The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About19850213 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 85-03 Meeting 85-03 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 REGULAR MEETING Wednesday BOARD OF DIRECTORS 375 Distel Circle, D-1 February 13, 1985 Los Altos, California AGENDA (7:30) ROLL CALL i WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ADOPTION OF AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (7:45) 1 . Possible Change of Board Officers -- H. Turner OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (7:50) 2. Sale of 1985 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Promissory Notes M. Foster Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $4,000,000 Principal Amount I of "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Notes" Resolution Approving, Authorizing and Directing the Execution of an Agreement with First Interstate Bank of California (8:00) 3. Final Adoption of Interim Use and Management Plan for the Hybl Property Addition to Coal Creek Open Space Preserve -- D. Hansen (8:05) 4• Results of Stable Study for Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve -- D. Hansen (8:35) 5. Proposed Procedure for Implementation of Brown Act Amendments Regarding Land Negotiations -- H. Grench Resolution Approving Overlay to District Master Plan, Dated February 13, 1985 in Conformity with Government Code Section 54956.8 (S.B. 2216 -- Chapter 1126 of 1984 8:45 6. Resolution Endorsing Goals of South Bay Wetlands Coalition -- H. Grench ( ) g Resolution Endorsing the Goals of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition I (8:50) 7. Interim Report on Search for Permanent District Office Headquarters -- C. Britton NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (9:00) 8. Appointment of Peace Officer -- D. Hansen Resolution Appointing Peace Officer 9:05 9. Transfer of Development Rights for a Portion of Lon Ridge Open Space Preserve ( ) P 9 9 9 p p to Jikoji -- C. Britton Resolution Approving and Authorizing Officer to Execute a Deed Conveying Develop- ment Rights to Jikoji and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve) | | � /9:15\ 10. The Experimental Dog Program a Committee Report -- R. Bishop (b) Staff Report -- D. Hansen /9:401 ll ' Proposed Addition to Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Mt. UmunMUm Area (Lands of Stour Investments, Inc. ) -- C. Britton � . ' . � Resolution Authorizing Acceptance Of Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate Of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General � Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary Or Appropriate to � Closing of the Transaction (Sierra AzU| Open Space Preserve - Stour Investments, Inc. Property) Resolution Approving and Authorizing Officer to Execute an Ed52m9Dt Deed in Favor Of Robert W. Barlow and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary Or Appropriate to Closing of Transaction (Sierra AzU7 Open Space Preserve - Stour Investments, Inc' ` '\PrOp�rtv | | /9:50\ 12. Proposed Land and Water Conservation Fund Applications -- D. Hansen Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Funds - PuriSima Creek K2d*0OdS Open Space Preserve Public Access Project Resolution Approving the Application for Land and Water Conservation Funds - Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Addition /10:05\ 13' Initial Legislative Program for 1985-1986 � a Staff Report -- H. GrenCh (b) Committee Report -- R. Bishop /10'15\ l4' Approval Of Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Communications Sublease by Gill Industries -- W. Tannenbaum Resolution Approving the Ground Communications Sublease Between Gill Industries and Communications Systems and Electronics Company (Monte Bello Open Space Pre- serve - Black Mountain) (10:20) 15. Conversion of Public Communications Coordinator Position From Three-Quarters to Full-Time Basis -- H. GreUch (10:30) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS CLAIMS / CLOSED SESSION / Land Negotiation, Litigation and Personnel Matters) ADJOURNMENT TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item y*u^nc concerned with appears on the | agenda, p3eomu address the Board at that time. Otherwise, you may o6>Ipeex the Board under 0za3 Communications. When mscogmioodL pCooso begin by � stating your name and address. Conciseness is appreciated. We request | you comp%e±e the �br�� ron��a� ou ��± your mmnm can �e o��a�u��10 inc3udmc� . ' - in the minutes. f F WRITTEN COMMUNI ^ION Meeting 85-, Feb. 13, 1985 22400 Skvlino Blvd. Box 22 La Honda, Ca . 94020 Feb. 6 , 1985 Patrick Miller, 2 M AssoCiates Bel kloy , Ca , 94 mpg Dear Mr . Miller : the area above Horseshoe Lake is an inappropriate location for a parking lot . pollutants from the parking facilities and emphasized public use of the area wit adversely affect Horseshoe Lake, Lambert and Peters Crooks one of the planning goals you have cited is to assist - in the resource protection of Alpine Reservoir . " sacrificing an important natural waLer source to protect an artificial pond is unreasonable . Horseshoe Lake is equally, if not more , important . The water resources of the Skyline Ranch are its unique features and outstanding attractions. The first priority should he to preserve and protect them . if parking cannot be dealt with on this property without endangering a water source . of her MROSD property should he considered for parking purposes. ICI sincerloy , William Ohormayer cc : Horb GrerIch Hatry Turner To the Board of Directt--s: A telephone message was received February 13, 1985 from Carol Gottlieb 24290 Summerhill Avenue Los Altos Hills , CA 94022 (415) 948-1704 regarding the Agenda item pertaining to the stable item at Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve. She is unable to attend tonight's meeting and left her message as follows: She feels from parts of the report quoted to her that there is bias on the part of the staff against stable facilities. The report sounded like the staff really doesn 't want the horses so all kinds of reasons were found not to have them. Some reasons didn' t seem to have merit. The park district is the perfect place for stables. The East Bay Regional Park have equestrian trails. The cost of land makes it impossible to have stables on private land, so the park land is the perfect place. She also asked that her appreciation be expressed for having been heard both now and when the item was previously presented to the Board, after which she received a synopsis of what had transpired at the Board meeting. WRITTEN Cr4 MUNICATION Meeta' 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985 4� hild SAN MATEO COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION, INC. 4 WEST FOURTH AVENUE SAN MATEO, CALIFORNIA 94402 TEL: (415) 342-7278 OFFICERS February 8, 1985 PRESIDENT T,Jack Foster,Jr. Foster Enterprises,Ltd. SR.VICE PRESIDENT Board of Trustees Donald G.Warren Redwood Shores, Inc. Mid peninsula Regional Open SECRETARY Space District William E. Cartwright 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Realtor Los Altos , California 94022 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER Ann M. Hammer Dear Board Members: California Canadian Bank VICE PRESIDENT-AT-LARGE The Growth Policy Council of the San Mateo County William E. Ryan Development Association has been monitoring the lawsuit United Airlines, Ret. between the Hassler Coalition and the Open Space District. From the beginning this Council has supported the Coalition DISTRICT VICE PRESIDENTS in its efforts to preserve these historical buildings for Stephen A.Clayton use by community groups. Our support for the Coalition is Half Moon Bay Properties consistent with our long-held stance that the use of public V.Kenneth Clifford lands acquired by the Open Space District and other Shell Oil Company agencies, and the expenditure of public monies associated Daniel McHale therewith should be balanced between acquisition and XIOX Corp. improvement within the acquisition for active public park Daniel P.Levin and recreational purposes. Lincoln Property Company Ronald F.Sykora Therefore, and particularly in light of the David D. Bohannon Organization February 5, 1985 decision of the First District Court of Appeal in favor of the Coalition, we strongly urge you to EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, immediatly meet with the San Mateo County Board of GENERAL MANAGER Supervisors and the Coalition and its mediator, William Pen Henry Bostwick,Jr. Mott, to negotiate a settlement of this wasteful litigation. ASSISTANT Such a negotiated settlement would be clearly in the public G. Frederick Wadlington interest in that it would put an end to costly litigation and public divisiveness and would be consistent with the expressed wishes of a majority of your constituents for preservation and restoration of the Hassler buildings. i Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District February 8, 1985 Page Two Would not the great sums of public monies spent on attorneys and lawsuits be better expended on providing a developed and accessible facility for all members of the public? Surely, such an action would go a long way toward mending the current image of the District. o truly, DO RREN Cha an Gr th Policy Council JACK FOSTER President, San Mateo County Development Association DW:PB:yh:327 cc: Board of Supervisors , All Members San Mateo County, Santa Clara County Governmental Research Council William Penn Mott Rod Hamblin, Exq. , U.S. Attorney's Office Howard Chapman, Western Regional Director National Park Service News Release I WRITTEN COMMUNIC 'ION Meeting 85 Feb. 13, 1985 6L 44 AZe Aly , oeecz /Z.,Z At, �l G [��// Z�t�t �✓zt�l 1�3��.C.q„� �,/f�j mac..rye t� a u � C c[�j o e.� ,c✓c jr-e-e .ems � 'gee I f �. w� �' ```� ELK Zee-,- -a A e zz- d WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985 Walter H. Vielbaum 1516 La M--sa Dr. Burlingame, CA 94010 Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle , Suite D-1 Los Altos, California 94022 RE: Clifford Property addition to the Mt. Umunhum area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve January 28, 1985 To whom it may concern: We were unable to attend the Open Space meeting on Wednesday January 23, 1985. A concerned neighbor who attended the meeting mentioned that when the subject of the Clifford Property came up there was a comment or some mention made that there was no opposition to it. If by chance in any way this was a reference to your proposed thoughts of securing a right of way through our property via Soda Springs Road, Please let it be known that this letter restates our strong opposition to any right of way as expressed in the letter to Mr. L. Craig Britton dated January 13, 1985. A copy of the letter to Mr. Britton is attached. Sincerely, Walter H. Vielbaum Norma E. Vielbaum 1 Walter H. Vielbaum 1516 !a IA-sa Or. Burlingame, CA 94010 1,r. L. Craig .Britton, SR/WA Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle , Suite D-1 Los Altos, California 94022 January 13 , 1985 Dear Mr. Britton: As the adjactent land owners to your recent acquisition to the Sierra Azul {Open Space Preserve ( Santa Clara County assessors parcel number 562-09-017 ) we want to bring to your attention certain facts concerning your proposed thoughts of an alternate access route via Soda Springs Road. Soda Brings Road is not a through road. It is marked / as such at the beginning. It ends with a locked gate about eight miles from it' s beginning. Beyond the locked gate the property owned b various individuals. iiiis priti i �e dirt is all privately y road is roughly three miles long and has to be maintained by kth property owners. The road originally was constructed as a fire service road for the County many years ago. The fire district has declared this road surplus and will not and has not maintained it for many years. The District has relinquished their right of access. Our property is posted and locked on both ends of our rpad with a chain on the South end and a gate on the North end. As recently as last month we arrived to find our locked gate cut and opened and also the chain cut at the South end . There is no public or utilityggight of way through our property and w.; have no intentions of making our private road a public acce:is road. As you must know, the ecology of the terrain:} Lij- this area is very fragile and will not support more than a few people. Our property is under the Williamson Act to maintain it aL a natural land preserve. This area has a very high fire risk. Those of us who live and have homes in- the area live with a constant threat of fire. Your proposal for access would accelerate that threat. Wev as our neighbors, would not only have to worry about increased fire risk but also the increased problems with break--ins, theft and vandelism. This has always been a problem due to the remoteness of the area. Having personally experienced a total loss of twenty acres including a home and other buildings on another piece of property due to arson we feel we must speak out to protect what is ours. We request our name be added to the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve mailing list. Respectfully, Walter H. Vielbaum Norma E. Vielbaum Herbert C. Vielbaum Elsie Vielbaum mmrnk MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 February 1, 1985 Walter H. and Norma E. Vielbaum Herbert C. Vielbaum Elsie Vielbaum 1516 LaMesa Drive Burlingame, CAlifornia 94010 Subject: Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (Former Lands of Clifford) Dear Mr. Vielbaum et al: In response to your letter of January 28 , 1985 regarding District consideration of your earlier comments on Soda Springs Road relative to public use of the former Clifford property, your comments were not ignored. I carefully reread the statement about Soda Springs which you found sensitive and it said: "An alternative access route may be possible via Soda Springs Road; however, road rights in this area are unclear. " Our staff reports utilize USGS maps to depict areas and parcels under consideration for purchase (as attached to the Clifford acquisition report) . Because these maps show all roads, including dirt roads and jeep trails, we are careful to describe all potential access routes to the property and indicate which routes are the legal access and describe the others where rights are non-existent or unclear. In the case of Soda Springs Road, the USGS map shows it paved to the current end near the Pezzoli property and then unpaved to its intersection with the paved road from Mt. Umunhum to Mt. Thayer. The unpaved portion crosses private property (including the Vielbaum holdings) and then enters District land (the former Fairweather property acquired in 1980) . The District has not researched the possible rights that may be appurtenant to tie former Fairweather property (or for that matter appurtenant to the former Clifford property) . The purpose of that section 0.f_ the report was simply to indicate where there was public access to the property, and where roads crossed private land and therefore were not available to the public. I= you would like more information about the District and any of its policies or procedures, I would be willing to meet with Herbert A-3F*--=1,_S*fwal Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley.Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin Walter H. and Norma E. Vielbaum Feb_sary 1, 1985 Rage Two you personally or discuss this matter by phone. The District is also interested in protecting this area as a natural preserve in parallel with your stated desires. Sincerel �, L. Crai Britton, SR/WA Land Acquistion Manager LCB:cac cc: Board of Directors, MROSD 4 M-85-15 (Meeting 35-03 Feb. 13, 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 5, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Possible Change of Board Officers Introduction : President Harry Turner has informed me that he must relinquish his special duties as President of the Board due to new and unexpected personal demands. fie asked that this matter be placed on your February 13 agenda. Discussion: Your Rules of Procedure regarding the President ' s position are the following: 1.22 Board of Directors; Election of Officers. At the first regular meeting in-January of each year beginning in 1974, the Board of Directors shall choose one of its members President, and another Vice-President, who shall act for the President in his/her absence or disability. The Board shall choose one of its members to serve as hoard Secretary and another to serve as Treasurer. Each officer shall be voted on separately. Elections shall be by secret ballot. The candidate receiving a majority of the vote of the members of the Board shall be elected. 1. 24 Duties of the Presiding Officer. The President, or in his/her absence, the Vice-President, shall be the presiding officer of the Board and shall assume his/her place and duties as such immediately following his/her election. The presiding officer shall preserve order at all meetings of the Board, announce its decisions on all subjects, and decide all questions or order, subject to an appeal to the Board. S/he shall partici- pate in debate, make motions, and vote on all questions as other members of the Board. The President shall sign all ordinances, resolutions, contracts and conveyances on behalf of the District after they have been approved by the Board, and a/he shall perform such other duties as may be imposed upon him/her by the Board. ail M-85-15 Page Two In the absence of the President, or in the event of his/her inability to act, the Vice-President shall perform all the powers and duties of the President. If both the President and Vice-President are absent or unable to act, the Board may select a president pro tempore who shall perform all the powers and duties of the President. M-85-18 (Meeting 85-03 Ak toe Feb. 13 , 1985) � MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 5, 1985 i I TO: Board of Directors FROM: M. Foster, Controller SUBJECT: Sale of 1985 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Promissory Notes Discussion: At your meeting of January 23 , 1985 you approved an underwriting agreement with Stone and Youngberg and authorized staff to take all actions necessary to arrange the issuance of $4 million of ten year notes (see report R-85-04 dated January 15, 1985) . You also designated Daniel Wendin as your representative at the due dill- Bence meeting. The due diligence meeting was held on January 30 at which time the Preliminary Official Statement and the terms and schedule for the note issue were reviewed by the underwriters, bond counsel, District Legal Counsel , the General Manager, D. Wendin, and me. At the con- clusion of the meeting Director Wendin on your behalf authorized the underwriters to (1) print and distribute the Preliminary Official State- ment, incorporating all changes discussed at the meeting and (2) apply for a bond rating from Standard and Poors. Because of the current favorable bond market conditions, all parties agreed to complete the steps necessary to present a note purchase contract to the Board at your February 13 meeting. A copy of the Preliminary Official Statement will be sent to you under separate cover by Stone and Youngberg. A final conference will be held on February 12 to review the response from Standard and Poors and the bond insurance companies, and to agree on the exact terms to be proposed at your February 13 meeting. If the Board decides to go ahead with the issue of $4 million of prom- issory notes, then the District must designate a Paying Agent. The duties of the Paying Agent are to make all payments on the notes and hold the $320 , 000 reserve fund. Investments of moneys in the reserve fund will be under my direction. First Interstate Bank is the Paying Agent on the $10. 6 million of notes issued in 1977 and 1982 , in addition to being the District' s bank. First Interstate provides good service to the District and should, in my opinion, be designated as Paying Agent for the new notes. The pro- posed fees appear to be reasonable and competitive. The final draft of the proposed agreement between the District and First Interstate was not received in time for inclusion in the packet mailing, but will be available at your Regular Board Meeting on February 13 . M-85-18 Page two ,Recommendation:; Assuming that the proposed net costs are acceptable to you, the following actions will be needed at your February 13 meeting: (1) Approval of Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $4, 000, 000 Principal Amount of "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Notes" ; A draft of the resolution is attached for your inspection. The final version will be available at the meeting. (2) Approval of Resolution Approving, Authorizing, and Directing the Execution of an Agreement with First Interstate Bank of California. A copy of the 1982 resolution and agreement to serve as paying agent is attached. Updated versions will be available at the meeting. �. 17 � � C�� ; ,, ,, - � �' tee"` �� u-. � ) I) #d' Meeting 84-28 All MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D•1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 REGULAR MEETING WednesdayBOARD OF DIRECTORS 375 Distel Circle, D-1 December 19, 1984* Los Altos, California A G E N D A' (7 :30) ROLL CALL WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ADOPTION OF AGENDA ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED (7:45) 1. Proposed Addition to the Windy Hill Open Space Preserve (Martin Property) -- C. Britton Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement, Authori- zing Officer to ''.Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or, Appropriate to Closing of the Trans- action (Windy Hill`\Open Space Preserve - Lands of Martin) (7 : 55) 2. Proposed Addition to.,,Coal Creek Open Space Preserve (Hybl Property) -- C. Britton } (8 : 05) 3 . Annual Review of RelatY"Ve Site Emphasis Plan and Use and Manage- ment Plan Review Schedul°g -- D. Hansen (8 : 35) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS CLAIMS CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiation and Litigation Matters) ADJOURNMENT TO-ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you,'re concerned --with appears on the agenda, please address the Board at the time. Otherwise, you may address the Board under �'raZ Communications. When recognized, please b gin by staring your name and address. Conciseness is appr i,ated. we request you complete the forms provided so that your ncre can be accurately included in the minutes. *NOTE: Rescheduled from December 26, 1984 Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.S"z+:ey,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin M-85-23 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13, 1985) oe MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 13, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Agreement with First Interstate Bank of California Attached is the proposed Resolution Approving, Authorizing and Directing the Execution of an Agreement with First Interstate Bank of California with the agreement attached, which is an up- date of a similar resolution and agreement on the 1982 note issue. The letter was included with memorandum M-85-18 dated February 5, 1985 from M. Foster to you. Also attached is a copy of the Preliminary Official Statement. i i I i l • S MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DIS`='RICT RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH FdRST INTERSTATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, this Board of Directors (the 'Board" ) of i d_peninsula Regional Open n Space "District" ) Dist rict the has provided for the issuance and sale of $6, 000, 000 principal amount of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1982 Negotiable Promissory Notes; and WHEREAS, in connection with the issuance and sal e of such promissory notes the Board desires to use the services of an experienced paying agent; and WHEREAS, First Interstate Bank of California (the "Bank") has such experience and has proposed to perform such services on the terms and conditions set forth in the proposed contract attached hereto, labeled Exhibit A and Jncorporated herein (the "Contract" ) ; and WHEREAS, the Board approves the terms of the Contract; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as follows: Section li The Contract between the District and the Bank is hereby approved and the General Manager of the District is hereby authorized and directed to execute the Contract on behalf of the District. Section 2 . This resolution shall take effect from and after its passage and approval. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 8th day of December, 1982, by the following vote: AYES: Directors NOES: ABSENT: APPROVED: President of the Board-of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District [SEAL] ATTEST: Secretary of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 2 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 1982, by and between MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, hereinafter called the "District", and FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, a California corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, hereinafter called the "Bank" . WITNESSETH: r WHEREAS, The District has authorization_ for the issuance of $ principal amount of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Negotiable Promissory Notes, Series dated as of and WHEREAS, the Bank is desirous of acting as paying agent of said notes through its Corporate Trust Department located in the City of San Francisco, California; and WHEREAS, it is mutually desirable that an agreement be entered into between these parties to provide for such paying agency services; NOW THEREFORE, the parties above named, in consider- ation of the mutual covenants herein contained agree as follows: 1. The Bank shall cause all notes of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Negotiable Promissory Notes, Series consisting of notes numbered through inclusive of the denominations of $5,000 each, dated as of and any coupons pertaining to subject notes, to be honored in accordance with the terms thereof upon the presentation of the same for payment or for collection upon maturity to the Bank or any co-paying agent. The District shall cause to be made available to the Bank all funds necessary in order to so honor such notes and coupons; provided, this paragraph shall not in any instance re- quire payment or disbursement of any funds in excess of the amount then on deposit in the "Principal and Interest Payment Account" referred to hereinafter. C. fle L1.5LL-L,.; . 61Ya1J. UePO51L OYY Or DeIULe eaca . 4 maturity date of % ions and/or notes with t� Corporate Trust Depart=ent of the Bank in San Francisco, funds for the payment of ma�.=ing coupons and/or notes. Such funds are to be deposited in an account designated "Principal and Interest Payment Account", i and shall be held and applied by the Bank in said Corporate Trust Department solely for the payment of coupons and/or notes. From such funds, the Bank agrees to pay at the maturity thereof interest and principal on all coupons and/or notes presented to the Bank or to any of the co-paying agents. Such presentation may be made at either of the principal offices of the Bank in San Francisco and Los Angeles, California, or at the offices of amy co-paying agent, and the Bank shall cause such payment to b--- made from whichever office such presentation shall be made. 3. The District shall pay to the Bank fees in ac- cordance with the following schedule: Coupon Payment $ .17 per Coupon ($200 Minimum Annual Charge) Each Check or Credit Letter Issued in Payment of Either Coupons or Notes $ .50 Note Payment $ 1.75 per Note Destruction of Coupons and Notes No Charge Cash Statements Monthly $ 25.00 Semi.