Loading...
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