to the Board in January or February. He pointed out
possible trail routes and discussed signing for the property.
A discussion ensued on the naming of the Preserve. R. Bishop stated
that, among his constituents , there was no objection to a name
change as Mr. Hassler was unknown in the area.
Beez Jones , 16890 Stevens Creek Road, Cupertino, raised questions
about the use of the CalTrans Park and Ride lot for parking and
whether the fence would be removed at the vista point to allow
access to the Preserve from that location. R. Bishop stated that
the park and ride lot was used lightly on weekends and it might be
possible to receive permission from CalTrans for use at that time.
H. Grench advised that the District is hopeful of working with
CalTrans to get an official public entrance to the Preserve from
the vista point parking lot. He noted that there are federal regu-
lations regarding pedestrian access from interstate highways.
With regard to Phase II of the proposed planning process, H. Grench
pointed out that the proposals listed in the memorandum had been
submitted with the idea of promoting discussion and brainstorming.
He noted that the role of the public advisory committee needs much
careful thought and discussed the role the planning consultant
might have with other public agencies as well as the community.
R. Bishop stated that staff had asked for guidance in trail devel-
opment during Phase land suggested that the existing trail up the
east canyon be opened to the top of the ridge to provide a loop
trail for long and short hikes and with signs posted to guide
people. He noted that item seven of Phase I lists either the east
or west canyon, and he proposed that the east canyon be selected.
N. Hanko stated that the last sentence of item seven which sug-
gested this trail could be left to Phase II be stricken.
Following discussion of what would be required to implement the
trail route as suggested by R. Bishop, T. Henshaw stated the con-
sensus of the Board that the trail be routed through the east
canyon if permission can be obtained from the City for an access
and that the trail be constructed under Phase One of the planning
process . She also stated that there was Board consensus on
Meeting 85-32
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D•1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DECEMBER 11 1985
MINUTES
I. ROLL CALL
President Teena Henshaw called the meeting to order at 7 :35 P.M.
Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Daniel Wendin, Teena Henshaw,
Edward Shelley, Nonette Hanko, and Harry Turner. Richard Bishop
arrived at 7 : 41 P.M.
Personnel Present: Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, David Hansen,
Jean Fiddes , Mary Hale, James Boland, and Doris Smith.
II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES
November 13 , 1985
Motion: E. Shelley moved the approval of the minutes of November 13 ,
1985 . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion to approve
the minutes passed 7 to 0.
November 20 , 1985
Motion: E. Shelley moved the approval of the minutes of November 20 ,
1985 . K. Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed 5 to 0
with H. Turner and D. Wendin abstaining because they had been
absent from the November 20 meeting.
III . WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
D. Smith stated the Board had received the following written communi-
cations :
1) a letter from Harry Haeussler, 1094 Highland Circle, Los Altos,
dated November 20 , 1985, recommending that the District provide
for a large increase in the number of rangers employed to insure
adequate patrols of increasing properties;
2) a letter from Ingeborg Kuhn, 315 Stanford Ave. , Palo Alto, dated
November 10 , 1985 stating that she felt signs posted at the Monte
Bello Open Space Preserve were not clear and suggesting that
distance be stated at certain key points;
3) a letter from Jim Warren, 345 Swett Road, Woodside, dated
November 18 , 1985 with a request that he be kept informed of
timely information regarding Board and Committee ruminations on
the issues of eminent domain and community outreach/good neighbor
efforts; he also stated his concerns regarding Version 4 of the
Eminent Domain Committee 's Land Acquisition Policies;
4) an update, dated November 1, 1985 , from the Santa Clara Valley
Integrated Environmental Management Project; and
5) a letter from Harry Haeussler, dated December 5 , 1985 , asking the
Board to cancel the present resolution pertaining to the Brown
Act and the list of property owners and to make identification of
Herbert A.Grench,Genera/Manager Board o/Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nanette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
Meeting 85-32 Page 2
real property or properties and the person (s) with whom the Dis-
trict's negotiator may negotiate in the Board meeting agenda of
the meeting immediately prior to the Closed Session .
The Board directed staff to acknowledge the letters from Ms . Kuhn and
the November 20 letter from Mr. Haeussler. T. Henshaw stated she
would respond to the written communication from Mr. Warren. Staff
advised that the update from Santa Clara Valley Integrated Environmen-
tal Management Project did not require a response from the District.
D. Wendin stated that Mr. Haeussler 's December 5 letter had been pre-
sented at a meeting of the Eminent Domain Policy Committee and that it
was the consensus of the Committee that the letter should be referred
to staff for further analysis and then submitted to the full Board for
discussion as the information received with Mr. Haeussler 's letter
contradicts the interpretation which was received from Senator Keene 's
office. It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. Haeussler 's letter
would be discussed in conjunction with the meeting 's second agenda item.
IV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Linda Newman introduced herself as a reporter from the Los Altos Town
Town Crier. There were no other oral communications.
V. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
T. Henshaw stated that the agenda was adopted by Board consensus.
VI . BOARD BUSINESS
A. Final Ado2tion of the Revised Use and Management Plan for the
Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve (Memorandum M-85169 dated
December 4 , 1965)
D. Hansen advised that no further public comments had been received
since the revised Use and Management Plan for Saratoga Gap Open
Space Preserve was presented at the November 20 Board meeting.
Motion: D. Wendin moved the adoption of the revised Use and Manage-
ment Plan for the Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve as con-
tained in report R-85-54 . The motion was seconded by E.
Shelley.
Discussion: D. Wendin asked what the timeline was with
regard to the decision concerning the septic system that
services the two rental houses . D. Hansen stated that a
financial analysis had not been completed. C. Britton
said that if the amount for repairs is more than $10 ,000 ,
staff will return to the Board for approval, but if the
repairs are less than $10 ,000 the repairs will be made.
The motion passed 7 to 0 .
B. Scheduling of Board Review of Draft Eminent Domain Policies
(Report R-85-55 dated December 2 , 1985)
D. Wendin reviewed the current draft report from the Eminent Policy
Committee which, he said, was the result of the Board 's last straw
vote. He called attention to some of the important issues to be
considered by the Board which did not have clear consensus from
the Board. These include non-subdividable unimproved properties ,
the small family lot, and the large family lot. He noted that the
MeetingM185-32 Page 5
Phase I in the staff report. Discussion of Phase II of the report
centered on the item two, the Y formation of a Public Advisor Commit-
tee . H. Turner said he felt a committee would be a good idea for
the pur
poses state
d in item
P b and that
t staff should formulate the
Committee with the Board having control over the composition of
the Committee. E. Shelley stated that the Board should give the
Committee a specific charg
e ge of providing advice on details of the
de
velopment of the Hassler site. N. Hanko stated that the Board
could proceed with adopting the Phase II recommendations thus far
and be more specific when the Use and Management Plan is presented
in January or February.
Motion : R. Bishop moved that the Board approve Phases I and II
of the report as modified in the Board 's discussion with
the following qualifications : that the first effort be
the building of the trail in the east canyon that would
run up to the ridge and create a loop trail, if possible,
and that the trail will be a part of Phase I and not part
of Phase II; the approval of Phase II is to include the
concept of having a Public Advisory Committee, the make-up
of the Committee to be finalized after consideration of
the Use and Management Plan for Phase I. The motion was
seconded by H. Turner. The motion passed 7 to 0.
D. Serialization of Note Held By Alan Hosking (Memorandum M-85-170
dated December 6 , 1985)
C. Britton advised that Stone & Youngberg had found a buyer for
the entire principal amount of $750 ,000 but that the buyer re-
quested that the notes be serialized with each note maturing in a
subsequent year over a period of ten years. He stated that Mr.
Hosking had agreed to pay all costs associated with the reissuing
of the notes and was willing to perform certain site security and
- improvement projects as indicated on Exhibit A.
Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board approve the reissue of the
$750 ,000 Hosking note into ten notes each maturing in
successive years until 1994 , approve the sale of these
notes by Stone and Youngberg as proposed, and authorize
the Board President and Secretary to execute the ten
replacement notes as required by law. N. Hanko seconded
the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0 .
VII . INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
H. Grench reported he and S. Norton attended a meeting of Santa Clara
and San Mateo LAFCO's to discuss changes in the LAFCO law. He stated
that the only changes in the law which would affect the District are
minor and technical in nature.
H. Grench reported on a contribution to the District from Mr. Walter
Girdlestone of San Carlos. He stated that Mr. Girdlestone had given
contributions to the District of $200 each year for the past four
years , and his contribution this year was in the amount of $300 . R.
Bishop stated he would personally like to thank Mr. Girdlestone.
D. Hansen gave an up-date on the use of a 'radar gun on Skyline Boule-
vard per discussions at a recent meeting at the Saratoga Summit Fire
Station.
Meeting 85-32 Page 6
VIII . CLAIMS
Motion: R. Bishop moved approval of Revised Claims 85-24 . H. Turner
seconded the motion. The motion passed 7 to 0 .
T.X. CLOSED SESSION
H. Grench announced that litigation matters to be discussed in Closed
Session fell under subdivision (b) (1) of Government Code Section
54956 . 9. The Board adjourned to Closed Session at 9 :05 P.M.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The Board reconvened to adjourn at 11 :01 P.M.
Doris Smith
Secretary
CLAIMS No. 85-24
' Meeting 85-32
MIDPENINStILA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: December ll ,)985
C L A I M S REVISED
Amount Name Description
(962 454.39 AT&T Information Systems Telephone Equipment
�963 165.00 A-Tool Shed Machine Rental
`964 31 .00 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement--Meal Conference
965 1 ,000.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Advocate Fee for November
%6 125.87 Alice Cummings Private Vehicle Expense
�967 10.86 Clark's Auto Parts District Vehicle Parts
968 301 .99 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies
969 166.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. Preliminary Title Report
125.00 First American Title insurance Co. Preliminary Title Report
r71 34.53 Jean Fiddes Reimbursement--Meal Conference
972 58.59 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Meal Conferences
?73 5.30 GTE Directories Service Corporation Telephone Listing
974 50.00* Hidden Villa Room Rental
975 175.00 Hodnick Design Design Consulting
976 132.00 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Service
977 3,421 .63 Holtzmann, Wise & Shepard, Dr. Legal Services--Hosking
78 127. 12 International Business Machines . Office Supplies
979 1 ,810.50 J P Tractor Corporation Machine Rental
-80 125.00 J & R Drilling
Drilling for Soil Sample
981 2,074.69 Keller and Daseking, Architects Hassler Site Renovation
A2 334.64 Curtis Lindsay, Inc. File Cabinet
983 8.00 Town of Los Altos Hills I
Agenda Subscription
7`84 78.41 Mobil Oil Company
p y Fuel for District Vehicles
485 50.00 National Association of County
Park and Recreation Officials Membership Dues--Herbert Grench
986 145.00 National Recreation and Parks
Association Seminar--James Boland
387 36.8o Stanley R. Norton Expenses for October
)88 840.34 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
)89 291 .60 Pacific Gas and Electric Company Utilities
)90 10.66 Rancho Hardware and Garden Shop Field Supplies
)91 296. 18 Clyde Robin Seed Company Seed Mix
992 1O1 .08
San.Francisco Water Department Water Service
1)93 6.00 Santa Barbara County Trails Council Resource Material
�94 170.00 County of Santa Clara
Department of General Services Radio Dispatching Services
i
3
Meeting: 85-32
Date: December 11 , 1985
REVISED
# Amunt Name Description `
8995 861 .85 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs for District Vehicle£.
8996 782.82 Signs of the Times Signs
8997 1 ,500.00 George Sipel Associates Personnel Consulting Fee
8998 26.p31 Tools R Us Shop Tool
8999 6. p
00 The Travel Place Seminar--Del Woods and Mary Gundert
9000 800.00 U. S. Postmaster Postage for Meter
9001 87.54 Sandy Voorhees Private Vehicle Expense
9002 48.90 Warren, Gorham and Lamont, Inc. Real Estate Law Book
9003 416.50 Western Governmental Research
Association Seminar--H.Grench,J.Fiddes & D.Hanst�
9004 84:05 Del Woods Private Vehicle Expense
9005 150.00 Dun & Bradstreet Seminar--Mary Hale
9006 500.00 Foss Associates Personnel Consulting Fee for Novemb='
9007 177.07 Petty Cash Office Supplies, Meal Conferences,
Xeroxing., Private Vehicle Expense,
Film and District Vehicle Expenses
*Issued as emergency check on November 26, 1985
G`
l
M-86-01
(Meeting 86-01
January 8, 1986)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
January 2, 1986
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: E. Johnson, Secretary to the General Manager
SUBJECT: Election of Board Officers for 1986
Pursuant to Section 1 .22 of your Rules of Procedure, your election of new
Board officers for the 1986 calendar year is to take place at your first
Regular Meeting in January. The Rules state that each officer will be voted
on separately by secret ballot, and the candidate receiving a majority vote
of the members of the Board will be elected. Your recently amended Rules of
Procedure lists the officers in the following order: President, Vice-President,
Treasurer and Secretary.