-Annual $ 25.00 Annual $ 50.00 Cut-of-pocket expenses, such as stationery, postage, telephone and telegraph charges will be in addition to the above charges. The Bank shall bill all, such paying agency fees directly to the District on a semi-annual basis. 4. The Bank shall provide cash statements concerning the "Principal and Interest Account" to the District semi-annually. - 2 - at no additional r-urge to the District, at .m—r-thern Trust Company in Chicago, Illinois, and Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company in New York, New York. 6. The Bank shall periodically destroy or have caused to be destroyed all cancelled coupons and notes and shall furnish the Controller of the District with appropriate destruction affidavits. 7. The District, upon six (6) months' written notice to the Bank, may terminate any requests for the performance of services pursuant to this agreement. 8. The Bank, upon six ,(6) months' written notice to the District may terminate this agreement; provided, however, that upon any default by the District under any of the pro- visions of this agreement or upon default of the payment of principal or interest of any issue or issues. with respect to which the Bank has undertaken to perform any services, the Bank shall immediately terminate this agreement in its entirety by giving such written notice. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto hereby execute this agreement on the day and year first above written. By General Manager of the Midpen- insula Regional open Space District ATTEST: Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional open Space District FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF CALIFONRIA By Trust Officer BY Assistant Trust Officer 3 STONE & YOUNGBERG MEMBERS: PACIFIC STOCK EXCHANGE VIA COURIER February 7, 1985 Herb Grench Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Drive, Suite D-1 Los Altos, CA 94022 Dear Herb: Please find enclosed a draft purchase agreement for our purchase of the District's $4 million Note financing on Wednesday. It is identical in all substantial respects to the purchase agreement we signed with you in 1982. Based on my conversations today with Standard & Poor' s and MBIA, we should learn on Monday of the rating and whether an insurance commitment will be forthcoming. Based on the information I receive on Monday, I will be in contact with you by phone and write a short letter which will describe the interest rates and discount applicable on an insured and on a non-insured basis. We should then plan to discuss the contents of that letter on Tuesday so that we may market the Notes and be in a position to present you with a purchase agreement on Wednesday. I look forward to talking with you soon. Yours very truly, STONE & YOUNGBE tom-- L. William Huck Partner LWH:cn Enc./255b cc: Mike Foster Carlo Fowler Stan Norton ONE CALIFORNIA STREET SAN FRANCISCO,CALIFORNIA 94111 (415)981-1314 1985 PROMISSORY NOTES PURCHASE AGREEMENT (the "Purchase Agreement") , dated as of February 13, 1985, between Stone & Youngberg (the "Underwriter" ) and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (the "District") , a regional open space district duly organized and operating under the laws of the State of California, for the sale and delivery of $4,000,000 aggregate principal amount of 1985 Promissory Notes (the "Notes") . WHEREAS, the Board of Directors (the "Board" ), of the District has found and determined that funds in the amount of $4,000,000 are needed by the District for the purpose of implementing the District's plan to acquire necessary and proper lands and facilities for open space purposes of the District (including reimbursing the District for moneys temporarily advanced to acquire such lands and facilities) , all in accordance with the provisions of Article 4, Chapter 3 of Division 5 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (the "Code"); and WHEREAS, Section 5544.2 of the Code authorizes the issuance and sale by the District of negotiable promissory notes to provide funds for the accomplishment of such purpose, and the Board has determined to issue and sell $4,000,000 principal amount of the Notes under such section to provide funds for the accomplishment of such purpose; and WHEREAS the Board has on this date lawfully approved a resolution providing for the issuance and sale of the Notes (the "Resolution"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the parties hereto do hereby agree as follows: Section 1 . Obligation to Purchase. The Underwriter agrees to purchase and the District agrees to execute and ifeliver $4,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Notes in the annual principal amount and for the annual coupon interest rates set forth in Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference, and as described in the Resolution and the Official Statement, dated February 13, 1985, relating to the Notes, including the Appendices thereto (the "Official Statement"). The Underwriter shall not be under any obligation under this Purchase Agreement to purchase less than all of the $4,000,000 aggregate principal amount of Notes. Section 2. Purchase Price. The purchase price of the Notes shall be four million dollars ($4,1000-Xg) , plus accrued interest to the date of delivery thereof. The good faith check in the form of a certified or bank check and in an amount of $25,-000, which has been tendered herewith to the District, shall be applied in partial payment of the purchase price. In the event that the Underwriter terminates this Purchase Agreement pursuant to Section 7 hereof, the District shall return said good faith check to the Underwriter. In the event the Underwriter fails (other than for a reason permitted hereunder) to accept delivery and pay for the Notes as herein provided, such check shall be retained by the District as and for full liquidated damages for such failure and for any default hereunder on the part of the Underwriter and, except as set forth in paragraph 8 hereof, neither party hereto shall have any further rights against the other hereunder. Section 3. Delivery of and Payment for the Notes. The Closing shall take place at ID:UU a.m. P. . on March 5, 1985,—o—F-aT such other time as may be mutually agreeable to the District and the Underwriter, at such place as the foregoing shall mutually agree upon. At the Closing, the District shall deliver the Notes or cause the Notes to be delivered to the Underwriter in definitive form, duly executed, together with the other documents hereinafter mentioned, against delivery of immediately available funds to the order of the District in the amount of $4,000,000 (including as a part thereof the $25,000 good faith check) , plus accrued interest. Section 4. The Notes. The Notes shall be delivered under the provisions of the Resolution. The Notes shall be in fully registered form, in denominations of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) or any integral multiple thereof and shall be made available to the Underwriter for checking in San Francisco, California, at least one business day prior to the Closing. Payments of principal of and interest due on the Notes shall be made in the amounts and on the dates set forth in the Resolution and Official Statement. Section 5. Representations and Warranties of the District. The District represents and warrants to the Underwriter that: (1 ) The District is a regional open space district duly created and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California and has all necessary power and authority to enter into and perform its duties under the Resolution and this Purchase Agreement, and, when executed and delivered by the respective parties thereto, the Resolution and this Purchase Agreement will constitute legal , valid and binding obligations of the District in accordance with their respective terms. (2) The execution and delivery of this Purchase Agreement, the Resolution and compliance with the provisions thereof, will not conflict with, or constitute a breach of or default under, the District's duties under said documents or any law, administrative regulation, court decree, resolution, charter, bylaws or other agreement to which the Board of Directors of the District is subject to or by which it is bound. (3) Except as may be required under blue sky or other securities laws of any state or under the Resolution, there is no consent, approval , authorization or other order of, or filing with, or certification by, any regulatory authority having jurisdiction over the District required for the issuance and sale of the Notes or the consummation by the District of.the other transactions contemplated by this Purchase Agreement. (4) To the best knowledge of the District, there is no action, suit, proceeding or investigation at law or in equity before or by any court or governmental agency or body pending or threatened against the District to restrain or enjoin the issuance or delivery of the Notes, or the receipt or setting aside of tax revenues pursuant to the Resolution or in any way 2 contesting or affecting the validity of this Purchase Agreement, the Resolution or contesting the powers of the District to enter into or perform its obligations under any of the foregoing. (5) The information contained in the Preliminary Official Statement dated February 7, 1985, was, and in the Official Statement dated February 13, 1985, is true and correct in all material respects and such information does not contain any untrue or misleading statement of a material fact or omit to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. (6) The District agrees to cooperate with the Underwriter in endeavoring to qualify the Notes for offering and sale under the securities or blue sky laws of such jurisdictions of the United States as the Underwriter may request; provided, however, that the District will not be required to execute a special or general consent to service of process or qualify as a foreign corporation in connection with any such qualification. Section 6. Conditions Precedent to Closing. Conditions precedent to "11 the Closing to be satisfieT-'i7n form and substance satisfactory to Under- writer) are as follows: (1 ) Execution and delivery of the Resolution and this Purchase Agreement in form and substance acceptable to the Underwriter; Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe, ("Bond Counsel"); and Stanley R. Norton, Esq. : General Counsel to the District ("General Counsel"). (2) Opinion, dated the date of Closing, of Bond Counsel , with respect to the validity and tax-exempt status of the Notes in the form described in the Official Statement. (3) Opinion, dated the date of Closing, of Bond Counsel that the Notes are exempt from registration under the Secutities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Resolution is exempt from qualification under the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, as amended. (4) Opinion of Bond Counsel dated the date of Closing as to the due authorization, execution and delivery by the District of the Resolution and this Purchase Agreement and as to the legal , valid and binding nature thereof. (5) Opinion of the District's General Counsel , dated as of the date of Closing, as to the due authorization, execution and delivery by the District of the Resolution and this Purchase Agreement and as to the legal , valid and binding nature thereof. (6) Satisfactory evidence that the payment of the Notes has been insured or guaranteed by the Municipal Bond Insurance Association. (7) Satisfactory evidence that the Notes have received or will receive a municipal bond credit rating of "AAA" from Standard & Poor's Corporation. (8) A certificate signed by the President of the Board of Directors and the General Manager of the District, to the effect that, based upon their 3 participation in the preparation of the Official Statement, but without undertaking an independent investigation, the Official Statement does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading. (9) Such other certificates, instruments or opinions as Bond Counsel may deem necessary or desirable to evidence the due authorization, execution and delivery of documents pertaining to this transaction and the legal , valid and binding nature thereof, as well as compliance with all parties with the terms and conditions hereof. Section 7. Events Permitting the Underwriter to Terminate. The UnderWrFiFt—ermay terminate the Underwriter's obligations to pu—r-cTase the Notes at any time before Closing if any of the following occurs: (a) Any legislative, executive or regulatory action or any court decision, which, in the judgment of the Underwriter, casts sufficient doubt on the legality of or the tax-exempt status of interest on obligations such as the Notes so as materially to impair the marketability or to materially reduce the market price of such obligations; (b) Any action by the Securities and Exchange Commission or a court which would require registration of the Notes under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in connection with the public offering thereof, or qualification of the Resolution under the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, as