I
f
R-86-07
(Meeting 86-01
OF January 8 , 1986)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
January 3 , 1986
TO : Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: M. Ha Public
Hale , ubl c Communications Coordin-
ator;
C. Britton, Land Acquisition
Manager
SUBJECT: Publicity Plan for Acquisition Policies Including Eminent
Domain
Background: As part of your deliberations on December 11 , 1985 on
acquisition policies and specifically the eminent domain procedures ,
you have directed staff to draft a plan for publicity as described
under Section 8 of Land Acquisition Policies, version 7 , 4 December,
1985: "Policies and proposed changes pursuant to restraint of eminent
domain shall be adopted by ordinance, legally noticed and freely publi-
cized (before and after any changes) in a manner designed to reach
the attention of all property owners within the District' s planning
areas. "
Since the District was established by the voters and is supported by
taxes imposed upon property owners in portions of Santa Clara and San
Mateo Counties , it is charged with the responsibility of representing
the public in acquiring land and interests in land located in the foot-
hills and baylands which are suitable as public open space.
In a few instances , the rights of an individual property owner compete
with the rights of the District as it seeks to represent the larger
interests of the general public in the geographic area it serves. In
such cases , the District always seeks to make an amicable arrangement
with the owner of the property in question. In only 11 instances
during the past 13h years has the District commenced the process to
exercise its right of eminent domain to acquire property. In each
case, this option was the last resort used only after all other
feasible avenues had been explored and failed. In some instances ,
the District has declined to exercise its right of eminent domain when
the District has been unsuccessful in negotiating acceptable terms of
a purchase.
Most property is acquired by the District from willing, often
enthusiastic sellers and in most instances, the sellers have first
approached the District. The MROSD staff has worked with sellers to
provide professional expertise so that the owner' s interests are pro-
tected. In the case of specialized problems or complicated estate
planning situations , the District is able to provide the owner with the
names of expert consultants who are able to assist the landowners.
I
R-86-07 Page two
Purpose : The intent of the proposed publicity plan is to disseminate
all of the final policy to interested members of the public and specifi-
cally those members of the public who might be directly affected by the
District' s acquisition procedure (that is , within the District' s planning
area) .
Discussion: While the Board directive was to address the specific
issue of eminent domain, it may be considered desirable to publish a
brochure which explains not only eminent domain policy, but to put it
in proper perspective as part of a larger document covering Board
policy and District procedures concerning land acquisition in general.
The proposed brochure would be as specific as possible to educate the
District constituency, eliminate possible fear caused by lack of accurate
information about the possible use of eminent domain, and to answer
other questions property owners may have about the District 's acquisi-
tion program.
Because discussions involving the use , sale and transfer of real estate
involve complex legal, financial, tax and estate planning, as well as
emotional and other subjective, personal considerations , a more compre-
hensive brochure might be helpful in clarifying, in lay language, the
terms, procedures, conditions and opportunities available for indivi-
dual property owners and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
to reach mutually satisfactory terms concerning land in which the Dis-
trict has expressed an ownership interest. The brochure , for example,
could cover opportunities for pxiVate land conservation, such as conser-
vation easements.
The District has faced difficult public relations and media relations
because of the perceived threat of the use of eminent domain. A more
comprehensive brochure would be helpful in informing the public and
the media about the District '.s - "good neighbor" efforts , and to quell
possible controversy which may arise because of a misunderstanding or
a lack of information. If this document were Board approved, it would
then become an "official" District publication, and less subject to
suspicion or misinterpretation, as is the case now, when such informa-
tion is informally provided by many different persons , some of whom
may spread unfounded rumors.
Proposed Plan : The proposed plan is in response to your directive to
draft a plan that is designed to reach all of the property owners in
the District' s planning area (taken literally) . The District' s planning
area has been defined for other purposes as the area shown in various
shades of green on the Master Plan. I assume it also includes for
the present purposes thelurbanizedlislands shown in grey within the
green areas. The Master Plan map shows a composite ranking of areas in
in the foothills and baylands as to their open space resource values.
Predominantly pre-existing information, such as topographic maps ,
aerial surveys , geologic maps , etc. were used to do the ranking.
Neither the base information nor the Master Plan map was parcel-specific;
rather, it was broad-brush information. Therefore , the outer (and inner)
boundaries of the planning area cut through foothill areas that were
already split into small parcels and often developed. Thus , the planning
area includes many, many parcels in which the District would never have
an interest.
The proposed publicity plan covers three phases :
1. Research and planning
2 . Preparation of a direct-mailing
3 . Preparation of a media campaign.
R-86-07 Page three
1. Research and planning is needed to determine the criteria and costs
for the selection of names for the mailing list. The Master Plan is
broad-brushed, rather than selective in scope. It was never intended
to be a parcel-specific plan. There are public relations risks and
excessive costs in using too generalized a mailing list.
To meet the Board' s request , it is proposed that temporary full-time
services be utilized to prepare a specific mailing list, targeted
to reach those landowners within the District 's planning area.
The reason a special list must be created is that currently available
lists are too general . They isolate parcels by tax code, land-use
code , zip code, census tract, or else they provide only the entire
assessor' s book list. (Please see attached memorandum dated
January 2 , 1986 . )
Without hand sorting to create a new list, the direct use of pre-
pared lists from other sources , such as assessor' s books , will
result in unnecessary duplication. Such an expanded mailing list
would randomly reach property owners in the urban areas and could
double, triple or quadruple the costs of printing and mailing.
For example , one prepared list yields a total of 40 ,000 plus names.
If hand-sorting were used to prepare a more precisely defined list,
we might reduce the 40 ,000 to 10 ,000 or 12 ,000.
A specially prepared list would also avoid the potential public
relations problem generated by the dissemination of this informa-
tion to property owners outside the District' s planning area.
Widespread distribution to property owners outside the planning
area would create unnecessary alarm, and the District would then
have to make special efforts to identify and inform only those
landowners affected. Since we will have to do this eventually, it
will be better to do it at the outset as part of our planning and
distribution process. It should be emphasized that even the list
of 10 ,000 or 12 ,000 might be an order of magnitude greater than the
number of property owners who could conceivably be involved in
the District ' s acquisition program. Thus , there is a substantial
risk of creating more concern rather than less.
Research would also be necessary to determine more cost
estimates and to prepare a timetable for completion of the project.
For a first-class mailing of 10,000 pieces , the cost might total
$18 ,600 , as follows :
Using only the current December 11, 1985 acquisitions text
would require 8 printed pages , 3�" wide by 8�" deep to fit a
no. 10 envelope for mailing. Postage at $. 37 each would cost
$3 ,700. Design, typesetting, paper, printing, envelopes, and
mailing services to stuff and stamp envelopes are estimated to
cost a total of $12 ,500. One month of hand sorting to create
the mailing list is based on $15 per hour x 160 hours, for
a total of $2 ,400 . To summarize :
Postage $3 ,700
List 2 ,400
Labor &
Materials 12 ,500
$18,600
If completion of this project is given top priority by the
Board, and Land Acquisition and Public Communications staff
R-86-07 Page four
are directed to work on a "crash" basis to provide the
earliest possible completion date , it is possible to provide a
printed brochure for distribution within three months of the
date the Board releases all approved text.
If the Board prefers that the project be given a high priority
but not to the extent that it would disrupt the current work
of Land Acquisition and Public Communications staff, a six-month
period could be considered for completion. Cost effectiveness
would be a major attraction of the six-month period, as well
as a better product, resulting from better planning.
Or, this project could be considered as part of the Public
Communications Action Plan for adoption in fiscal year 1986-87 .
2 . Preparation of a direct-mailing. Writing, editing, design and
ing the proposed brochure . Print extra copies to have available
for special requests.
3 . Preparation of a media campaign. News release timed to be mailed
on the same date the proposed brochure is mailed to the list
determined in part 1 above. Possibly have a press conference on this
same date. Invite media to indicate availability of the brochure
to anyone who wishes to have it.
Alternative: We could cut costs and the time needed if we were to send
the brochure to everyone on the Brown Act List, approximately 700 , via
first-class mail. and then work with neighborhood landowners' groups
and with the media to provide news of the availability of the brochure
to anyone who wishes to have it. Most importantly, we would not create
concern where none now exists and where the District would never be
involved in acquisition.
Recommendation: I recommend that you approve the following plan of
action:
1. Approval of the Brown Act List to be adopted as the official
mailing list to receive the brochure.
2 . Staff to draft text for the brochure , to be expanded to include
a glossary of terms and other general information to help
clarify the implementation of Board policies regarding land acqui-
sition. Text to include a summary of the policies , with an invita-
tion for the public to contact the District office for a copy of
the policies in their entirety.
3 . Board to approve text of entire brochure.
4 . Staff to draft budget for Board approval for this special project.
(Cost estimates to be prepared after final text, as approved by
Board, is released for design and typesetting. )
5. Print enough extra copies of brochure to allow for distribution
to landowners ' associations , the media, and a supply held in reserve
to meet special requests.
t
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
January 2 , 1986
TO: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager
FROM: S. Voorhees, Real Estate Research Analyst
SUBJECT: Mailing List - All Property Owners Within the District's
Planning Area
You asked me to determine the number of property owners within the
District' s planning area and find a computer service that could pro-
vide mailing labels . The most accurate method of achieving this goal
is to go through every Assessor ' s book and page by hand in order to
isolate the District' s planning area. The reason for this method is
that the various computer systems isolate parcels only by the following
methods:
1. tax code area
2. land use codes
3. zip codes
4 . census tracts
5 . entire Assessor ' s books
All of these methods are very general and would give the District a
broader area of interest than needed.
The Counties are willing to provide the District with mailing labels if
the District will determine which parcels are to be included; for example:
.the District requests certain Assessor 's books - then the Counties ' com-
puters will provide mailing labels for every parcel in the book. It would
be the responsibility of the District to go through all of the labels to
eliminate duplication of names because of multiple parcel ownership and
also eliminate parcels outside the District ' s planning area.
Santa Clara County' s computer data processing department would provide
the labels at a cost of $175 for a set-up fee, plus computer time at
approximately $50-$100.
Santa Cruz County will also supply us with labels if we give them a list
of Assessor' s books at a cost of $20/1000 labels plus a set-up charge
of $50.
San Mateo County - no information is available. They do not currently
provide this service although we are the second public agency to ask
for mailing labels; therefore, they are investigating costs .
C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager
Mailing List -- All Property Owners Within the District's Planning Area
January 2 , 1986
Page Two
The biggest obstacle in creating the planning area list is the specific
identification of the parcels within the Assessor' s books and elimina-
tion of duplication. It can be done but would take approximately one
month to complete if I devoted full time to the task .
I have attached a sheet showing the number of parcels in the District's
planning area (and the source) . The number was reached by identifying
specific Assessor books and referring to the Counties ' land use statis-
tical reperts which show the number of parcels in each book -- the
parcels are identified by land use generally (not by specific page,
i. e. , locla-tio-n ) . The number is a general estimate only because the
various books are often in urban and rural areas, and several of the
books include urban areas while others include parcels outside the
District' s sphere of influence.
As you can see, the total number of parcels is 40 ,365. It is my guess
that multiple parcel ownership would halve this number to 20 ,000 and the
elimination of parcels outside the District's planning area would further
reduce the actual number of targeted ownerships to 10 ,000 - 12 ,000 names.
(This is an estimate only and the actual number could not be determined
until the sifting process was completed -- as I said approximately one
month of full-time attention to the project. )
Attachment
SAN `ATEO COUNTY - Number of Parcels
Book 96 - 195 64 - 951* 78 - 193
56 - 1601* 67 - 1086 76 - 418
93 - 295* 57 - 2364** 80 - 737
49 - 2200** 66 - 816* 85 - 192
50 - 2869** 72 - 779 1,540
54 - 1518 74 - 2360****
55 - 2609*** 75 - 611
11,287 8,967
21,794 PARCELS
* Sphere of Influence
*� Includes parts of San Carlos, Redwood City
*** Includes parts of Menlo Park
***x Includes parts of Portola Valley
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY - Number of Parcels
Book 88 - 404 (9/16/85)
SANTA CLARA COUNTY - Number of Parcels
15 - 564 366 - 1,198* 544 - 1,198*
08 - 42 503 - 1,880* 558 - 1,,153*
182 - 1,222* 510 - 1,669* 562 - 387**
336 - 1,132* 537 - 400 583 - 1,274**
351 - 317 575 - 1,616** 517 - 1,912
342 - 2,203* 6,763 5,924
5,480
18,167 TOTAL PARCELS
*Includes parts of cities
** Sphere of Influence
GRAND TOTAL 40,365 Parcels
Report 86-06
(Meeting 86-01
January 8 , 1986)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
January 2 , 1986
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods, Open
Space Planner; M. Gundert, Associate Open
Space Planner
SUBJECT: Use and Management Plan Review for the Sierra Azul Open Space
Preserve - Limekiln Canyon and Kennedy Road Areas
Introduction: The Use and Management Plan for the Sierra Azul Open Space
Preserve was last reviewed at your November 9 , 1983 meeting (see report
R-83-45, dated November 1 , 1983) .
The Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve is comprised of three areas: Kennedy
Road, Limekiln Canyon, and Mt. Umunhum. This review focuses on the first
two of these areas. The third, the Mt. Umunhum area will be scheduled
at a later date to incorporate input from a neighborhood meeting scheduled
for February 8 , 1986. Since the last review, there have been eight
additions to the Preserve, totalling 1337 acres. Two of these additions
are in areas that are the subject of this review. They are listed below:
Limekiln Canyon Area
Carter property, 10 acres (see report R-84-23 , dated May 3 , 1984) ,
undedicated;
Kennedy Road Area
Grossmith property, 3 acres (see report R-84-12 , dated March 7 , 1984) ,
undedicated
I. Limekiln Canyon Area
A. Site Description and Use
The 824 acre area is located adjacent to the east of Lexington
Reservoir. It includes a non-contiguous 10 acre parcel located
to the south of Soda Springs Road. The terrain is generally
steep with westerly facing slopes that are densely vegetated with
chaparral. The major portion of the site is accessed by a road
originating at the Reservoir and ascending to Priest Rock and
the eastern boundary.
Recreational use over the past two years has been relatively low.
The site is most used by hikers and occasionally by equestrians
and bicyclists (mountain bicycles) . Access to the Priest Rock
trail is currently limited by poor roadside parking and an
R-86-06 Page 2
unmarked gate at the trailhead. Equestrians have a difficult time
entering the site around the existing gate as the County has not
yet provided any access stiles at that location which is in the
area they lease from the Santa Clara Valley Water Disteict.
Management problems are centered around illegal motorcycle access
and shooting. The motorcycles enter from the neighboring proper-
ties to the east, while the shooting activity is concentrated near
the western edge of the site.
The small 10 acre parcel , located south of Soda Springs Road, was
completely burned and partially bulldozed during the Los Gatos
Creek fire. It was reseeded aerially and by hand in September
with the assistance of the California Division of Forestry and
volunteers.
B. Planning Considerations
The Limekiln Canyon Area is located within unincorporated Santa
Clara County and the Sphere of Influence of the Town of Los Gatos.
The Priest Rock trail is shown on the County' s 1979 Trails and
Pathways Plan.
In 1984, the Santa Clara County Park and Recreation Department
undertook a comprehensive study of the Lexington Reservoir Area
to determine the feasibility of providing improved recreation
facilities. Encouraged by this study, the County then embarked
on a master planning process which is expected to be completed
this spring. At this time, the process is at the stage of
identifying recreational alternaties before proceeding to a draft
master plan.
Although the focus of the plan is on water recreation and water
access improvements, including a Highway 17 interchange, some
consideration has been given to trails that lead to District lands.
Parking facilities have been shown in the vicinity of the Priest
Rock trailhead. This proposal includes space for 20-30 passenger
vehicles (no trailer spaces) and will primarily serve a picnic
and rowing area. According to County staff, provisions for trailer
parking have been excluded due to severe design limitations caused
by steep terrain.
Other key points of interest about the plan include access facili-
ties near the Los Gatos Creek Park and trail crossing provisions
for Highway 17. Staff will be responding on all points when the
draft plan is circulated for review in the coming months.
C. Use and Management Plan
The following discussion and recommendations pertain to the
existing Use and Management Plan (report R-83-45) , the Interim
Use and Management Plan contained in the acquisition report for
the former Carter property (R-84-23) , and new recommendations
now being proposed.
R-86-06 Page 3
1. Access and Circulation
a. A pipe gate will be installed at the northeastern boundary
of the area to limit vehicle access. Cost is estimated
at $900.
Status: Funding for the gate has been provided in the
fiscal year 1985-1986 budget. This project is scheduled
for the spring of 1986 .
b. A formal public right to pass should be investigated ,on
the service road across the Santa Clara Valley Water
District property located between the reservoir and the
Preserve boundary.
Status: Staff investigated the status of public rights
to pass over the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD)
property. The trails are open to the public as part of a
lease agreement with the Santa Clara County Parks and
Recreation Department. However, it has just recently been
noted that the SCVWD has posted no-trespassing signs at
the trailhead. County staff has been contacted for an
explanation regarding this change.
C. The PG&E service road entering the property from the
Alma Bridge Road is the primary patrol road for the area
and should be maintained on an annual basis at an estimated
cost of $500 a year.
Status: Funding for the road maintenance is provided in
annual budget preparations. The patrol road is maintained
yearly in cooperation with PG&E and a neighbor.
2. Signs
Existing Use and Management Plans
a. Wildland regulatory signs should be installed at the
eastern and western boundaries. Cost is estimated at $50.
Status: The project has been completed.
b. Boundary plaques should be placed at the appropriate
boundaries on the newly acquired non-contiguous 10 acre
parcel to the south (former Carter property) .
Status: This project has been completed.
New Use and Management Recommendations
a. Signs should be replaced as necessary. The annual cost is
estimated at $100 and funding will be included in annual
budget preparations.
3. Dedication Status
The entire Limekiln Canyon Area is undedicated to allow for
the potential transfer of density rights. Except for the
former Carter property, which is an isolated parcel , the
R-16-06 Page 4
Limekiln Canyon Area is a land unit which could become fully
functional for open space use. I recommend that, except for
the former Carter property, you indicate your intention to
dedicate the Limekiln Canyon Area for public open space
purposes while maintaining a Board's right to transfer density
rights if it is deemed in the best interest of the District's
program to do so at a future time. Legal Counsel should
advise you on the efficacy of this approach.
II. Kennedy Road Area
A. Site Description and Use
The 469 acre Kennedy Road Area is located southeast of the Town
of Los Gatos and is comprised of two non-contiguous land units.
The easternmost of the two contains approximately 600 feet of
roadside frontage along Kennedy Road, and extends southerly up
the ridge towards Mount El Sombroso. The second parcel is to
the west of this and is surrounded by private property. The lands
are best characterized as steep chapparal covered slopes that
offer the visitor occasional panoramic views of the valley.
Primary access to the site is from Kennedy Road via a hiking/
equestrian stile opposite Top-of-the-Hill Road. Roadside parking
for approximately 2-3 vehicles is available at the intersection
of Top-of-the-Hill Road and Kennedy Road. The District has not
encouraged use of this area because of the current parking
limitations.
The site is frequently used by hikers, equestrians , and bicyclists
(mountain bicycles) who are neighbors. The increased use by
bicyclists over the past couple of years has caused a conflict
with the more established uses at the Preserve. There have been
reports of bicyclists travelling down the trails at excessive
speeds, jeopardizing the safety of equestrians and hikers.
Problems with illegal uses still occur. Most of the problems are
centered around camping and campfires , shooting, motorcycles , and
dogs. Camping and gunfire occur mostly on the upper slopes.
While motorcycle activity is most prevalent on the westerly por-
tion of the site near Blackberry Road, loose dogs are commonly
seen on the lower portion of the Preserve near the Kennedy Road
entrance.
B. Planning Considerations
The Kennedy Road Area is located within the Town of Los Gatos,
and major improvements to the site are subject to local ordinances
and regulations.
Preliminary plans for a parking area were prepared in the spring
of 1985 and submitted to the Town's Development Review Committee
for initial comment. The comments dealt primarily with technical
design specifications and potential joint management schemes.
R-86-06 Page 5
A public workshop was then held in November to solicit public
input for the proposed site plans. The workshop was well attended,
and comments focused on concerns over the District's patrol
capabilities and presence, the question of need for a parking area,
current and pot ntial illegal off-hour activities in the neigh-
borhood and on gistrict land, visual impact of a parking area,
and possible contamination of the neighbors ' on-site water system.
The next step in the planning process, if you decide to proceed,
is the submittal of an application to the Town of Los Gatos for
the construction of the parking area. This process will include
review by the Town' s Planning Commission, Development Review
Committee and, Eventually, the Town Council .
In December 1984 , staff submitted a grant application to the
California StatE Department of Parks and Recreation in an effort
to secure Proposition 18 funds to assist in the development of
the Preserve. This potential grant was not funded. Although
there is a chance of having a resubmittal funded, I am not recom-
mending a delay ; in the project to accommodate such reapplication.
C. Use and Management Plan
The following discussion and recommendations pertain to the
existing Use and Management Plan (report R-83-45) , the Interim
Use and Management Plan contained in the former Grossmith property
acquisition report (report R-84-06) , a memorandum on Trail Bike
Use on the Preserve (memorandum M-84-28 , dated March 19, 1984) ,
and on new recommendations now being proposed.
1. Access and Circulation
The proposed parking area plans will be presented to you at
the January 8 , 1986 meeting. These plans include detailed
information concerning grading, drainage, trailhead, fencing,
and signing .
Existing Usk and Management Plans
a. Staff will investigate the possibility of developing a
parking area near Kennedy Road to improve access to the
Preserve.
i
Status: Staff has determined that developing a parking
area near Kennedy Road is feasible. The proposed parking
area plans , which were prepared by a District consultant,
show the possibility of providing space for 8-10 passen-
ger vehicles and 1-2 horse trailers. The design is con-
sistent with other District staging areas to enable
visitors to identify readily the public open space and to
park easily at the trailhead. Following your review of
the pla -is, refinements will be incorporated into the design
before :)eing submitted to the Town of Los Gatos. The
Town' s review process could be expected to start within
the nex : few months.
R-86-06 Page 6
b. A neighborhood workshop and meetings with the Town of
Los Gatos staff will be held to discuss planning and
management.
Status: The workshop and meetings with Town staff have
occurred. Three key points of concern raised by neighbors
at the workshop were: 1) the feeling that curbside parking
along the Top-of-the-Hill Road is more than adequate to
serve the Preserve, 2) there will be an increase in illegal
activities in the area and not enough Town police patrol
coverage to combat the problem, and 3) the neighbor' s
on-site water system may be polluted.
In response, staff examined the practicality of parking
along Top-of-the-Hill Road and has determined that it is
prohibitive for horse trailers and difficult for passenger
vehicles due to its steepness. In regard to the question
of patrol capabilities, one suggested remedy is the
establishment of a Ranger residence in this area and a
cooperative agreement with the Town to increase patrol
coverage, prior to the development of the parking area.
The issue of the water system is addressed in a following
section, titled Structures and Improvements.
Meetings with the Town staff have focused on possible
cooperative management plans and design specifications
which may require refinement. Discussions regarding
cooperative management suggested a potential exchange
of patrol services between the Town and District Ranger
staffs to provide more effective management of both the
Kennedy Road Area and Los Gatos Creek Park. The proposed
design modifications relate mostly to setbacks, grading,
and surfacing.
c. The Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST) has expressed an
interest in raising funds for the parking project, and
the timing of the actual construction would depend upon
the fundraising timetable. If the timetable is longer
than the date by which the Board feels the parking must
be installed, the District could expend the funds itself.
The estimated cost of the project is $25 ,000.
Status: POST has deferred this project due to other higher
priority projects and will most likely not become involved
in fund raising. Funding for the project has been provided
in the fiscal year 1985-1986 budget. If the plans are
approved by the Town of Los Gatos by this coming spring,
construction probably will not be scheduled until summer
1986. Therefore, funding will again be included in fiscal
year 1986-1987 budget preparation.
d. Staff will prepare a plan to replace the chain link
fencing at the Kennedy Road access with more appropriate
fencing, gate and stile. Estimated costs of the project
are $1100.
Status: The fencing, gate and stile were replaced in
the summer of 1984.
R-86-06 Page 7
e. The fence located adjacent to the driveway to the east
of the Proposed parking area (former Grossmith property)
will be improved to prevent equestrian access. Equestrians
will be asked to use the recently installed stile at the
northwest corner.
Status: The fence has been improved and equestrian access
directed to the existing stile.
f. A new access gate will be installed at the Blackberry Hill
access road with the property owner' s permission, and
berms or logs will be placed across any alternative routes
to prevent illegal access. If permission is not obtained
from the adjacent property owner, an alernate gate will be
installed where the road crosses the western boundary of
the Preserve. The estimated costs are $1050 .
Status: Funding for this project has been provided in
the fiscal year 1985-1986 budget. The project has been
deferred because permission has not yet been granted to
install a gate at the entrance to the access road. In
addition, the berm which has been constructed at this
location by the property owner prevents District vehicles
from patrolling the site as well as preventing staff from
installing a gate at the Preserve boundary. Meanwhile,
motorcycles continue to access the site over the berm.
Staff will continue to attempt to reach an agreement with
the property owner.
g. The Blackberry Hill entrance road will be improved a an
estimated cost of $480 and minimally maintained for patrol
purposes.
Status: Funding has been provided in fiscal year 1985-1986
budget. The project has been delayed due to the current
inaccessibility of the road.
h. A gate should be installed at the Tereseta Way entrance
at an estimated cost of $900.
Status: Staff has been unable to secure permission from
the adjacent property owner to install a gate at this
entrance. The road now has major slides and does not
provide patrol access but does offer access to motorcycles.
Staff will continue to work with the neighbors to find an
acceptable means to secure the road , perhaps with a log
barrier. Estimated cost is reduced to $100 with funding
provided in fiscal year 1985-1986 budget preparation.
i. A neighborhood workshop will be held to discuss and
attempt to resolve further trail use conflicts. This
will be done in conjunction with the planned workshop,
which is to be scheduled in June, to receive public comment
on the proposed parking area.
R-86-06 page 8
Status: A District-wide workshop was held by the Mid-
peninsula Trails Council in the summer, 1984 . Staff is
now in the process of developing general trail use
policies and guidelines which will eventually be used to
develop site specific trail plans. If this results in
the consideration of significant trail use changes for
this site, a neighborhood public workshop will be held to
gain additional public input.
New Use and Management Recommendations
a. The patrol roads will be maintained on an annual basis at
an annual cost of $500 a year. Funding will be provided
in annual budget preparations.
2. Signs
Existing Use and Management Plans
a. Boundary plaques will be placed where appropriate on newly
acquired parcels.
Status: Boundary plaques have been placed on the former
Grossmith property.
b. Regulatory signs will be placed at the entrances to the
portion of the site near Blackberry Hill Road. Estimated
cost is $100.
Status: Funding has been provided in fiscal year 1985-1986
budget. The signing has been belayed until access is
improved.
C. Signing will be installed immediately at appropriate places
on the trails to advise bicyclists to use caution and
recognize that equestrians , hikers and other slower trail
users have the right-of-way. Estimated cost is $200 .
Status: Funding is available in fiscal year 1985-1986
budget. The signs will be installed in spring, 1986 .
New Use and Management Recommendations
a. Signs should be replaced as necessary. The annual cost
is estimated at $200. Funding will be included in annual
budget preparations.
3. Structures and Improvements
Following the public workshop in November, staff met with
neighbors to discuss concerns over protection of their water
system which is located on District lands. Several suggestions
were made to secure the spring area and water storage tanks
and to discourage public access into this area. The neighbors
claim the increased public use of the site has led to increased
disturbance of the spring and trespass around the water tank.
R-86-06 Page 9
New Use and Management Recommendations
a. An abandoned spring shaft will be secured to prohibit
public access. Estimated cost is $250 , and funding is
available in fiscal year 1985-1986 budget. The project
is anticipated to occur in spring, 1986.
b. Signs will be placed where appropriate to discourage
public entry into the spring and water collection area.
Signs will state the non-potable condition of the water.
Estimated cost is $200 , and funding is available in fiscal
year 1985-1986 budget. The project is anticipated to
occur in spring, 1986.
C. If signing does not prove to be effective in eliminating
public access near the spring, fencing will be installed
where necessary. Estimated cost is $1000 , and funding will
be included in fiscal year 1986-1987 budget preparation.
d. The underground pipes in the roadway will be carefully
marked and protected during normal grading of the roadway.
e. Staff will participate with neighbors in obtaining bids
for constructing a fence around their water storage tank.
An agreement will then be sought whereby the District will
contribute to a portion of this construction cost. The
District' s share should not exceed $1000 , and funding will
be included in fiscal year 1986-1987 budget preparation.
4. Natural Resource and Agricultural Management
Existing Use and Management Plan
a. Staff will work with the neighbor adjacent to the main
trail to relocate bees to a more suitable location. If
they are to remain on the Preserve, the owner may be
requested to provide security fencing.
Status: All the bee hives have been removed.
b. The portion of the site near Blackberry Hill Road will be
cleaned up by removing trash and taking out the dead
cypress trees. The rest of the cypress grove will be
preserved as a shaded view point. Estimated dumping and
tree removal costs are $400 .
Status: Estimated cost has been increased to $500 and
funding has been included in fiscal year 1985-1986 budget.
The project has been deferred due to site inaccessibility
at this time.
C. Erosion problems on the portion of the site near Blackberry
Hill Road will be addressed. Temporary control measures
could include placing log barriers or ditches across the
eroded vehicle tracks and diverting runoff. Estimated
costs for the temporary work is $500 . Eventually, the
R-86-06 Page 10
tracks will be graded to more natural contours and
drainage ways, mulched with straw or jute netting, and
seeded with species appropriate for erosion control and
compatible with the natrualized vegetation. Costs to
accomplish this work will be determined next spring
once a period of time is allowed to review what occurs
once vehicles are excluded, and the temporary measures
have helped stabilize the soil .
Status: This project has not been started. Once illegal
off-road vehicle access to the site has been totally
blocked, a resource assessment can be made followed by
a restoration plan, including costs to complete this plan.
5. Visitor and Site Protection
Existing Use and Management Plan
a. The area will be patrolled at least once a week to make
sure illegal vehicles are not gaining access to the site.
Status: The Kennedy Road Area is now patrolled on the
average of twice a week by District Rangers. The neigh-
bors have been encouraged to report use problems to the
Rangers as they arise. Most calls, which average about
one a month, are related to illegal camping activities.
b. Dedication Status
Twenty-one acres are currently dedicated although the
easterly portion of the Kennedy Road area should be dedi-
cated, this action could be withheld until adequate parking
facilities are approved. The Kennedy Trails property was
specifically recommended for purchase in spite of its high
per-acre cost precisely because it could provide parking
and a "gateway" for the site. Also, the Kennedy Road Area
consists of two non-contiguous parts at this time and is not
fully functional as a unit. I recommend that the area remain
undedicated at this time.
Recommendation: I recommend that you tentatively adopt the Revised Use
and Management Plan for the Limekiln Canyon and Kennedy Road Areas of the
Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve as contained in this report. In addition
I recommend that you indicate your intention to dedicate the Limekiln
Canyon Area, excluding the former Carter property, for public open space
purposes, while maintaining the right to transfer density credits.
%'.SIERRA AZUL
• ' C�� If F �AIH $Tl b • , r 1/ , 826✓i,l�' ..- ��--
4(O' PEN
n� ,OPEN SPACE PRESERVEL SERENO I (KENNEDY ROAD AREA)SPACE PRESERVE 'to �! kf
r ,l) '• _ ` : � C , PROPOSED ' b
" o (([[��•\\� / '• , 1 ,. _moo �C t PARKING_
SPRING
PROPOSED _ "v
GATESFLU
;fit 5` LOS GATOS
LCREEK PARK
6 0
NNU
' -- PROPOSED'' � '
Ilk
•- PARKING °
PIL_WAY 545
2 n PROPOSED' - -
1� oiF GATE \
T..
AN TA CLARA VALLEY isoo
Iw1TER DISTRICT V/4.
(�-EXINGTON RESERVOIR.
� RECREATION AREA) X
SIERRA AZUL >?
OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - '�• ,
(LIMEKILN CANYON AREA)
kA:
SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
ENNEDY ROAD PF•'A & L I ,17K I LN C•WON AREA
( AREA
;CALE 1" = 2(00' NORTH BURNED _ \
' _�''�? '=-
R-86-03
(Meeting 86-01
January 8 , 1986)
%6, 1
In Of
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
REPORT
January 2 , 1986
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager;
D. Woods , Open Space Planner
M. Gundert, Associate Open Space Planner
SUBJECT: Award of Contracts for Skyline Ridge and Purisima Creek Redwoods
Open Space Preserves to Complete Parking and Access Facility
Plans and Specifications
Introduction: On August 14 , 1985 the District was awarded a $150 ,000
State 1984 Park Facilities Bond Act grant to complete parking, trail, and
other use facilities at the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve.
Earlier, you approved a $15 ,000 allocation in the 1985-1986 Open Space
Management budget to complete the plans and specifications for similar
facilities at the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve. In an effort to save
money, staff sent out a Request for Proposals (see R.F.P. and addenda
attached) for both these projects at the same time and is recommending in
this report that the contracts be awarded to a single consultant to com-
mence work as soon as possible.
Discussion: Ten experienced firms were contacted in mid-November 1985 and,
if interested, were invited on a site tour on November 26th. Representa-
tives of eight firms attended the field trip, and six submitted proposals
for the projects . These six firms are:
1. Brian Wittenkeller, Landscape Architect, San Rafael
2 . Dillingham Associates , Oakland
3 . Ortha Zebroski , Landscape Architect, Berkeley
4 . Kent Watson and Associates , San Francisco
5 . Singer & Hodges , Oakland
6 . Hardesty Associates , Menlo Park
The proposals , due to their bulk, are not attached with this report but
are available for your perusal before Wednesday at the District office and
will be available at your meeting as well.
Cost figures for the job were important, and they were the most important
factor, but experience with similar projects , knowledge of the area, and
past work with government agencies were important factors as well in de-
termining the choice made by the selection committee and recommended here
Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
R-86-03 Page Two
to you. The selection committee was made up of D. Hansen, Land Manager;
D. Woods , Open Space Planner for the District; and Cindy Quarton from
Peninsula Open Space Trust.
For your information, the cost breakdown by firms and projects was as
follows :
Purisima Skyline Total
1. Ortha Zebroski $ 13 ,000 $ 26 ,500 $ 39 ,500
2 . Dillingham Associates 14 ,020 26 ,800 40 ,820
3 . Brian Wittenkeller 16 ,190 30 ,440 46 ,630
4 . Hardesty Associates 12 ,240 + 35 ,360 to 47 ,600 to
topo survey 37 ,360 49 ,600
5 . Kent Watson & Associates 13 ,002 37 ,312 50 ,314
6 . Singer & Hodges 15 ,600 42 ,880 58 ,480
References for the top two firms , Ortha Zebroski and Dillingham Associates,
whose final estimates were considerably lower than the other four firms,
were contacted and the choice of Ortha Zebroski , Landscape Architect, was
made by the selection committee due to some of the other factors previously
mentioned above as well as having the lowest price quote. This was a very
difficult decision by the committee as both firms could do an equally pro-
fessional job.
Contracts will be available at your meeting and would be executed immedi-
ately upon your approval. Work would commence the following day, with
submittal of the finished product extended approximately one week from
that given in the R.F.P . or until April 8 , 1986 for the Purisima Creek pro-
ject and until May 8 , 1986 for the Skyline Ridge project.
Budget Implications : The staff estimate for the grant for the Purisima
engineering costs was $7 ,000 ; however, $150 ,000 is available for completion
of the entire project. Because project construction costs will probably be
lower due to volunteer assistance, there is no need at this time to approve
additional funds to complete the engineering at the $13 ,000 estimate sub-
mitted by Ms. Zebroski 's firm. If final project costs do exceed the
$150 ,000 projected, staff will return at the time it appears necessary to
seek additional funding.
The budgeted engineering estimate of $15 ,000 for Skyline Ridge did not in-
clude staff 's estimated $15 ,000 cost for detailed aerial photography. How-
ever, because this has been found necessary to complete the plans and
specifications , it was included in the proposals submitted. An additional
$12 ,000 was included in budget to complete geologic and site water engi-
neering services , but because these projects will probably not commence
until the spring, that money may be available to cover the additional
$12 ,000 . However, it may be necessary toward the end of the fiscal year
to approve a budget transfer from another budget category.
Recommendation: I recommend that you award the Skyline Ridge Open Space
Preserve and Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve contracts to
Ortha Zebroski, Landscape Architect, to complete the plans and specifica-
tions for access facilities to both Preserves , and that you direct the
President of the Board to execute these same contracts for completion under
the timeline mentioned in this report.
PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS OPEN SPACE PRESERVE SKYLINE RIDGE. OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
Topo Schematic Construction Topo Schematic Construction Sub-
Firm Survey Design Documents Subtotal* Survey Design Documents total* Total
1. Ortha Zebroski $3000 $ 4000 $ 6000 $ 13,000 $ 7,000 $ 7,000 $ 12,500 $ 26,500 $39,500
2. Reed Dillingham 6320 3200 4500 14,020 12,800 4,500 9,500 26,800 40,820
3. Brian Wittenkeller 4500 6940 4750 16,190 9,500 13,440 7,500 30,440 46,630
4. Hardesty Associates N.I.C. 3040 9200 12,240 7,000 6,480 22,000 35,480 47,720
5. Kent Watson 2354 4224 6424 13,002 11,572 8,360 17,380 37,312 50,314
6. Singer & Hodges 4000 4600 7000 15,600 10,000 9,880 23,000 42,880 58,,,,0
Figures may not correspond directly to bid as submitted.
For sake of comparison some figures were omitted from
totals.