amended; (c) Any restriction or trading in securities, or any banking moratorium, or the inception or escalation of any war or major military hostilities which, in the judgment of the Underwriter, substantially impairs the ability of the Underwriter to market the Notes; or (d) Any event or condition which, in the judgment of the Underwriter, renders untrue or incorrect, in any material respect as of the time to which the same purports to relate, the information, including the financial statements, contained in the Official Statement, or which requires that information not reflected in such Official Statement should be reflected therein in order to make the statements and information contained therein not misleading in any material respect as of such time. Section 8. Fees and Expenses. The Underwriter shall pay the costs and 5— 1 expenses i curred by it in connection with this financing including advertising and selling expenses, and the fees and disbursements of Counsel to the Underwriter, if any. The District shall pay all other costs in connection with the sale and delivery of the Notes, including the cost of printing or reproducing the 4 Preliminary Official Statement, the Official Statement and the Notes, the fees of the Paying Agent, rating agency fees, bond insurance premium fees of Municipal Bond Insurance Association, the fees and disbursements of Bond Counsel and the fees and disbursements of any other experts or consultants retained by the District. Section 9. Notices. Any notices to be given to the Underwriter shall be given in writing to Stone & Youngberg, One California Street, Suite 2800, San Francisco, California 94111 . Any notices to be given to the District shall be given in writing to the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 , Los Altos, California 94022, Attention: General Manager. Section 10. No Assignment. This Purchase Agreement has been made by ict a the Distrnd I the underwriter, and their successors or assigns and no person other than the foregoing shall acquire or have any right under or by virtue of this Purchase Agreement. All of the representations, warranties and agreements contained in this Purchase Agreement Nall survive the delivery of and payment of the Notes and any termination thereof. Section 11 . Appplicable Law. This Purchase Agreement shall be interpreted, governed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Section 12. Severability. In the event any provision of this Purchase Agreement shall be held invalidor unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision hereof. Section 13. Prior Agreements. The terms of this Purchase Agreement shall supercede any prior agreements between the parties with respect to the Notes. STONE & YOUNGBERG By By MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT By President of the Boa—r-d—of Directors 5 EXHIBIT A MATURITY SCHEDULE Maturity Principal December 15 Amount Coupon 1985 4009000 1986 400,000 1987 400,000 1988 400,000 1989 4009000 1990 40031000 1991 4009000 1992 4009000 1993 400,000 1994 4009000 - 6 - I MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $4, 000, 000 PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF "MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 1985 PROMISSORY NOTES" WHEREAS, this Board of Directors (the "Board" ) of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (the "District" ) has found and determined that funds in the amount of $4, 000, 000 are needed by the District for the purpose of acquiring necessary and proper lands and facilities for open space purposes of the District, all in accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of Chapter 3 of Division 5 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California (the "Code" ) ; and WHEREAS, Section 5544.2 of the Code authorizes the issuance and sale by the District of promissory notes to provide funds for the accomplishment of such purpose, and the Board has determined to issue and sell $4, 000, 000 principal amount of promissory notes under such section to provide P Y funds for the accomplishment of such purpose; and i WHEREAS, it is appropriate to adopt this resolution in order to provide the conditions and terms under and pursuant to which such promissory notes shall be issued and sold by the District; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as follows: Section 1 . The Board has reviewed all proceedings heretofore taken relative to the issuance and sale of such promissory notes and has found, as a result of such review, and hereby finds and determines that all acts, conditions and things required by law to exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the issuance and sale of such promissory notes have existed, happened and been performed in regular and due time, form and manner as required by law, and the District is now duly authorized to issue and sell such promissory notes and incur an indebtedness under and pursuant to the conditions and terms provided in this resolution. Section 2 . Pursuant to the provisions of Section 5544. 2 of the Code and for the purpose hereinabove set forth, the District determines to borrow the principal sum of $4, 000, 000 by the issuance and sale as hereinafter provided of $4, 000, 000 principal amount of promissory notes to evidence such indebtedness. Such promissory notes shall be known as the "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Notes" (the "Notes" ) . The Notes shall be 2 issued in fully registered form in the denomination of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof (not to exceed the principal amount of Notes maturing in any one year) , shall be dated March 1, 1985, and shall mature on the dates and in the principal amounts and shall bear interest at the interest rates per annum as set forth in the following schedule: Principal Maturity Date Interest Amount — (December 15) Rate - $400, 000 1985 % 400, 000 1986 400, 000 1987 400, 000 1988 400, 000 1989 400, 000 1990 400, 000 1991 400, 000 1992 400, 000 1993 400, 000 1994 The Notes shall bear interest from the interest payment date next preceding the date of authentication and registration thereof, unless such date of authentication and registration is an interest payment date, in which event they shall bear interest from such date, or unless such date of authentication and registration is prior to the first interest payment date, in which event they shall bear interest from March 1, 1985. Such interest shall be payable on December 15, 1985, and semiannually thereafter on June 15 and December 15 of each year until the Notes shall have been fully paid. Such interest shall be paid by check mailed to the persons whose names appear as the registered owners thereof as of fifteen ( 15) days prior to each interest 3 payment date on the registration books required to be kept by the principal corporate trust office of First Interstate Bank of California in San Francisco, California (the "Paying Agent" ) by Section 5 of this resolution, and the principal of the Notes shall be payable only on surrender of the Notes by such registered owners to the Paying Agent at the maturity thereof. Both the interest on and the principal of the Notes shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Section 3 . The Notes and the authentication and registration endorsement and the assignment form to appear thereon shall each be substantially in the following forms, the blanks in said forms to be filled in with appropriate words or figures, namely: 4 [ Form of Note ] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTIES OF SANTA CLARA AND SAN MATEO MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 1985 PROMISSORY NOTE Interest Maturity Date of Rate Date Issue CUSIP December 15, March 1, 1985 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a regional open space district located in the Counties of Santa Clara and San Mateo, State of California (the "District" ) , hereby acknowledges itself indebted and for value received promises to pay to or registered assigns, on the maturity date specified above, the principal sum of THOUSAND DOLLARS together with interest thereon from the interest payment date next preceding the date of authentication and registration of this Note (unless this Note is authenticated and registered as of an interest payment date, in which event it shall bear interest from that date, or unless this Note is authenticated and registered prior to December 15, 1985, in which event it shall bear interest from March 1, 1985) until payment of said principal sum in full at the interest rate per annum specified above, payable on December 15, 1985, and semiannually thereafter on June 15 and December 15 of each year. Interest due on or before the maturity of this Note shall be payable only by check mailed to the registered owner hereof as of fifteen ( 15 ) days prior to each interest payment date, and the principal hereof shall be payable on the maturity of this Note only upon surrender hereof by the registered owner hereof. Both the interest hereon and the 5 principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America at the principal corporate trust office of First Interstate Bank of California in San Francisco, California, the Paying Agent of the District. This Note is one of a duly authorized issue of promissory notes of the District aggregating four million dollars ($4, 000, 000) in principal amount (the "Notes" ) , all of like tenor and date (except for such variations, if any, as may be required to designate varying numbers, denominations, interest rates or maturities) , and is authorized to be issued under and pursuant to the conditions and terms of Resolution No. of the Board of Directors of the District (the "Resolution" ) duly and regularly passed and adopted on February 1985, under and by authority of Section 5544.2 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California, and is issued to provide funds for acquiring necessary and proper lands and facilities for open space purposes of the District. This Note is transferable by the registered owner hereof, in person or by his duly authorized attorney, at the above-mentioned office of the Paying Agent, upon surrender of this Note for cancellation accompanied by delivery of a duly executed written instrument of transfer in a form approved by the Paying Agent, and thereupon a new Note or Notes of authorized denominations for a like aggregate principal amount and of the same maturity date will be issued to the transferee in exchange therefor, in the manner, subject to the conditions and terms and upon payment of the charges provided in the Resolution. The District and the Paying Agent may deem and treat the registered owner of this Note as the absolute owner hereof for the purpose of receiving payment hereof and for all other purposes, and neither the District nor the Paying Agent shall be affected by any notice or knowledge to the contrary; and payment of the interest on and the principal of this Note shall be made only to such registered owner, which payment shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge liability on this Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. The Notes are authorized to be issued in the form of fully registered Notes in the denomination of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof (not exceeding the principal amount of Notes maturing in any one year) . Subject to the conditions and terms and upon payment of the charges provided in the Resolution, the Notes may be exchanged at the above-mentioned office of the Paying Agent for the same principal amount of Notes of the same maturity date of any other authorized denominations. 6 This Note shall not be entitled to any benefits under the Resolution or become valid or obligatory for any purpose until the certificate of authentication and registration hereon endorsed shall have been signed by the Paying Agent. It is hereby certified, recited and declared that this Note is issued in strict conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of California now in force and with the proceedings of the Board of Directors of the District authorizing the same, and that all acts, conditions and things required to exist, happen and be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Note have existed, happened and been performed in regular and due time, form and manner as required by law, and that this Note, together with all indebtedness and obligations of the District, does not exceed any limit prescribed by the Constitution or statutes of the State of California or by the Resolution, and that the interest on and the principal of this Note is payable from limited ad valorem property taxes levied upon all taxable property within the District by the Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County and by the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County, and allocated to the District under applicable law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District has caused this Note to be signed by the facsimile signature of the President of its Board of Directors and attested by the facsimile signature of the Secretary of its Board of Directors, and has caused the seal of the District to be imprinted hereon, and has caused this Note to be dated March 1, 1985 . President of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District [ SEAL] Attest: Secretary of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 7 [Form of Paying Agent' s Certificate of Authentication and Registration] This is one of the Notes described in the within-mentioned Resolution which has been authenticated and registered on FIRST INTERSTATE BANK OF CALIFORNIA, as Paying Agent By Authorized Officer [ Form of Assignment] For value received the undersigned do(es) hereby sell, assign and transfer unto the within Note and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the same on the register of the Paying Agent, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: NOTE: The signature( s) to this Assignment must correspond with the name( s) as written on the face of the within Note in every particular, without alteration or enlargement or any change whatsoever. 8 Section 4. The President of the Board is hereby authorized and directed to execute each of the Notes by his facsimile signature, and the Secretary of the Board is hereby authorized and directed to attest such execution of the Notes by his facsimile signature, and to imprint the seal of the District thereon, which such signing, attesting and sealing as herein provided shall be a sufficient and binding execution of the Notes by the District. If either officer of the Board whose signature appears on any Note ceases to be such officer before the delivery of the Notes to the purchaser thereof, the signature of such officer appearing on the Notes shall be valid and sufficient for all purposes to the same extent as if such officer had remained in office until such delivery of the Notes. Only such of the Notes as shall bear thereon a certificate of authentication and registration in the form hereinabove set forth, executed and dated by the Paying Agent, shall be entitled to any benefits hereunder or be valid or obligatory for any purpose, and such certificate shall be conclusive evidence that the Notes so authenticated and registered have been duly authorized, executed, issued and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits hereof. Section 5 . First Interstate Bank of California at its principal corporate trust office in San Francisco, California, is hereby appointed Paying Agent of the District for the purpose of receiving all money which the District is 9 required to deposit with the Paying Agent hereunder and for the purpose of paying the interest on and the principal of the Notes. The District may at any time in its sole discretion remove the Paying Agent initially appointed and any successor thereto and may appoint a successor or successors thereto by an instrument in writing; provide that the District agrees that it will at all times maintain a Paying Agent having a principal corporate trust office in San Francisco, California. The Paying Agent is hereby authorized to pay the interest on the Notes due on or before the maturity thereof to the registered owners thereof as their names appear as of fifteen (15) days prior to each interest payment date on the registration books required to be kept by it pursuant to this section as the registered owners thereof, such interest to be paid by check mailed to such registered owners at their addresses appearing on such books or at such other addresses as they may have filed with the Paying Agent for that purpose, and to pay to such registered owners the principal of the Notes upon presentation and surrender of the Notes to the Paying Agent at the maturity thereof. The District shall from time to time, subject to any agreement between the District and the Paying Agent then in force, pay the Paying Agent compensation for its services, reimburse the Paying Agent for all its advances and expenditures, including but not limited to advances to and fees and expenses of independent accountants, counsel and 10 engineers or other experts employed by it in the exercise and performance of its rights and obligations hereunder, and indemnify and save the Paying Agent harmless against liabilities not arising from its own gross negligence or willful misconduct which it may incur in the exercise and performance of its rights and obligations hereunder. The recitals of facts, agreements and covenants contained herein and in the Notes shall be taken as statements, agreements and covenants of the District, and the Paying Agent does not assume any responsibility for the correctness of the same and does not make any representation as to the sufficiency or validity hereof or of the Notes, and shall not incur any responsibility in respect thereof other than in connection with the rights and obligations assigned to or imposed upon it herein or in the Notes, and shall not be liable in connection with the performance of its duties hereunder except for its own gross negligence or willful misconduct. The Paying Agent will keep at its office sufficient books for the registration, transfer and exchange of the Notes, which books shall at all times be open to inspection by the District. Upon presentation for such purpose the Paying Agent shall, under such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, register or transfer or exchange the Notes on such books as hereinafter provided. Any Note may be transferred on such books by the registered owner thereof, in person or by his duly authorized f attorney, upon payment by the person requesting such transfer of such charge as the Paying Agent shall deem reasonable (but not exceeding twenty dollars ($20. 00) for each new Note authenticated and delivered upon any such transfer) and also upon payment of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer and upon surrender of such Note for cancellation accompanied by delivery of a duly executed written instrument of transfer in a form approved by the Paying Agent. Whenever any Note or Notes shall be surrendered for transfer, the District shall execute and the Paying Agent shall authenticate and deliver a new Note or Notes of authorized denominations for a like aggregate principal amount of the same maturity date. The District and the Paying Agent may deem and treat the registered owner of any Note as the absolute owner of such Note for the purpose of receiving payment thereof as above provided and for all other purposes, whether such Note shall be overdue or not, and neither the District nor the Paying Agent shall be affected by any notice or knowledge to the contrary; and payment of the interest on and the principal of such Note shall be made only to such registered owner as above provided, which payment shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge liability on such Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. The Notes may be exchanged on such books by the registered owners thereof for a like aggregate principal 12 amount of Notes of the same maturity date of other authorized denominations, upon payment by the person requesting such exchange of such charge as the Paying Agent shall deem reasonable (but not exceeding twenty dollars ($20. 00) for each new Note authenticated and delivered upon any such exchange) and also upon payment of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange. Section 6. The proceeds of sale of the Notes (except accrued interest received on such sale) shall be deposited with the Controller of the District in a special fund maintained by him which shall be designated the "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Note Acquisition Fund" (the "Acquisition Fund" ) . All money in the Acquisition Fund shall be withdrawn therefrom only upon the order of the Board or pursuant to its directions, and shall be expended exclusively for the purpose for which the Notes were authorized to be issued. All money in the Acquisition Fund shall, pending expenditure, be deposited or invested as permitted by law so as to obtain the highest yield that the Controller of the District deems practicable, having due regard for the safety of such deposits and investments; provided, that all such deposits and investments shall be withdrawable or shall mature, as the case may be, to coincide as nearly as practicable with the time when the money so deposited or invested is expected to be expended 13 hereunder. All proceeds of such deposits or investments shall be deposited as and when received in the Acquisition Fund. When the purpose for which the Notes were authorized to be issued has been accomplished, any balance of money then remaining in the Acquisition Fund shall be transferred to the Note Fund referred to in Section 7 hereof. Section 7 . For the purpose of paying the interest on and the principal of the Notes, until the interest on and the principal of the Notes are paid in full or until there is a sum in the treasury of the District set apart for that purpose sufficient to meet all payments of the interest on and the principal of the Notes as they become due, the District shall annually set aside a portion of the limited ad valorem taxes levied upon all taxable property within the District by the Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County and by the Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County, and allocated to the District under applicable law, sufficient to pay such interest and principal that will become due before the proceeds of a tax levied at the next general tax levy will be available for such purpose. In order to implement this provision, the District agrees that it will set aside, as soon as possible after the receipt of such taxes that become delinquent after April 10, 1985, an amount of such taxes (or other available funds of the District) equal to the interest that becomes due and payable on the Notes on 14 i December 15, 1985, plus the principal of the Notes that becomes due and payable on December 15, 1985, and as soon as possible after the receipt of such taxes that become delinquent after December 10 of each year (commencing with such taxes that become delinquent after December 10, 1985) , an amount of such taxes (or other available funds of the District) equal to the interest that becomes due and payable on the Notes on the next succeeding June 15 plus one-half ( 1/2 ) of the principal of the Notes that becomes due and payable on the December 15 next succeeding such June 15, and as soon as possible after the receipt of such taxes that become delinquent after April 10 of each year (commencing with such taxes that become delinquent after April 10, 1986) , an amount of such taxes (or other available funds of the District) equal to the interest that becomes due and payable on the Notes on the next succeeding December 15 plus one-half ( 1/2 ) of the principal of the Notes that becomes due and payable on the next succeeding December 15 . Such taxes (or other available funds of the District) shall be deposited by the Controller of the District in a special fund maintained by him which shall be designated the "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Note Fund" (the "Note Fund" ) . There shall likewise be deposited in the Note Fund any money received on account of interest accrued on the Notes from their date to the date of delivery thereof and actual payment of the 15 I purchase price thereof. The money in the Note Fund shall be used solely for the payment of the interest on and the principal of the Notes, and for this purpose the Controller of the District shall, at least five (5 ) business days before each interest payment date on the Notes and each principal maturity date of any of the Notes, disburse money in the Note Fund to the Paying Agent in amounts sufficient to make such interest and principal payments. All money in the Note Fund shall, pending its disbursement as above provided, be deposited or invested as permitted by law so as to obtain the highest yield that the Controller of the District deems practicable, having due regard for the safety of such deposits and investments; provided, that all such deposits and investments shall be withdrawable or shall mature, as the case may be, to coincide as nearly as practicable with the time when the money is required to be disbursed hereunder. All proceeds of such deposits or investments shall be deposited as and when received in the Note Fund. When all the interest on and the principal of the Notes has been paid, any balance of money then remaining in the Note Fund shall be used for any lawful District purposes. Section 8. For the further protection of the registered owners of the Notes, a fund to be known as the "Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 1985 Promissory Note Reserve Fund" (the "Reserve Fund" ) shall be established 16 and maintained at the principal office of the Paying Agent in San Francisco, California, so long as any Notes are outstanding. Upon the delivery of and payment for the Notes, the District shall set aside out of the proceeds thereof and deposit in the Reserve Fund the sum of $320, 000, and thereafter there shall be maintained in the Reserve Fund an amount equal to the lesser of either ( 1 ) $320, 000, or (2 ) the sum of (a) one-half ( 1/2 ) of the interest on the Notes that becomes due and payable during the year ending on the next succeeding December 15 plus (b) one-half ( 1/2 ) of the principal of the Notes that becomes due and payable during the year ending on the next succeeding December 15. The money in the Reserve Fund shall be used solely for the payment of the interest on and the principal of the Notes in the event and to the extent that the District has no other money available therefor, except that ( 1 ) any money in the Reserve Fund in excess of the balance required to be maintained therein may be withdrawn from the Reserve Fund and used for any lawful District purpose, and (2 ) the money in the Reserve Fund may be used (together with any other money available for that purpose) for the retirement of all the outstanding Notes. Whenever any withdrawals from the Reserve Fund reduce the balance therein below the balance required to be maintained therein, the Reserve Fund shall be replenished from the first available taxes and revenues of the District, except