I
i
PROJECT TITLE: Access Improvement on the Skyline Ridge and Purisima
Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION : The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
wishes to employ a consultant t develop-
ment o prepare develop
ment plans for the following:
Skyline Ridge open Space Preserve
Two parking areas , a service road, and primary
and secondary entries to the Preserve from
Skyline Boulevard
Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve
Improve three parking areas , two of which are
along Skyline Boulevard, the third is located
on Higgins Purisima Road near Half Moon Bay.
The intent of these projects is to provide access
to the Skyline Ridge and Purisima Creek Redwoods
Open Space Preserves consistent with the level
of development on other District Preserves. Empha-
sis should be placed on, the preservation of the
natural environment through the use of native
vegetation, proper drainage techniques and porous
surfacing materials.
A consultant will be retained by the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District to work under the
direction of the District 's Land Manager, or other
District staff as designated by the General Manager.
It is anticipated that this project will be awarded
and a contract signed to proceed .January 2 , 1986
with work to be concluded and approved by the
District Board of Directors in February and March
1986.
Consultant Qualifications
This invitation is being sent to selected landscape architectural,
architectural, or planning firms known to be qualified to perform the
described project. Primary consideration will be given to those firms
which can demonstrate successful past experience in similar design and
management projects related to public park and open space properties.
The principals of this applicant firm shall be licensed in the State of
California and its subconsultants shall likewise be licensed to practice
their particular speciality.
Invitations are going to selected firms throughout the Bay Area, but
firms within the District will be given priority consideration.
The District is an equal opportunity employer and will require the con-
sultant to provide evidence of past and ongoing efforts to assure that
no discrimination is made in the employment of persons because of sex,
race, color, religion or the national origin of such person, and of past
and ongoing efforts to involve minority business enterprises in the per-
formance of its services.
-2-
Submittal Requirements and Procedure
Applicants should submit on not more than 10 pages the following informa-
tion :
1) a brief description of the scope of work to be performed for each
project and individual cost analysis for both projects.
2) Qualification of the firm and persons to be working on the project.
3) The name of the principal who will be in charge of the project.
4) Subconsultants with pertinent qualifications should also be identified.
5) A record of experience in past projects of a similar nature.
6) Any other information which you feel would be of assistance in choosing
your firm over others , such as awards , design philosophy, or graphic
examples of work.
The above information shall be submitted to the Midpeninsula, Regional
Open Space District to the attention of Mr. David Hansen, Land Manager,
and shall be postmarked no later than December 15 , 1985.
Scope of Consultant Services
1) Consultant will complete development plans (and construction specifi-
cations) for a portion of Phase 1 of the Master Plan for the Skyline
Ridge Open Space Preserve. Primary components of the Plan will include:
A. The main public access to the Preserve from Skyline Boulevard.
This new two-way access will be developed to include a northbound
left turn lane on Skyline Boulevard for access into and egress
from the Preserve. Preserve identity signs , split rail fencing
and District standard pipe gates will be incorporated into the
entrance.
B. Skyline Trail/service road. An 18 foot wide gravel road enters
the Preserve through the main public entry travelling westerly
through the Preserve to the Ranch area. This trail will be
used as the primary access to the Ranch area by the public and
will also be used as a service/patrol road by District staff.
C. Parking area - 25 car. A gravel surface parking area near the
main Preserve entrance capable of future expansion. Fencing and
signing should be consistent with District standards.
D. Parking area - 10 car (with two handicapped spaces) and 2 bus spaces.
This parking area is proposed for the Ranch area to accommodate
special use parking needs . It will also be gravel surfaced.
E. Secondary entrance to the Preserve . Primarily envisioned as a
service and maintenance entrance to the Preserve, this entrance
will tie into the Skyline Trail/service road from the main
entrance.
(' 2) Consultant will complete development plans (and construction specifi-
cations) for improvement to three parking areas on the Purisima Creek
Redwoods Open Space Preserve in accordance with the Proposition 18
Development Grant providing the funding for this Project.
3-
A. Parking Area 1---10 cars , 5 10 horse trailers. This is an
existing, unsurfaced 10 car parking area which will be expanded
to accommodate 10 cars and 5-10 horse trailers. The parking
area is located on Skyline Boulevard, 4 .5 miles south of the
Skyline Boulevard/Highway 92 intersection.
B. Parking Area 2 10 cars . This is an existing 5 car CalTrans
pullout located on Skyline Boulevard. Development here will
consist primarily of grading, surfacing, and fencing. This area
must accommodate 2 handicapped parking spaces.
C. Parking Area 3 ---10 cars. This area is currently undeveloped for
parking. Located at the end of Higgins-Purisima Redd the Half
Moon Bay entrance to the site, this development plan will include
grading, drainage provisions, and vegetation with native plant
material.
3) Consultant will be responsible for assessing the necessary engineering
requirements of the project, including any topographic survey work and
soil engineering.
4) Consultant will be responsible for evaluation-of the California Environ-
mental Quality Act as it pertains to this project.
5) Consultant will be responsible for developing plans in accordance
with appropriate permit granting agencies and municipalities.
Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve San Mateo County
Santa Clara County
California Department
of Transportation
Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space San Mateo County
Preserve California Coastal Commission
California Department
of Transportation
6) Consultant 's final plans must be received by February 1 1986
for the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve and Marcil 1
1986 for the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve.
District Background and Policies
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is an independent, special
district created in 1972 by the voters of northwestern Santa Clara County
and joined by southern San Mateo County in 1976 .
The purpose of the District is to acquire and preserve open space lands
in the foothills and baylands . The boundaries of the District generally
extend from San Carlos to Los Gatos, and from the San Francisco Bay to
Skyline Ridge.
The land is preserved for a variety of reasons , including protection of
flora and fauna, agricultural production, preserving areas of scenic
beauty and the scenic backdrop, shaping urban growth, ensuring public
safety, environmental education, and recreation.
• -4-
The District follows a land management policy that provides proper care
of open space land , allowing public access appropriate to the nature of
the land and consistent with ecological values.
As land is acquired, the District works to make it accessible to the
public . Initial recreational development is primarily low intensity
recreation such as hiking, riding, and nature study. The ultimate
development is envisioned as that which maximizes recreational oppor-
tunities while insuring protection of important natural values of open
space. This will preclude such facilities as large ball fields, golf
courses or tennis complexes .
The District seeks arrangements with other governmental agencies or
private groups whereby they provide some or all development and super-
vision of recreational facilities.
The District currently has 25 preserves totalling approximately 19,500
acres. Of these, 8 have public staging areas with trail systems; the
remaining 17 are considered undeveloped.
Site Information - Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve
The 1100 acre Preserve is an integral part of a vast amount of public
open space along the Skyline Scenic Corridor. It is located at the
intersection of Alpine Road and Skyline Boulevard, which is a center
point within the District 's Skyline holdings. The site potentially offers
access to over 7000 acres and eight different preserves.
The natural features of the Preserve are those common to the Santa Cruz
Mountain region. The terrain is gentle to steep, and vegetation types
range from oak woodland to Douglas fir forest.
A Master Plan for the Preserve was prepared for the District and adopted
by the Board of Directors in May 1985 . The Master Plan is designed to be
implemented over a 15-20 year time period. This project is the first
portion of Phase I development.
Site Information - Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve
This 2500 acre Preserve is the largest District holding in the northern
part of the District. The Preserve extends westerly from Skyline Boule-
vard toward the Pacific Ocean and the town of Half Moon Bay. The coastal
influence is evident in the vegetation found on this Preserve, ranging
from redwood and Douglas fir forests to coastal scrub. The terrain is
gentle to steep.
The site has historically been used for logging, as evidenced by the
presence of numerous logging roads through the property. A Proposition
18 Development Grant was awarded to the District to develop the Pre-
serve with the three parking areas , a systematic trail system, and
backpack camp. Design of the three parking areas is the first step in
implementing the development plan. The remainder of the work will be
conducted with District labor.
Attachments
- Excerpts from Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Master Plan
- Purisima Creek Site Plan
- USGS site maps for both Preserves
- District standards for gates , fencing
Timeline for Access Improvement Project on the Skyline Ridge and
Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserves
November 15 , 1985 RFP s sent to 10 perspective consultants
November 26 , 1985 On-site meeting with perspective consultants
December 15, 1985 Consultant proposal submittal deadline
January 2 , 1986 Award of contract
February 3 , 1986 Consultant 's plans for Purisima Open Space Preserve
to be submitted for Board of Directors approval
March 3 , 1986 Consultant 's plans for Skyline Ridge Open Space
Preserve to be submitted for Board of Directors
approval
-cember 2 , 1985
ADDENDUM 1
Access improvement on the Skyline Ridge and Purisima Creek Redwoods
Open Space Preserves
GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Professional Liability Insurance
The Consultant need not carry Professional Liability Insurance specifi-
cally for this project.
2. Bid Documents
Consultant will be responsible for supplying working drawings and
technical information for the bid package. The District will be
responsible for the more general (boiler plate) bid package.
3. CEQA Requirements
Consultant will only be expected to help District staff in the pre ara-
t an op
tion of an environmental checklistP
study) n offer .
on
on the need for an Environmental Impact Report basedonthedevelopment
plans.
4. Permits
It will be the Consultant 's responsibility to consult with permitting
agencies such as CalTrans and San Mateo County to insure the develop-
ment plans meet their standards for permitting. The District will
prepare the actual permit application.
5. Timing
Final drawings and technical information for the project are due
April 1, 1986 for the Purisima Creek Redwoods portion of the project
and May 1, 1986 for the Skyline Ridge portion of the project. These
dates supersede the dates set forth in the original request for
proposal .
6 . Funding for the Project
Construction costs have been budgeted for the two Preserves in the
amount of:
Skyline Ridge $200 000
Purisima Creek Redwoods 85,000
7. Proposal Submittal
The Consultant should submit only one proposal with separate cost
estimates for the two Preserves.
.SKYLINE RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
1. Topographic Survey Work - The area to be included in the survey has been
expanded to include areas of future development. Referencing the
attached development plan from the Skyline Ridge Master Plan, the survey
should extend from the Handicapped Parking (5 spaces) along Alpine Road
to the southernmost parking area (20 trailer spaces) . The area outside
the project area should be surveyed to a 51 contour interval.
2. Service Road - Consultant will investigate potential for wheelchair
use on the service road from the parking area (25 passenger vehicles)
to the Ranch Area, if reasonable.
3. Parking Area (25 passenger vehicles) - Consultant should try to minimize
visual impacts from Skyline Boulevard through siting and vegetative
screening. Secondly , siting should have minimal impact on the tree farm
area to , in turn,* reduce the cost of the District 's tree farm leasdbuy-
OU4- . - I
L- The main entry road from Skyline Boulevard (tree farm entrance)
requires a separate turn lane. Consultant will be responsible for
coordinating all requirements of CalTrans into the design.
4 . Parking Area (10 passenger vehicles) - Accommodations for one 'school-
ype ' bus should be included in the parking area. consultant will also
be responsible for investigating alignment of entry road around the
ranch area to avoid pedestrian/vehicle conflicts.
PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
1. Topographic Survey Work - The County of San Mateo has topographic maps
of this area available at a scale of ill = 400 ' with a contour interval
of 201 . A property line survey is not available for parking area 1 but
a known monument exists at the entry road and a legal description of
the property is available. A property line survey (no topos) of the
area around parking area 3 is available through the District office.
2 . Parking Area 1 (10 passenger vehicles, 5-10 horse trailers) - Expansion
of this existing 10 car parking area needs to accommodate 5-10 horse
trailers on a permit basis. The horse trailer area needs gating for
closure when reserved or can accommodate passenger vehicles when not
reserved.
3. Parking -Area 3 (10 passenger vehicles) - This area has a history of
vandalism requiring parking to remain very near the road for ease of
patrol and surveillance. Due to physical restraints , this may mean
reducing the number of parking spaces.
MIDPEVINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965.4717
December 6 , 1985
ADDENDUM 2
Access Improvement on the Skyline Ridge and Purisima Creek Redwoods
Open Space Preserves
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Submittal Timing
The proposal shall be postmarked no later than December 15,
1985 or hand delivered between the hours of 9 :00 A.M. and
5 :00 P.M. on Monday, December 16 , 1985 to the District office
at 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1, Los Altos , California.
SKYLINE RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
1. Main entry road (tree farm entrance) - The point of intersection
between the entry road and Skyline Boulevard is flexible within
the existing straight-of-way on Skyline Boulevard as long as
CalTrans safety requirements are met (i.e. , line-of-sight) .
2. Restroom facilities
The restroom facilities are manufactured by Monogram Industries
and are self-contained units utilizing an underground holding
tank. Siting of the units is all that is necessary for this
project.
v
F
yy�
i
Due to the length of the Personnel Policies and
Procedures Manual, a copy is not being mailed to
the entire mailing list. However, a copy is avail-
able at the District office for review.
The Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual will be
mailed under separate cover on January 6 since it
was not xeroxed due to power outage at the District
office on January 3 .
R-86-05
(Meeting 86-01
January 8 , 1986)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
January 2 , 1986
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes, Administrative Services Manager
SUBJECT : Adoption of Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual
Background: In May 1979 , you adopted a comprehensive report on Salary,
Fringe Benefits, and Personnel Systems prepared by Gary Foss, the Dis-
trict ' s Personnel Consultant (see report R-79-18 of May 16 , 1979) . A
portion of the report was entitled Recommended Personnel Rule Revisions-
Recommended Changes/Modifications , and you adopted the recommended
changes and confirmed the clarifications in the personnel rules as
recommended by G. Foss. You also directed me to codify this material
as soon as practicable.
Attached for your consideration and adoption is the proposed Personnel
Policies and Procedures Manual. The development of this manual has been
a dynamic and evolutionary process , and certainly one that was under-
estimated in terms of time and effort required when initially proposed
in 1979 .
Process Involved: G. Foss wrote the initial draft of the proposed
Personnel Policies and Procedures , and then working with J. Fiddes amended
and edited the draft document in preparation for my review. I reviewed
the entire document, proposed changes or additions, and subsequently,
working with G. Foss and J. Fiddes reviewed a series of drafts. Dis-
trict Legal Counsel also reviewed and commented on the draft policies
and procedures.
In August 1984 , a draft of the manual was shared with Program Leaders
C. Britton and D. Hansen and former Public Communications Coordinator,
C. MacDonald. Based on comments and recommendations received from these
members of the management staff, certain changes were made in the draft
document, which was then reviewed by supervisory staff members J. Boland
and D. Woods.- Following this review, the draft of the document was dis-
tributed to the District's three Lead Rangers for review and comment,
and based upon their input, as well as continuing input from staff mem-
bers who had previously reviewed the document, a revised draft of the
Personnel Policies and Procedures was prepared for distribution to all
regular staff members for review and comment.
Two members of the District' s office staff and five members of the
District ' s field staff who had not previously reviewed the document chose
to comment on or question the content of certain sections or statements
of the proposed document. Based on the input of these employees certain
changes or additions were made.
R-86-05 Page two
Purpose of the Document: As noted in G. Foss 's 1979 report, the purpose
of the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual is to have a formal
codified document containing District personnel rules and a majority of
administrative procedures that can be used by District personnel in
present and potential personnel transactions. The manual 's content was
written on a "universal" District scope, and there will be situations that,
on a daily management level, will require interpretation and/or modifi-
cation to detail how a specific policy or procedure will be administered.
Because of the project 's increasing complexity, it was impossible to
include all administrative policies relating to personnel-related matters
in the manual without it becoming the size of Gone With the Wind, and
therefore an administrative decision was made not to include all admini-
strative policies in the text. Administrative policies not included in
the manual will continue to be incorporated into the personnel binder
given each employee.
Content: The following section highlights , in very general statements ,
the content of the Personnel Policies and Procedures :
Article I. General Provisions
Original Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual shall be adopted by
the Board of Directors .
General Manager is responsible for administering or delegating the
administration of all the provisions of the personnel policies and
procedures , and preparing or causing to be prepared amendments to such
policies and procedures.
Substantive amendments to salary or benefit related personnel policies
must be adopted by the Board of Directors.
General Manager shall have the power to vary or modify the strict appli-
cation of the provisions of the manual in any case in which the
strict application of the provisions would result in practical diffi-
culties or unnecessary hardship for either the District or the
employee or both.
Article II . Personnel Policies and Procedures
General Manager is the appointing authority for all District employees,
except those appointed by the Board of Directors.
In certain situations, a vacant position could be filled through an in-
house hiring process .
New or promoted employees shall fulfill a probationary period of at least
six months .
In terms of employee relations , the General Manager shall provide a pro-
cess for employees to review and provide input, on matters affecting
the employees ' wages , hours , benefits , and working conditions.
Nepotism section provides for the opportunity for more than one member
of a family to be a District employee.
Article III. General Conduct, Discipline, Termination, and Appeal
A formal process for handling disciplinary action is detailed and types
of actions that may constitute grounds for disciplinary action are
listed.
The General Manager has the authority to determine other acts , not listed
in Section 20 (c) which are incompatible with the best interests of
the District or which reflect discredit on the District and to de-
termine if a conviction by a court would be incompatible with the
work performed for the District by the affected employee.
The power to reprimand, suspend, demote or discharge is granted solely to
the General Manager.
R-86-05 Page three
The decision of the General Manager in the case of a grievance shall
be final and binding on the employee or group of employees involved.
The initiation of a grievance in good faith by an employee shall not cast
any reflection upon the employee ' s standing with his or her superiors
nor upon the employee' s loyalty to the District.
Article IV. Classification Plan
The Position Classification Plan is a Board adopted document and may be
amended by the Board. You have adopted such a plan each year in
connection with the annual salary survey.
The General Manager is responsible for keeping the Position Classifica-
tion Plan current through periodic studies of the positions within
the organizational structure of the District.
New positions must be approved by the Board of Directors upon recommenda-
tion by the General Manager.
Vacant budgeted positions can be filled at the discretion of the General
Manager.
Reclassifications requiring budgetary changes must be approved by the
Board of Directors.
Article V. Compensation
The General Manager shall review compensation received by District
employees at least annually and will report the findings to the
Board of Directors with recommended actions as appropriate.
Compensation rates for promotional and acting appointments have been set.
The acting appointment compensation section differentiates between
exempt and non-exempt employees. Historically, non-exempt employees
have not received acting appointment pay when filling in for an
employee who is absent due to vacation, illness , or short-term leave.
The overtime and compensatory time section for non-exempt employees
has been written in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA) that becomes effective in April for governmental agencies.
The overtime compensation rates would go into effect upon your
approval of the manual , rather than waiting until April .
Non-exempt employees who work in excess of 40 hours per week shall be
compensated at one-and-one-half times their regular hourly rate for
the hours in excess of forty hours. Compensatory time off may be
requested in lieu of all or part of overtime pay in accordance with
FLSA.
Holiday and vacation time , sick leave, and leaves of absence with pay
are included in the computation of hours worked for the purpose
of calculation of overtime .
Non-exempt employees working on a designated holiday shall be compensated
at one-and-one-half times their regular hourly rate and shall also
be assigned a replacement holiday.
District employees shall be paid according to a salary pay plan adopted
by the Board of Directors. Adjustments may be made by the Board
upon recommendation of the General Manager.
Article VI. Fringe Benefits
With respect to District holidays , I am recommending that effective
January 20 , 1986 , Martin Luther King Jr. Day be observed as an
official District holiday. Your stated policy is that District
employees have 13 paid holidays per year, and historically a por-
tion of this paid holiday time has been observed as floating
holiday time , now called personal leave time, (i.e . , time taken off,
upon approval, at the employee ' s discretion) .
R-86-05 Page four
During my discussion with staff regarding my recommendation to make
Martin Luther King Jr. Day an official District holiday and in the
draft Personnel Policies and Procedures circulated among the staff,
it was stated that Martin Luther King Jr. Day should be observed
by the District either:
1) in place of another District holiday;
2) in place of eight hours of personal leave hours (i.e. ,
remaining undesignated holiday time that can be observed at the
employee 's discretion) ; or
3) as an additional holiday based on a survey of the number of holi-
days offered by comparable employers.
Based on the following survey results that were shared with the staff in
December, I am recommending that Martin Luther King Jr. Day, a State
and national holiday , be observed as an official District holiday in
place of the Lincoln' s Birthday holiday, rather than to add an
additional holiday at this time. A majority of the staff preferred
to eckchange this specific holiday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day
rather than give up eight hours of personal leave time. Assuming
you adopt the change , your Rules of Procedure will need to be
changed accordingly.
NUMBER OF NUMBER OF FLOATING
DESIGNATED AND/OR PERSONAL
HOLIDAYS LEAVE DAYS TOTAL
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 112 12 13
Santa Clara County 11 4 15
San Mateo County 12 0 12
East Bay Regional Park District 122 0 121
East Bay Municipal Utility District 13 1 14
City of Palo Alto* 12 4 16
City of Sunnyvale 10 22 122
City of San Mateo 11 1 12
*Also have 22 days personal business leave chargeable to sick leave each year.
It should be noted that the amount of holiday and personal leave time
included in the District ' s fringe benefit package will be included
as one of the components of the forthcoming benefit study.
The vacation accrual section reflects current Board policy; this item
will also be included in the forthcoming benefit study. In 1979
G. Foss suggested that the District consider a more graduated vaca-
tion accrual policy.
Vacation shall not normally be taken in increments of less than four
hours for full-time employees or one-half the length of a regular
workday for part-time employees.
In the event a temporary employee is hired to fill a regular staff posi-
tion, the employee will be able to apply the amount of time he or
she was a temporary employee toward his or her vacation accrual rate.
The sick leave accrual section reflects current Board policy.
Unused sick leave shall not be compensated for in any way in the event of
resignation or dismissal from District employment.
An employee may use up to three consecutive days of accrued sick leave
per incident to a maximum of six days per year to care for a member
of his or her family, limited to husband, wife, and/or children
living within the household.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT ADOPTING PERSONNEL
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL
WHEREAS , the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District seek to insure equal treatment for those indivi-
duals who compete for District employment and promotion and
seek to define the obligations, rights, privileges, benefits,
and prohibitions which are placed upon all employees of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District; and
WHEREAS, the attached Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual is
provided to maintain uniformity and equity in personnel
matters in order to facilitate efficient and economical
service to tie public;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does adopt the
attached Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual, effective
January 1, 1986 , and that said Manual shall supersede the
Personnel Policies adopted on September 10 , 1975 exclusive of
sections (f) through (j) relating to the following fringe bene-
fits : medical plan , dental plan, life insurance , long-term
disability insurance , and accidental death and dismemberment
insurance.
r
R-86-02
Ak (Meeting 86-01
IN, January 8 , 1986)
tow
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
December 18, 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: Board Appointee Review Committee : E. Shelley, K. Duffy and
T. Henshaw
SUBJECT: Recommendation on Compensation Adjustments for Board Appointed
Staff Members
At the first meeting of the Board Appointee Review Committee it was
agreed that an independent consultant should be hired to provide
comparable compensation data for the General Manager position and to
make recommendations. We were fortunate that George Sipel Associates
agreed to update their 1981 report on the same subject. That report
will be discussed in more detail below in connection with the Committee ' s
recommendations on adjustments in the General Manager' s compensation.
In the following we make recommendations on compensation adjustments
for the Controller (Michael Foster) , Legal Counsel (Stanley Norton)
and General Manager (Herbert Grench) .
Controller
While continuing to recognize that this position has historically
been partially volunteer, the Committee recommends that the Board
recognize not only the excellent performance of the Controller but
also the probable increased demands for more frequent and detailed
cash projections as we enter an era of lower reserves. The Committee
recommends an increase from $3 ,500 to $3 ,850 annually retroactive to
May 1 , 1985.
Legal Counsel
In recognition of Legal Counsel 's continued excellent support of the
District ' s activities , the Committee recommends an increase from
$52 ,788 to $55 ,480 annually, retroactive to July 1 , 1985.
General Manager
IF Ifie Sipel report together with G. Foss ' earlier report on the subject
of severence (both attached) illustrate the fact that the District
has maintained the General Manager 's compensation at or above the
average for comparable agencies , consistent with Board policy. In
order to continue that position and to maintain a reasonable inter-
nal relationship between the General Manager ' s and subordinates '
salaries , the Committee recommends that the General Manager' s annual
base salary be increased by $3 ,000 from $66 ,344 to $69 ,344 , retro-
active to July 1, 1985 .
R-86-05 Page five
Any use of sick leave may require a statement from an employee' s doctor
or licensed practitioner.
Leaves of absence without pay include disability leave, maternity dis-
ability leave, and an employee requested leave of absence without pay.
The District, with the General Manager's approval , may continue to provide
and pay the premiums for health, dental , life insurance, and other
insurance benefits to the same extent provided other regular Dis-
trict employees up to a maximum of three months after vacation and
sick leave benefits have been used by an employee on disability
leave.
Leaves of absence with pay include bereavement leave, witness or jury
duty, and military leave.
Article VII. General Provisions
The District shall not condone any form of sexual harassment committed
by a District employee (s) against another District empl6yee (s) .
Sections relating to conflict of interest and off-duty employment have
been included. A few employees felt that the District had no right
to infringe in their personal lives with respect to off-duty employ-
ment.
Training has been divided into two types : 1) required and assigned, and
2) voluntary. Reimbursement for meals, which are not pre-paid,
while attending a required and assigned training program class will
be made by the District according to approved administrative policies .
The section regarding time off to vote is taken from the California
Elections Code.
Recommendation: I recommend that you approve the attached Resolution
adopting the Personnel Policies and Procedure Manual.
I further recommend that your approval of the Manual be retroactive to
January 1 , 1986 specifically to allow those Rangers who worked on New
Year' s Day to receive time-and-one-half compensation.
R-86-02 Page two
The Committee makes two additional recommendations :
1) The five day administrative leave that was granted on a temporary
basis in 1984 should be permanent.
2) The employment agreement between the District and the General Mana-
ger should be modified to increase the severance period from three
months to six months in the case that employment is terminated
without cause. This provision would require the District to pay
the General Manager' s salary and fringe benefits either until new
employment is secured or the end of the severance period, which-
ever occurs first.
It is the Committee' s finding that both of these non-salary benefit
adjustments are consistent with those provided by other agencies for
similar positions and seniority.
i.
a GeorgSipel Associates
Individual, Team, and Organizational Improvement
November 18, 1985
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Reqional
Open Space District
375 Distel Drive, Suite D-1
Los Altos, California 94022
Members of the Board:
George Sipel Associates was retained by the Board of Directors to provide
information to enable the Board to set the compensation of its General Manager
for 1935-86. It updates a similar study conducted by Mr. Sipel in July, 1981.
This report transmits information we collected during our study, provides
analysis of the data, and makes recommendations.
I. Our Assignment
We approached our assignment as an update of the study completed four years
ago. Our first step was to collect information from the District on compensation
and to identify changes in policy, duties and responsibilities since 1981.
The second step was to review our previous criteria on which to base a
compensation recommendation . The following criteria were used previously and
based on our experience in the field we believe they are still appropriate.
Most Important
- Market data on comparable positions
- Internal organizational relationships
Important
- Cost of living and completed salary actions for other
District employees
- Ability to pay
- District salary policy
Each of these criteria will be discussed below.
With the criteria developed, we collected both objective and subjective data.
The largest data collection effort came with the salary survey. We developed a
list of 11 jurisdictions which had positions which we felt might be reasonably
comparable to the District's General Manager position. These jurisdictions were
the same ones surveyed in 1981. We sought to identify comparable private sector
positions but were unable to do so.
The material that follows represents our findings in each area.
215 Cowper Street Palo Alto, Califomia 94301 (415) 321-7479
Board of Directors -2- November 18, 1985
II . Findings
A. Market data
A salary survey was conducted of 11 public jurisdictions in Northern
California. An attempt was made at the outset to find jurisdictions
identical in purpose, size and configuration to the District and
within the general geographical area. We were unable to find any
districts which matched up in all respects to the Midpeninsula
District. The following meet one or more of the criteria and were
used in the survey:
- East Bay Regional Park District
- Marin County Open Space District
- Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District
- Valley Water District
In addition, based on our experience in working with County governments,
we believe that County Parks and Recreation Directors have similar jobs
to the District's General Manager, so we included the following:
- Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation Director
- San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Director
Finally, we compared the General Manager's position to five City
Manager positions within the District boundaries. These jurisdictions
were:
- Los Altos
- Los Gatos
- Mountain View
- Palo Alto
- Sunnyvale
It should be noted the latter three of these cities have a broader
spectrum of activities and substantially larger budgets and are not
"comparable" in the true sense of salary survey work.
A questionnaire was developed for comparative purposes. We asked a
number of traditional questions about the jurisdiction as well as
information about salary and fringe benefit programs. In addition,
we sought to determine comparability in duties and responsibilities
by asking a series of management questions. These data are included
in Appendix I.
Board of Directors -3- November 18, 1935
i
With respect to salary, the data indicate that the General Manager
is currently paid approximately one percent above the average of the
11 agencies: $66,344 versus $65,707. In 1981 the relationship was
similar:
District salary: $50,000
11-agency average: $49,478
Percentage above average: 1 .05
The range of salaries is very broad -- from the Palo Alto City
Manager ($82,596) to the Director of the Monterey Peninsula
! agency ($44,976). It should be pointed out that nearly all agencies
have completed salary actions for 1935-86.
A more important comparison equalizes salaries and agencies' retire-
ment and deferred compensation contributions. The average compensation
is $75,763 as compared to the District payment of $78,868. Again,
the City of Palo Alto pays the highest ($100,214), while Monterey is
the lowest ($54,443) . Below is a comparison with 1981.
1981 1985
District compensation $54,850 $78,868
11-agency average 52,002 75,763
Percentage difference 5.5 4.1
The above data are detailed in Exhibit I on page 4.
We did not
a perform quantitative analysis of fringe benefit data.
P
we did collect general data resented in Appendix II, which
However, g p PP
show the District generally in a favorable position with respect to
such key fringe benefits as vacation, sick leave, and health and
dental plans.
Board members requested that the study also focus on administrative
leave. In recent years some public agencies have granted leave over
and above vacation, holidays and sick leave. Their rationale includes
recognition of additional time spent in public meetings; desire to
differentiate senior management from other employees; and desire to
retain key employees. Of the 11 agencies surveyed the following have
such a policy:
East Bay Regional Park District 5 days
Marin County Open Space District 5 days
Valley Water District 3 days
San Mateo County Parks & Recreation 5 days
Los Gatos 5 days
Mountain View 10 days
It is our understanding the Board and the General Manager agreed on
five days of administrative leave in 1984-35.
�I
Board of Directors -4- November 18, 1985
Exhibit I
Salary Comparison
11 Agencies
Salary & Retirement
Agency Salary Maximum Equalization
Palo Alto $82,596 $100,214
Mountain View 78,650 89,905
Sunnyvale 77,500 89,791
Valley Water 82,200 86,310
East Bay Park 75,314 85,644
MIDPENINSULA 66,344 78,868
2
Los Gatos 60,000 68,3 7
Los Altos 54,000 67,596
San Mateo County 57,744 66,660
Parks & Recreation
Santa Clara County 57,276 65,295
Parks & Recreation
Marin County Open Space 52,520 59,254
Monterey Peninsula
Regional Parks 44,976 54,443
Average
(excluding Midpeninsula) $65,707 $ 75,763
Board of Directors -5- November 18, 1985
B. Internal organizational relationships
The rule of thumb in internal relationships is that the supervisor
should receive at least 10 to 15 percent more than the employees
supervised. At upper levels of an organization, the differential
should be greater to provide an incentive for high performance and
to compensate for greater risk and contribution. In recent years
in the public sector, we find substantial compaction in middle and
upper level management salaries. This is attributable to a number
of factors, including an unwillingness to track inflation for upper
level people, negative political philosophy toward compensation
for senior managers and attainment of absolute maximums for some
public jobs.
There is a broad range of differentials among agencies surveyed
from zero in Los Altos to 47 percent in San Mateo County. The
agency which compares most favorably to the District in terms of
mission and structure, the East Bay Regional Park District, has a
13% differential . In the District the internal relationship between
the General Manager and the assistant is as follows:
General Manager $72,544*
Assistant General Manager $62,498
Differential : 16.1 percent
This differential is the minimum that should exist. The Board should
consider ways to establish and maintain a 20 percent differential .
*Calculations as follows:
General Manager
Salary $66,344
Special retirement contribution 6,200
TOTAL $72,544
Assistant General Manager
Salary(Maximum) $59,465
Potential Incentive Payment 3,033
TOTAL T62,498
Board of Directors -6- November 18, 1935
C. Cost of living and completed salary actions for other District employees
The Bay Area July 1984 to July 1985 consumer price index increased
4.5%. All other District employees received a salary adjustment of
5.1% effective in July 1985. Assuming that the 5.1% adjustment was
intended to offset inflation, one could conclude that the General
Manager should also receive the adjustment since he also experiences
inflation. A 5.1% increase for the General Manager would more than
maintain the internal salary relationships that existed prior to
July 1 , 1985.
D. Ability to pay
Public organizations are finding it more difficult to finance
operations and some are facing the alternative of paying good salaries
versus layoffs. While the District does not appear to be dealing
with this kind of choice currently, funding is tight. This means that
the District must be cautious about major expenditures such as
salaries and any precedents that could impact the District's financial
future. It appears at this time that the District has sufficient
funds to compensate employees within its current salary policy.
E. Di
strict
salary
policy
p Y
employees at least the average
i o a9
policy s t
The District's salary po y pay
of comparable jurisdictions. There is no evidence to suggest that
the Board has changed its salary policy since 1981. In discussion
with the Board President and General Manager in 1981, they linked a
strong salary policy with attraction and retention of employees,
particularly the latter. Retention is an important factor for
several reasons. First, the District is somewhat of a hybrid. The
mix of specific skills required of the General Manager may not be
easily attainable in the marketplace since there are few similar
organizations in Northern California. It should be noted, however,
that generalist City Managers have the knowledge, skills, and
abilities to perform the job. Second, both public and private
organizations are experiencing difficulty in attracting potential
employees from out of the area because of the prohibitive cost of
housing. All in all , the maintenance of a very competitive salary
policy by the District is prudent.
Board of Directors -7- November 18, 1935
III . Conclusions and Recommendations
There are no agencies which are truly comparable to the District. Major
differences exist in organizational purpose, size, and number of employees .
Most agencies surveyed are larger than the District and are responsible for a
greater mix of functions, programs, and services. Only two agencies , Monterey
and Marin, are smaller in size and scope than the District. Hence, the salary
data can only be used as a general guideline.
Based on comparative salary data, the General Manager is currently compen-
sated four percent above the average and is in the same relative position with
the 11 agencies as he was in 1981. Market data do not justify a salary increase.
A review of internal relationships shows a differential of 16.3 percent between
the General Manager and the Assistant. While a 20 percent differential is not
an absolute it is a good rule of thumb. However, I can not justify a substantial
increase based on this factor alone. Additional factors must be considered:
completed salary actions for other District employees, cost of living, ability
to pay and desire to retain qualified employees. The following table illustrates
salary increase criteria and the range of possible increase.
Criterion
Most important Range of possible increase
Marketplace (11 agency comparison) -0-
Internal relationships (4%) $2,650
Important
Cost of living (4.5%) $3,000
Salary actions for other District
employees (5.1°;) $3,400
Ability to pay $2,000 - $4,000
Taking all of the above into consideration, we recommend that the General
Manager receive an increase of $2,500 - 3,000. You may wish to give a portion
of this increase in time off'(approximately $250 per day) . If you wish to give
compensation beyond the $3,000, you might consider two possibilities : addition-
al time off -- perhaps five days administrative leave (in addition to the five
granted for 1984-85) or a one-time cash incentive similar to that which is
available to other District employees .
I look forward to discussing these findings , conclusions and recommendations
with you.
Respectfully submitted,
ti
George A. Sipel
APPENDIX I
COMPARISONS OF GENERAL INFORMATION & KEY MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
11 AGENCIES
Deal directly Facility Facility Develop Maintain
Population No. of 1985-86 with policy- Acquire Long-range use design financing land & Lobby for
Agency served employees budget makers? land? planning? plans? direction? plans? facilities? funding?
Special Districts
East Bay Regional
Park District 1,750,000 400 25.0 mil . yes yes limited yes yes yes yes yes
Marin County Open 65,400
Space Distridt (uninc. ) 7 2.4 mil . limited yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
Monterey Pen. Reg.
Park District 125,000 2 1 .8 mil . yes yes yes some yes yes yes yes
Valley Water District 1 ,000,000+ 320 187 mil . yes yes yes N/A yes yes yes yes
County Governments
Santa Clara County 112,500
Parks & Rec. Director (uninc. ) 90 10.0 mil . yes yes yes yes yes yes yes limited
San Mateo County 72,900
Parks & Rec. Director (uninc. ) 70 4.4 mil. yes yes yes limited yes yes yes yes
City Governments
Los Altos 26,000 124 9.0 mil . yes no yes limited yes yes limited limited
Los Gatos 28,000 160 10.0 mil . yes yes yes limited no yes no yes
Mountain View 78,650 464 24.2 mil . yes yes yes limited limited no limited yes
Palo Alto 55,000 895 43 mil . yes yes yes limited limited limited no yes
Sunnyvale 107,000 635 83 mil . yes yes yes no no yes no limited
MIDPENINSULA 600,000+ 27 11 .9 mil . yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes
APPENDIX II
' SALARY AND FRINGE BENEFIT COMPARISONS
11 AGENCIES
Amount Salary Days of
Current Date of of last Years Incen- Deferred Days of Days of admini- Paid Paid
Salary/ last ad- adjust- in posi- tive Compensation vaca- sick strative health dental Retirement/
AGENCY Range justment ment tion Plan? paid by Agency tion leave leave plan? plan? Agency pays
Special Districts Private/10% of
salary by Dis-
East Bay Regional $56,870- trict + Soc.