that the District shall not be obligated to make any 17 payments into the Reserve Fund at any time when the money contained therein and in the Note Fund is at least equal to the principal amount of the outstanding Notes plus the interest then due and thereafter to become due thereon. All money in the Reserve Fund shall, pending its use, be deposited or invested as directed by the Controller of the District as permitted by law so as to obtain the highest yield that the Controller of the District deems practicable, having due regard for the safety of such deposits and investments; provided, that all such deposits and investments shall be withdrawable or shall mature, as the case may be, to coincide as nearly as practicable with the time when such money is expected to be withdrawn for use hereunder, and any proceeds thereof shall be deposited in the Reserve Fund. When all the interest on and the principal of the Notes has been paid, any balance of money then remaining in the Reserve Fund shall be used for any lawful District purpose. Section 9 . The District hereby agrees and covenants that, until payment in full of all the interest on and the principal of the Notes (or provision satisfactory for such payment shall have been made) , it will: A. Duly and punctually pay or cause to be paid the interest on and the principal of the Notes in accordance 18 with the conditions and terms thereof, and with the conditions and terms of this resolution. B. Incur no additional indebtedness or capital lease obligations payable from taxes received by the District having any priority in payment of the interest on or the principal of the Notes. C. Incur no additional indebtedness or capital lease obligations payable from taxes received by the District on a parity in payment of the interest on or the principal of the Notes unless it shall have first filed with the Paying Agent a certificate executed by the Treasurer of the District, showing: 1 . The taxes received by the District in its most recent audited fiscal year, as shown by the most recent audited financial statement of the District, plus the total subventions in lieu of taxes received by the District from the State of California in such fiscal year, less the total debt service paid by the District in such fiscal year on all indebtedness or capital lease obligations of the District incurred prior to June 6, 1978; 2 . The total debt service payable by the District during its next succeeding fiscal year on all indebtedness or capital lease obligations of the District, including debt service on such additional indebtedness, less the total debt service payable by the 19 District in such fiscal year on all indebtedness or capital lease obligations of the District incurred prior to June 6, 1978; 3 . That the total defined in subparagraph 1 above is at least 115% of the total defined in subparagraph 2 above. D. Prepare and adopt a budget for each fiscal year, which budget shall provide as a priority item for the payment of the interest on and the principal of the Notes (together with all other indebtedness or capital lease obligations of the District incurred subsequent to June 6, 1978) becoming due and payable in such fiscal year and for appropriations fully sufficient to make such payments. A copy of each preliminary budget shall be filed with the Paying Agent within twenty (20) days of its adoption and a copy of each final budget shall be filed with the Paying Agent within twenty (20) days of its adoption. E. Make no use of the proceeds of the Notes which would cause the Notes to be "arbitrage bonds" under Section 103 (c) of the Internal Revenue Code; and, to that end, so long as any of the Notes are outstanding, comply with all requirements of said section and the regulations of the United States Department of the Treasury thereunder, to the extent that such regulations are, at the time, applicable and in effect. 20 Section 10. The Secretary of the Board is directed to cause the Notes to be prepared to comply with the provisions hereof, and to procure their execution by the proper officers of the Board, and to deliver them, when so executed, to the Treasurer of the District, who shall deliver them to the purchaser thereof upon receipt of the purchase price thereof. The President of the Board and the Secretary of the Board are further authorized and directed to make, execute and deliver to the purchaser of the Notes a signature certificate in the form customarily required by purchasers of notes of public districts, certifying to the genuineness and due execution of the Notes, and said Treasurer is hereby authorized and directed to make, execute and deliver to the purchaser of the Notes a receipt in the form customarily required by purchasers of notes of public districts, evidencing the payment of the purchase price and the delivery of the Notes, which receipt shall be conclusive evidence that the Notes have been duly paid for and delivered. The purchaser of the Notes and any subsequent registered owner of the Notes is hereby authorized to rely upon and shall be justified in relying upon any such signature certificate and any such receipt with respect to the Notes issued and delivered pursuant to the authority of this resolution. Section 11 . The Board hereby determines that the issuance and delivery of the Notes is not subject to prior investigation, report and approval by the Districts 21 Securities Division of the Office of the California State Treasurer under the Districts Securities Investigation Law of 1965, by reason of the fact that the amount of outstanding indebtedness of the District plus the principal amount of the Notes does not exceed one-quarter ( 1/4) of two hundred per cent (200%) of the assessed value of the land and improvements within the District, as shown on the last equalized assessment rolls of the County of Santa Clara and the County of San Mateo. The Secretary of the Board is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution, together with evidence as to the foregoing, with the Districts Securities Division of the Office of the California State Treasurer, with the request that written notice be given to the Secretary of the Board that the Notes do not appear to be subject to prior investigation, report and approval under the Districts Securities Investigation Law of 1965 . Section 12 . The Notes are hereby sold to Stone & Youngberg at a price of Dollars ($ ) , together with accrued interest thereon from their date to the date of delivery thereof, in accordance with the Purchase Agreement with respect to the Notes, a copy of which is on file with the Secretary of the Board, and the President of the Board is authorized to execute such Purchase Agreement for and on behalf of the District. 22 Section 13 . The Board, having been advised by its staff that the Official Statement for the Notes prepared by Stone & Youngberg accurately reflects the financial conditions and other factors relating to the affairs of the District and having carefully reviewed such Official Statement, hereby approves and authorizes distribution by Stone & Youngberg of such Official Statement to potential purchasers of the Notes in the form presented to the Board at this meeting. Section 14. This resolution shall take effect from and after its passage and approval . PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of February, 1985, by the following vote: AYES: Directors NOES: ABSENT: APPROVED: President of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District [SEAL] ATTEST: Secretary of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 23 SECRETARY' S CERTIFICATE I , Secretary of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula. Regional Open Space District, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Board of Directors of said District duly and regularly and legally held at the regular meeting place thereof on the day of February, 1985, by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members of said Board, of which meeting all of the members of said Board had due notice and at which meeting at least two-thirds thereof were present and acted; that at said meeting said resolution was, upon motion of Director seconded by Director adopted by the following vote: AYES: Directors NOES: ABSENT: I do hereby further certify that I have carefully compared the same with the original minutes of said meeting on file and of record in my office, and that said resolution is a full, true and correct copy of the original resolution adopted at said meeting and duly entered of record in said minutes, and that said resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded since the date of its adoption and the same is now in full force and effect. WITNESS my hand this - day of February, 1985. Secretary of the Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District [ SEAL] M-85-19 (Meeting 85-03 , 1146 February 13 , 1985) AW 0 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 7 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; M. Gundert, Associate Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Final Adoption of Interim Use and Management Plan for the Hybl Property Addition to Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Introduction: At your meeting of December 19 , 1984 you approved the proposed Hybl Property addition of the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve (see attached reports R-84-53 , dated December 13 , 1984 and R-84-05 , dated January 25 , 1984) . You also tentatively adopted the use and management plan recommendations contained in the report and stated your intention to dedicate the property. In accordance with the Land Acquisition Public Notification Procedures see memorandum M-83-106 dated August 31 1983 final ( g adoption of the interim use and management plan was deferred until close of escrow on the property to allow for public comment. The stipulated judgement on the Hybl property was recorded on January 18 , 1985 , and the District thereby took title. To date, staff has received no public comment. Recommendation: I recommend you adopt the use and management plan as contained in reports R-84-53 and R-84-05 for the Hybl property addition to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve and that you dedicate the pro- perty as public open space. R-84-53 VMeeting 84-28 0-0 December 19 , 1994) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT December 13, 1984 TO: 3oard of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RIESPONZIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Hansen, Land Manager; M. Gundert, Associate Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve (Hyb1 Property) Discussion: On January 25 , 1984 , you passed Resolution 84-2 finding and requiring that the public interest and necessity required the acquisition of the subject property (see report R-84-05, dated January 17, 1934) . Since that time, staff has worked with the property owner, his attornevs, and District attorneys to achieve an amicable resolu- tion for the acquisition of this critical parcel. A voluntary settle- ment- has been reached, but because the Hybls have withdrawn the court deposit, the final terms of purchase will be by stipulated judgment. This :weans that no contract, resolution, deed, or certificate of acceptanze is required. However, it is required that you approve the claim .for an additional $17 ,000 (a $208,000 deposit was made with the court at the time the District took possession of the property in order. to stop the environmental damage--firewood harvest--being done to the pro=e-.y by the owners) . The total figure of $225,000 was arrived at by mutual consent of the parties as a fair price, considering all factors includin7 accrued interest from the date of possession and a composite of two se=arate appraisals that were completed for the property. The funding for the purchase would be all cash and be charged against the Previous Land Commitments budget category. A. Existing Use and Management Plan the 7nterLm Use and Management Plan from report R-84-05 is reiterated as f:)Iiows: (1) The travel trailer will be removed and the site cleared of debris and returned to its natural state. Status: The travel trailer and debris were removed by the owner in the spring. (2) The site will be managed as a natural area and remain open to hikers and eauestrians. R-84-53 Page Two B. New Use and Management Recommendations (1) The barrier across Crazy Pete's Road at the entrance to the subject property will remain where it is while a more appropri- ate location for a District gate and stile is determined. Funding costs of $900 should be included in fiscal year 1985-86 budget preparation. C. Dedication The property should be dedicated as public open space. D. N eLm e The property should become' an addition to the CoalCreek Open Space Preserve and be known by that name. Recommendation: I recommend that you authorize the expenditure of an additional $17 ,000 from the above-named budget category for acquisition of the Hybl property by approving item # 7788 on the attached claims list. I further recommend that you adopt the use and management recommendations made in this report and officially name the site as an addition to Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. Finally, I recommend that you dedicate this parcel as public open space. Since this matter was before you previously and the adjoining owners were notified in accordance with required procedures, this would be the final adoption of the Interim Use and Management plan. -84-05 _ ,teeting 84-05 /► January 25, 1984) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT January 17, 1984 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods, Open Space