Park District 75,314 - -- 2 mo. no up to 1% 12 12 5 yes yes Sec. ($2,799)
Marin County Open
Space District 52,520 10/85 1.5% 3 no no 15 12 5 yes yes County plan
Monterey Pen. Reg. $3,170 (7.05% PERS/Total paid
Park District 44,976 7/1/85 6% 12 no of salary) ` 30 12 -- yes yes by District(14+1
Valley Water District 82,200 6/16/85 -- 12 no no 26 12 3 yes yes 5% of biweekly,
gross paid by
District
County Governments
Santa Clara County PERS/14% paid
Parks & Rec. Director 57,276 8/85 3% 2 no no 30 8 -- yes yes by County
San Mateo County 46,200- County plan/
Parks & Rec. Director 57,744 1/85 5% 3 no no 20 12 5 yes yes 15.44% of salary
by County
City Governments PERS/15.919% of
Los Altos 54,000 10/84 -- 1 no $5,000 15 12 -- yes yes salary by City
Los Gatos 60,000 -- -- -- no No contribution 15 12 5 yes yes PERS/13.878% of
by agency salary by City
Mountain View 78,650 5/85 9% 9 no No contribution 12 12 10 yes yes PERS/14.31% of
by agency salary by City
Palo Alto 82,596 7/85 $4,994 6 no No contribution 15 12 -- yes yes PERS/21.33% of
by agency salary by City
Sunnyvale 77,500 7/85 2.5% 5 yes No contribution 21 un- -- yes yes PERS/15.86% of
by agency limited salary by City
MIDPENINSULA 66,344 7/1/84 4% 12 no No contribution 20 12 5 yes yes PERS/9.532% of
f by agency salary by District/
$6,200 in individual
retirement plan
George Sipel Associates
Individual, Team, and Organizational Improvement
December 16 , 1985
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Open Space District
375 Distel Drive, Suite D-1
Los Altos , Ca . 94022
Members of the Board,
At the request of your chairperson, Tina Henshaw, I am providing
some additional informaLion on severance agreer.,ents for local govern-
ment managers . This letter amplifies on material provided verbally.
In the past five years severance arrangements for local govern-
ment managers , particularly City Managers , have been on the upswing.
Generally, they are hart of a written contract that covers salary,
fringe benefits and other conditions of employment. A study recently
completed by the International City Management Association indicates
that about 50 percent of City Managers nationwide would receive
severance pay in the event of involuntary termination. Regionally,
the figure is 61 . 5 percent on the Pacific Coast. The mean amount of
severance pay is 13 .1 weeks . The tendency is to increase severance
pay as service increases .
In the immediate area the City of Los Altos City Manager has a
severance arrangement of four months pay. Most of the other City
Managers in the area (Palo Alto, Sunnyvale) do not have contracts or
severance arrangements . The incumbents have been in their jobs for
a number of years and contracts were not a norm when they were hired.
My discussiorswith several knowledgable people around California
suggest that the trend is moving from three to six months . The
rationale is that it realistically takes six months for a person to
obtain a new position, sell property and relocate a family.
In summary, the trend is toward providing some type of severance
pay for involuntary termination. At least three months is the mean.
There is some supporting data to suggest greater severance pay
particularly with longer tenure .
I hope this information is helpful . Please call if you need
further clarification .
Sincerely yours ,
George A. Sipel
jw
i
215 Cowper Street Palo Alto, California 94301 (415) 321-7479
Foss & Associates
Management Consultants
C O N F I D E N T I A L
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: - Gary C. Foss, Foss & Associates
DATE: November 30, 1984
SUBJECT: Employment Agreement/Severance Program for the District's
General Manager
'Assignment
The Board directed that a special review and survey be conducted to determine
the trend and/or current practices employed by government agencies regarding
employment agreements and/or severance programs for the top administrator/
manager.
Approach
Seven jurisdictions were chosen to sample to obtain a reasonably diversified
yet localized data base to determine trends and practices. These jurisdictions
were the Cities of Palo Alto, Sunnyvale, San Mateo, Redwood City and Mountain
View and the Special Districts of East Bay Regional Parks and Sanitation
District No. 4 in Campbell .
To gain a perspective of national trends and practices, the International
City Managers Association's "Compensation 84" special study was consulted.
Results of Study/Survey
The local government jurisdictions revealed that no formal employment agreements
exist between the jurisdiction and the top administrator/manager. If any do
exist, they are of a confidential nature and not available to the public. It
appears, however, that only one jurisdiction falls into this latter category
but this has not been substantiated.
As for a severance program, only one jurisdiction has a formal plan for only
top management positions. EBRPD provides for one month severance pay for
every two years of service to a maximum of six months (12 years service) .
1035 Russell Avenue/Los Altos, CA 9402211(415)965-8392
i
Board of Directors
November 30,. 1984
Page Two
Palo Alto provides a percentage payoff of unused sick leave of up to 45%
maximum of unused sick leave for all employees employed prior to 1980. The
Sanitation District also has a payment for unused sick leave program upon
retirement. According to the "Compensation 84" survey, in 1982,of those
organizations reporting to the survey, 39.5% of City Managers , 33.5% of
County Managers and 22.8% of Special Government agencies had employment
contracts or agreements. The "Compensation 84" survey also reported that
41 .3% of City Managers, 32.6% of County Managers and 12.5% of Special
Government jurisdictions received a severance program in their agreement/
contract. 82.4% of these managers had a "fixed dollar amount" provision
which provided for a severance which did not increase or decrease based on
months or years of service. 7% of the managers had increasing severance
programs while 1 .5% had decreasing programs.
There were some added thoughts provided by the survey regarding special pro-
visions found in some severance programs. Notice of termination before
separation was one. This notice can be for a minimum of three months to a
maximum of one year. The time frame allows both parties to make arrange-
ments to smoothly handle the transition. Another program would provide for
benefit continuation for a three to six months as an example (medical ,
dental and life insurance plan payments) .
Recommendation
The approach which appears to make the most sense for the top administrator
is to provide a minimum of one- month severance and then add an additional .
month for each two years of employment to a maximum of six months (10 years
service) for a full severance package upon termination (involuntary). The
Board has the alternative of developing a minimum notice program of three to
six months and then working out a mutually agreeable transition plan. The
added provision recommended would be to pay for some benefit continuation.
One to three months payment for medical , dental and life insurance would be
a sound program.
This report should be discussed in executive session including implementation
process and timing.
GC F:ms Foss & Associates
CITY OF SAN DOSE, CALIFORNIA
�+ * 801 NORTH FIRST STREET
18 SAN JOSE,CA 95110
=ZtF01t% (408)277.5320
SHIRLEY LEWIS
Councilmember
� December 1791985
I
Mr. Herbert Grench
Executive Director
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
37b Distel Circle #D-1
Los Altos, CA 94002
Dear Fir. Grench:
Thank you for your letter concerning the availability for purchase of the
Baldwin Wallace property. The purchase opportunity appears to be a very
attractive one which the San Jose City Council would strongly support
since it connects the open space resources in Almaden Quicksilver Park and
the Fit. Umunhum area. Unfortunately, the City of San Jose currently does
not have funding available to commit to a purchase of this sort.
As you know, the City has undertaken a study to determine a means of
implementing a greenbelt on the
perimeter of San Jose. The Hillside and
Greenbelt Task Force is currently considering a full range of preservation
techniques, funding sources and organizational structures from which it
will draw recommendations fora reservation program. In the even h p p g event
this program includes funding for public acquisition of open space land,
participation in the kind of joint acquisition that you have proposed
would certainly be the ideal means of maximizing our resources.
I regret that our response has been slow in coming and that it cannot be
more positive at this time. Although we recognize the need to act swiftly
to take advantage of such opportunities, we are not yet in a position to
do so. I look forward to the day when San Jose is able to work together
with you in achieving our preservation goals.
Sincerely,
C ilwoman hirley Lewis, Chair
Hillside and Greenbelt Task Force
SL:Ch:ke
CC3CL/p7G
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965.4717
December 17 , 1985
Mr . Jim Warren
345 Swett Road
Woodside , CA 94062
Dear Mr . Warren:
The District ' s Board considered your letter dated November 18
at our meeting of December 11 , 1.985 .
Your comments regarding draft eminent domain policies will be
considered at the Special Meeting on this topic scheduled for
January 15 when we will hear comments from the public regarding
Version 7 of the draft policies .
Congratulations on your election !
Sincerely yours ,
.Teena Henshaw , President
Board of Directors
TH: ej
/cc : MIROSD Board of Directors
Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Honshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
i
i
i
I
V
eoe
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: F.Y.I.
DATE: January 3, 1986
i
mmmwx
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D•1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
December 17, 1985
Ingeborg Kuhn
315 Stanford Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
In response to your letter dated November 10, 1985, I would like to
inform you that your concerns and suggestions regarding trail signs
at the Monte Bel
lo Open S co
nsider-
ation. Preserve have
P been taken into c P onsider
ation. Please find attached a copy of the site brochure on which I
believe I have marked the point of confusion (1) . As shown an this
map, the trail which is to the right as you are walking south climbs
u to Table
b Mountain an
d continues roues on to Saratoga Gap. There is
currently a sign on order for this location which will indicate approxi-
mate distances to all destinations.
As for the problems you had returning, I believe I have also marked
this second point of confusion (2) . Here again, the map shows the
trail direction back to Page Mill Road. We have been told by our
Ranger staff that this is not normally a problem area but, nonetheless
we will be checking the signs at that location for accuracy.
Thank you for your interest in the District's trail system and your
helpful suggestions.
Sincerely,
David Hansen ,
Land Manager
DH:ej
Enc.
zc: MROSD Board of Directors
Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teens Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.T ri�ne_r,jaitrijel G.Wendin
CLAIMS No. 86-01
Meeting 86-01
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: January 8, 1986,
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Description
9051 373.81 AT&T Informations Systems Telephone Equipment
9052 1 ,000.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant Fee for pecembe
9053 168.35 Clement Communications, Inc. Safety Posters
9054 285.00 Dun & Bradstreet Seminar--John Escobar and David Topley?
j 9055 23.00 Federal Express Express Mail
9056 4, 152.51 First Interstate Bank Note Paying Fees
9057 200.00 Edmund A. Guidice Instruction Fee for Seminar
9058 38.95 Mary E. Hale Private Vehicle Expense
9059 8.87 Harbinger Communications Computer Services
9060 1 ,375.00 Hodnick Design Design Consulting
9061 475.00 Holtzmann, Wise & Shepard,Dr. Legal Services--Hosking
9062 10.00 Midpeninsula Environmental }
Education Alliance Membership Dues
9063 105.94 Mobil Oil Credit Corporation Fuel for District Vehicles
9064 160.49 Noble Ford Tractor Parts for District Vehicles
9065 49.54 = Oil Heat Engineering Furnace Repairs
9066 398.53 On-Line Business Systems, Inc. Computer Services
9067 64.57 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
9068 31 .30 Peninsula Office Supply Office Supplies
9069 101.08 i San Francisco Water Department Water Service
9070 50.00 County of Santa Clara Zoning Map Set
907I 700.00 E. R. Sheehan Consulting Services for Trail-Layout
9072 192.95 Value Business Systems Equipment Maintenance.
19073 706.82 Xerox Corporation Maintenance and Supplies
i'9074 139.25 Petty Cash Private Vehicle Expense, Meal
Conferences, Out-of-Town Meeting Expense
Office and Field Supplies
III
i
REVISED
CLATms No. 86-01
Feting 86-01
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: January 8, 1986
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Description
9051 373.81 AT&T Informations Systems Telephone Equipment
9052 1 ,000.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant Fee for December '
9053 168.35 Clement Communications, Inc Safety Posters
9054 285.00 Dun & Bradstreet Seminar—John Escobar and David Topley
:9055 23.00 Federal Express Express Mail
9056 4, 152.51 First Interstate Bank Note Paying Fees
9057 200.00 Edmund A. Guidice Instruction Fee for Seminar
i9058 38.95 Mary E. Hale Private Vehicle Expense
i9059 8.87 Harbinger Communications Computer Services
9060 1 ,375.00 Hodnick Design Design Consulting
061 475.00 Holtzmann, Wise & Shepard,Dr. Legal Services--Hosking
062 10.00 Midpeninsula Environmental
Education Alliance Membership Dues
I0063 105.94 Mobil Oil Credit Corporation Fuel for District Vehicles
064 160.49 Noble Ford Tractor Parts for District Vehicles
a65 49.54 oil Hea
t Engineering Furnace Repairs
[1066 398.53 On-Line Business Systems, Inc. Computer Services
067 64.57 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
)068 31 .30 Peninsula Office Supply Office Supplies
�069 101 .08 San Francisco Water Department Water Service
070 50.00 County of Santa Clara Zoning Map Set
071 700.00 E. R. Sheehan Consulting Services for Trail-Layout
)072 192.95 Value Business Systems Equipment Maintenance
)073 706.82 Xerox Corporation Maintenance and Supplies
074 139.25 Petty Cash Private Vehicle Expense, Meal
Conferences, Out-of-Town Meeting Expense
Office and Field Supplies
a
s
ti
I
i
i