Planner; M. Gundert, Associate Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Determination of Public Necessity - Proposed Addition to Co al Creek ert P Open Space Preserve (Hybl Pro P Property) Introduction: The 14 .95 acre Hybl property is located between two portions of the District's Coal Creek Open Space Preserve and links the two into one contiguous unit (see attached map) . Located along Skyline Boulevard, the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve helps to form the scenic backdrop to the Town of Portola Valley and is an important public land holding in the proposed development of the Skyline Trail . k A. Description of the Site (1) Location and Boundaries. The subject property is located on Crazy Pete's Road, approximately one-half mile northeast of its intersection with Skyline Boulevard, and is bounded by private property to the north, west, and south and by the District's Coal Creek Open Space Preserve to the east and west. Besides the close proximity of the property to the Coal Creek Open Space PReserve, it also is in close relation- ship to the Mt. Melville Area of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve, which is located approximately one-half mile to the west across Skyline Boulevard. (2) Topography, Geology and Natural Landscape. This rectangularly shaped parcel contains 14 .95 acres . The elevation ranges from 2080 feet along the southern border to 1720 feet along the northern border. The site slopes toward the northeast with a nearly level potential building pad centrally located on the site. The site is vegetated primarily in oak-madrone-Douglas fir forest. The current owner has removed mature tree growth from approximately a 2 .5 acre area in the center of the property, which appears to be in violation of Chapter 8 of San Mateo County's Excavating, Grading, Filling and Clearing Regulations governing vegetation removal . The area east of Skyline Boulevard extending from Page Mill Road to the Windy Hill Open Space Preserve is geologically unstable as evidenced by the major landslides on the former R-64-05 Page two Stallings and Fernandez properties (Coal Creek Open Space Preserve) , and the Windy Fill Open Space Preserve. Like those areas, the U.S. Geological Survey's Landslide Susceptibility in San Mateo County, California, 1978, indicates this site is in the highest susceptibility to landsliding rating category. The San Andreas Fault lies: approximately one mile to the northeast from the property. B. Planning Considerations The property is located within unincorporated San Mateo County and is within the Sphere of Influence of the Town of Portola Valley. The property is zoned Resource Management and, in accordance with the zonina, would be developable with one single family residence. Open space use of the land is con- sistent with the General Plan for San Mateo County. The Town of Portola Valley has an adopted Trails and Pathways Plan which indicates a mid-level trail that could extend through this property and eventually connect Alpine Road with the Windy Hill Open Space Preserve. The property has a medium rating on the District's Master Plan map, a composite rating indicating the suitability of land as open space. C. Current-Use and Development An area approximately 1 .5 acres in size is cleared of vegetation in the central portion of the site. The clearing of vegetation extends from a level pad on the southern portion of the site to the steeper side slopes overlooking the valley below. Located within the level clearing is a travel trailer and several vehicles. Crazy Pete's Road cuts through the southeastern corner of the property. A second road branches from Crazy Pete's Road, qoes through the level clearing on the site, and appears to terminate at the site's western boundary. D. Potential Use and Management Staff feels that the site, due to its natural characteristics, is a vital and integral part of the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. If acquired, the site would play an integral role in enhancing the trail system on the Preserve. In acquiring the surrounding Coal Creek Open Space Preserve, the District received a patrol easement across the subject property, which the current owner is attempting to realign to a location unacceptable to the District. Acquisition of the property would alleviate this easement problem and open this section of Crazy Pete 's Road to both public and patrol use, and create the potential for a connecting trail from Alpine Road to the Mt. Melville Area of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve through the meadows of the Coal Creek Preserve. A short loop trail is also possible utilizing Crazy Pete's Road through the property and a trail which branches from Crazy Pete's Road towards the east, re- joining Crazy Pete's Road near its intersection with Alpine Road. The level area on the site would make an ideal resting/picnic spot for Preserve visitors . Delightful views of the valley and . San Francisco Bay Area are available to visitors from this spot. Page three E. Inte-ri-m Use and Management Recommendations travel trailer should be removed and the site cleared of dablris and returned to its natural state. (2) —,he site should be managed as a natural area and remain open to hikers and equestrians. F. Na=e 7-he prc-Derty should become an addition to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve and be known by that name. G. The property should be dedicated as public open space. H. Ter-=s On December 31, 1979, Joseph B. Hybl and Albert D. Plank acquired the subject property at a purchase price of $169,000 as one rural -residential site. Their original purpose was to build a home on speculation and sell it in a then rapidly expanding real estate market. The parcel was sold by Lynda L. Rose, and because her ow-n hone was located on the adjoining parcel to the south, the deed included a restrictive covenant that no improvements other than a termis court be built on the area directly below the Rose property and home. The partners had a falling out which finally culminated with Jack A. Eybl (Joseph B. Hybl 's father) perfecting title in his name by Trustee's Deed on January 27, 1981 . The District acquired the first unit of the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve, which adjoins the HVb1 property on two sides, on July 1 , 1982 by Resolution 82-25 (see report R-32-27, dated June 1, 1982) . On July 14, 1982, Joseph B. Hybl filed a lawsuit against Lynda Rose and Derr. L. Allen (the predecessors in interest to the easterly porticn of the Coal Creek Preserve) . The main purpose of the lawsuit was to abate the restrictive covenant created at the time of purchase by 'Elybl and to relocate Crazy Pete's Road as it passed through the F-Ybl property. Both of these aspects of the Hybl legal action were of concern to the District, since the restrictive covenant served to protect a highly visible portion, as seen from the Coal Creek Preserve, of the Hybl property from development. .P-lso, the portion of Crazy Pete's Road proposed for relocation was an area over which the District had an easement that was planned as a Fanger patrol road and possibly as a part of the over-all trail system for the Preserve. The new location of the road easement was unsatisfactory because of the gradient and soils stability. 'k-Fter learning of this legal action, the District contacted Joseph HEybi for the purpose of acquiring the property. It was then that staff learned that an approximately 2.5 acres area of the property had h-een essentially cleared of oak and madrone by the removal of nearl-v 100 cords of firewood. It was also evident from an inspection of the property that the new road easement location had been rough graded, and other aradina work had occurred on the property. During -,--e additional contacts were made with both Joseph and Jack Evbl by telephone and through Skywood Realty, which handled the original sale to Hybl . 7hrough- these discussions, it was our understanding that Joseph Hybl R-8 4-05 Paae four not only planned to build his own home on the property (rather than just a home for resale) , but also felt that if he could defeat the restrictive covenant, the parcel had the possibility of being divided into two sites, thus providing a profit on the entire development project. During the timte of the early contacts with Joseph Hybl, a planning study was conducted in which it became evident that not only would development of the Hybl parcel be detrimental to the adjacent preserve (including the relocation of the road easement) , but also that the property would be a very desirable acquisition for the District as the property would Drovide a natural trail and loop trail system corridor from the east portion of 'the preserve to- t'lhe west. Also the building pad area (the area of the restrictive covenant) would provide an ideal picnicking and public use area. During the negotiations process, it was evident that the owners would only consider selling the property on the basis of two sites and that they intended to proceed with their legal action to enhance the developability of the property. The District has obtained an outside a-ooraisal and made an Offer of Just Compensation accordingly. This offer is and continues to be unacceptable to the Hybls. it this point, because of the sensitive nature of the property, the proximity to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve, and the abundant public recreational potential of the site based on viewshed, trails potential and public recreational use, the only alternative is to acquire the property through the eminent domain process. This process would allow the Hybls to have a jury of their peers determine the Fair Market Value of the property and, therefore, the amount of compen- sation the public, through the District, would have to pay to acquire this priority parcel . It is hoped a negotiated settlement could be reached before that uoint. Because of the damage that has already occurred to the property as a result of fire wood removal and grading, the proposed resolution of necessity contains a provision for the District to deposit the appraised amount into a court trust fund (available to the owners) and take immediate possession of the property. Reco=endation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Finding and Determining That the Public Interest and Necessity Require the Acquisition of Certain Properties for Public Use, To Wit , for Public Park, Recreation and Open Space Purposes, Describing the Properties - Necessary Therefore and Authorizing and Directing Its Retained Legal Counsel to Do Everything Necessary to Acquire All Interests Therein (Coal Creek Open Space Preserve - Hybl Property) . I also recommend that you tentatively adopt the interim use and manage-ment plan contained in this report, and indicate your intention to dedicate this property. It is further recommended that you name the property as an addition to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. SITE 14AP /I. �'\•\��1W �, ,�:l,l��'•`ll'�LN.l•` 1'3 S_;� ••t��\j' �.-,�-.-,� —� -- ',_./'� �:�. �i,•- ii�j �\�1'„ . ^� -•��\s,.;.,X .'y ��• Coal Creek i t\ �=' ^ ;"�•' .` �',! „/�' '� �l N$1,1.;P '�. �� _ �� x ��i. Open Space PreserveI North [[ �� ;. ;."� .;sue- : ; ' ; ( ,� �, ;�J ' •roa `:.: �, ' Scale 1"=2000 ' rj �•'.. .� \��4"s sy-�"�`\' /-.� yg �� . ��_-= V. ,! ;` f � � 1' `ram v. ',,,Q l 1�� . �, f C ram• •..� o�`\ �� `� �r 1 r ry.��-� ` i �� Lards of �\ Rose � ` j ':y�'' �� \� `! ' _ 'Y:1' ��,• M. .MOM r _'.••� opose r- r , �,;( :�`' _ _ �. \,•f r Addition s; .IT 1,j 10 ��"�� ..�`` .��. r � ��, `•.....rr�'1��1 ✓ ". .� �1 .,� ��`i-. •9:\ `�{ .� , f ^•_` +!^-\\ -•'`�-yam .+ x..\`.• �-L, sue, %, � ,s%` ��.d,� + ` \./��\ ,�,,��.• tS}r-��''• �/� — - ••^_\. v��\\mac \ '`- '� Coal Creek `` ,�� os ncos ;T J 1� ,.�,��+ t t- 1 Open Space_ Preserve f� Space Preserve L"` � ol .y/ r L� _ ,•1 ' l!`:I w _�y�1 �1 �Q-� 1,r ` / `'�r � {'-�l `'4c. / � q�4�y -.. `f i �'��\l"� ,\`� --r_ �-•" �a �``~ onte Bello Rus ,\u .:, _ .'�' - - ` .. �_ :>D,�.�' . •��..// ;'^ M `' -. sian Ridge •+ Hit! � _Open Space PreserveD 1 ` ace ,• � a. , _ ,-. .�,-• \ . � ,'Open S Preserve ,. t I i f '• ..,, i}� ��` / t} iJ ,-zS �` `�-.� .• '� _\ � \ �`-'=ate ' ' •.� _� ,-- `\\� ``�\\ �sue`�.?q°�` /�' ' �/r�7'h�� -` \`�.��t- --/<''�s �!/�Cxs—�i '� � � i' =r'! �� ,i1 r�c,`2c�?; 1 �' s_-�a��.,1 r= (� - •�8f i � Z + i;eSy'ir.r 'J� ` �P ( �,'1 '_^ �/�-�a+�• r�\ ` fi i '` '�}+f � `; 0 $'1, r \ a � to itRaaci.��i - ��7 •�- � , \L �,�;,�� '�.` 4-l•'/r,I 4 f\1.4��i�, \�''•�s ..��.ti.i�/ .i �� BIW. 115 =.a a 1 "`f)1!,'�,� �,� , ; �_.- .� ( � ;- • Sky Ridge Open Space Preserve t`! .��`�_ 3\,'` F%"; !� ` •.�' r � �, ��"�J^�J` o•.. , \ r 7i'�\��,!� //'7;�?ate � 1•t'1 j 1��f' XZ IN IR ja RESOLUTION NO. 84-2 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE ACQUISI- TION OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES FOR PUBLIC USE, TO WIT, FOR PUBLIC PARK, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PURPOSES, DESCRIBING THE PROPERTIES NECESSARY THEREFORE AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING ITS RETAINED LEGAL COUNSEL TO DO EVERYTHING NECESSARY TO ACQUIRE ALL INTERESTS THEREIN (COAL CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - HYBL PROPERTY) WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is authorized to acquire property for public purposes, pursuant to Division 5 , Chapter 3 , Section 5542 , of the Public Resources Code, State of California, and WHEREAS, the property, rights, and interests described in Exhibit A attached to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference (the "property") are necessary for public park, recreation, and open space purposes, said purposes constituting a public purpose, and WHEREAS, the. Offer of Just Compensation required by Section 7267 . 2 of the Government Code has been made to the owners and/or owners of record by and through their attorney, Mr. Walter H. Harrington, Jr. , by letter dated January 18 , 1984, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and determine that the public interest and necessity require the acquisi- tion of the property for public park, recreation, and open space purposes; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that acquisition of the fee (unless a lesser estate is described in Exhibit A) is necessary therefore; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby find and deter- mine that said property is located so as to be most compatible with the greatest public good and cause the least private injury; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager be and is hereby authorized and directed to cause to be negotiated and/or pre- pared all appropriate applications to governmental agencies for grants of funds or property, legal documents and related instruments for acquisition of title to the property by gift and/or purchase, all upon terms and conditions discussed by or presented to this Board at its meeting this date or customary to this District in like transactions; provided, however, that each such application, docu- ment and instrument shall be subject to approval as to form and content by this Board prior to its execution or delivery on behalf of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the law firm of Rogers, Vizza,rd & Tallett be and the same is hereby retained, instructed and directed to do everything necessary to acquire all interests in the property described in Exhibit "A" , and they are further authorized to prepare and prosecute such condemnation proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof as are necessary for such acquisition, including the obtaining of an order for immediate possession to prevent the development and/or destruction of such property, pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 1255. 410 et seq. DESCRIPTION The land herein referred to is situated in the State of California, County of San Mateo, and is described as follows: PARCEL I : Parcel "D" as shown on that certain map entitled "PARCEL MAP OF A RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL "3" AS SHOWN ON VOL. 22 P.M. PG. 49 , FILED IN S.M. CO. AND BEING DESCRIBED IN 7776 O.R. 1524 , SAN MATEO COUNTY , CALIFORNIA- , filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 17 , 1979 in Book 47 of Parcel Maps at pages 77 and 78. EXCEPTING THEREFROM all gas, oil and other hydrocarbon substances and all other minerals in and from said property as same was excepted and reserved in that certain Deed from Hugh Carpol, et al, to .Helen Tinker, et al , recorded April 16 , 1974 in Book 6592 of Official Records at page 60 (File No. 33586-AM) , Records of San Mateo County, California. PARCEL II: A non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress and utilities within so much of Parcel "A" as shown on that certain map entitled "PARCEL MAP OF A RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL "3" AS SHOWN ON VOL. 22 P.M. PG. 49, FILED IN S.M. CO. AND BEING DESCRIBED IN 7776 O.R. 1524 , SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA" , filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 17 , 1979 in Book 47 of Parcel Maps at pages 77 and 78 of which the centerline is designated "c - Existing 50 ' Road Ease. as per 22 P .M. 49 6592 O.R. 60 to benefit PCL'S, B, C, & Dn on said map. PARCEL III : A non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress and utilities within a portion of Parcels "B" and "C" as shown on that certain map entitled "PARCEL MAP OF A RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL "3 , AS SHOWN ON VOL. 22 P.M. PG. 49 , FILED IN S.M. CO. AND BEING DESCRIBED IN 7776 O.R. 1524 , SAN MATEO COUNTY , CALIFORNIA- , filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 17 , 1979 in Book 47 of Parcel Maps at pages 77 and 78 and a portion of Parcel 4 as shown on the Parcel Map entitled "BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE LANDS OF HUGh continued . . . . H I S I T__ A -- page of-2- CARPOL, ET AL, AND BEING A PORTION OF SECTIONS 8 AND 9 TOWNSHIP 7 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN- , filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on November 16, 1973 in Book 22 of Parcel Maps at pages 49 and 50. Said easement being a strip of land 40 feet in width lying equally on each side of the following described centerline: BEGINNING at a point on the Northeasterly line of Parcel "A" as shown on the first above mentioned map, said point being distant South 380 481 33" East, 26.57 feet from the Southeasterly terminius of that certain course shown as "N 580 461 18" W 312.25 ft." , on said map; thence from said point of beginning leaving said Northeasterly line, North 190 431 57" East 89.15 feet; thence North 36* 29' 12" East 79.38 feet; thence North 490 00 ' 42" East 125 feet; thence North 25* 461 12" East 93 feet; thence North 8* 50 ' 25" East 284 .64 feet to the most Southerly corner of Parcel I above described and the terminius of said center line. The sidelines of said easement to be lengthened or shortened so as to form a continuous 40 foot easement extending from said Northeasterly line of Parcel "A" to the Southwesterly and Southeasterly lines of Parcel I herein. PARCEL IV: A non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress and utilities within a portion of Parcel "A" as shown on that certain map entitled "PARCEL MAP OF A RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL "3" AS SHOWN ON VOL. 22 P.M. PG. 49 , FILED IN S.M. CO. AND BEING DESCRIBED IN 7776 O.R. 1524, SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA" , filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Mateo County, State of California on August 17, 1979 in Book 47 of Parcel Maps at pages 77 and 78 , more particularly described as follows: A strip of land 10 feet in width measured at right angles, the Northeasterly line of said easement being coincident with those certain courses designated as No. 28 and 36 on said map. EXCEPTING THEREFROM so much as lies within Parcel II above. A.P. No: 080-260-090 EXHIBIT Page 2 R-85-15 (Meeting 85-03 , February 13 , 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 8 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods , Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Results of Stable Study for Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve Introduction : On September 26 , 1984 , the Use and Management Plan review for the Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve was brought before you (refer to report R-84-41 , dated September 20 , 1984) . At that meeting, there was a great deal of discussion by staff and through public testimony regarding the issue of retaining the stable operation. The Board decision was that staff return sometime within the next four to six months with a proposal for a stable operation which best serves the public, mitigates the environmental concerns that have been raised, meets the County ' s requirements , does not include a rental or breeding operation, and maintains a traffic pattern at or below the current level . Staff was also directed to consider other sites on the Preserve or on the County Park for the stable. The following report has been prepared to inform you of the progress of the proposed stable plan and the status of the current lease agreement. Discussion: To date, staff has completed the initial steps in the planning process for the stable operation. In an attempt to determine the appropriate location, an analysis of all possible alternative sites on the Preserve and County Park was conducted. Secondly, we have investigated the preparation of an economic study. It appears this would involve considerable expense if the District contracts for services of a private economic planning firm. The results of these two steps have indicated that to proceed with the plan- ning process , a decision should be made as to the desired location and a concensus reached on whether or not to prepare a detailed economic study. The following discussion addresses these points in more detail . A) Analysis of Sites : The attached chart summarizes the analysis of the existing and alternative stable sites (see Table I) . A brief description of the major problems and attributes is also provided to explain the chart. Our conclusion is that given the existing and future contraints , i .e. , environmental , recreational , and financial , there appears to be no parti- cularly suitable location for a stable on public lands in the Rancho area. The current stable site (D) and the one suggested at Ravensbury (A) are the least desirable locations . Site F, the equestrian parking area at the County Park, would have the least environmental impact in relationship to the other sites but, even at that, there are significant problems to overcome. Initial consultation with County staff indicates that they are not inter- ested in a stable use at Rancho San Antonio County Park. Their draft five year plan indicates no equestrian facility improvements through 1989 . R-85-15 Page 2 This plan, however, does indicate acquisition of land between the park and Permanente Road and adjacent to the equestrian parking lot (owned by the Archdiocese of San Jose) which would be the most ideal site in the area for an equestrian facility. This acquisition, however, while listed on the five year plan, has no allocation of funds over the five year per- iod and is of low priority to the County. County staff members have indicated that the existing stable site on the former Consigny property in lower Stevens Creek Park offers better oppor- tunity for an improved stable operation. Whether the High Meadow Stable operation could be moved in the near future to this site is unknown due to existing tenants and low planning priority by County staff to upgrade the Consigny stable. This facility consists of approximately 15 stalls and a riding ring and does not currently have access to a public trail system. Its small size and lack of trail access could be limiting factors in its feasibility, but these things have not been explored in detail . B. Economic Feasibility: In an effort to understand better the economic viability of a stable operation, staff contacted the consulting firm of Greig and Associates who have conducted similar recreational economic studies for public agencies (see attached letter to me, dated January 4 , 1985) . Their initial response indicates that stable operations generally are marginally profitable enterprises and most often must be subsidized in some fashion. They also indicate that for stables to be marginally pro- fitable a wide range of services and facilities should be offered which usually mean a great deal of initial capital outlay. Based on this infor- mation, it would appear that to proceed with the stable plan it should be recognized that significant private and/or public funding may be required both initially and on an ongoing basis in order to provide an acceptable public stable facility. If it is the decision of the Board to proceed in this direction, the next step in the planning process would be to contract with a planning firm to conduct a detailed economic analysis based on a specific stable location. It is estimated that this study would cost approximately $5 ,000; the pros- pects appear dim for a favorable result, based upon the initial response from the consultant. C. Current Tenant's Lease Compliance: In regard to the current tenant' s compliance with the conditions of the interim lease, some efforts have been made in respect to repairs , public safety, and clean-up. Refer to the attached memos to W. Tannenbaum, dated January 16 , 1985 , and to D. Hansen, dated January 15 , 1985 , and the copy of the letter to Beverly Fike from the Los Altos Fire Department for more detailed information. Of main concern to District staff is the continuing existence of mounds of manure on the site, especially immediately adjacent to the creek. The water tank has not as yet been installed for fire protection. There had been some problems with the tenant ' s dogs which have since been resolved. According to Ms . Fike , the stable has experienced a decline in patrons and now numbers only 15 boarders most of whom live in the Los Altos area but some who come from Burlingame , Saratoga, Cupertino, and Menlo Park. An additional 10 individuals are taking lessons at the stable. It has been suggested that most of the stable patrons have left due to the uncertainty of the future of the operation, but some seasonal decline occurs at this time as well . The tenant has indicated that if she were to discontinue her stable operation, a three year period would be needed R-85-15 Page 3 in order to accomplish an orderly transition and/or relocation. In the event a decision is made to phase out the stable, it might be mutually advantageous to the District and the tenant to arrange for the tenant's earlier departure from the premises in exchange for a lump sum payment. Recommendation: I recommend that you take the following course of action at this time: Based upon staff and consultant ' s analysis , pursue no further a stable oper- ation on the existing Rancho San Antonio County Park or Open Space Preserve due to environmental and economic constraints and direct staff to phase out the operation over a three year period at its current location. Alternative courses of action might be as follows : a) If an alternative site is to be pursued, that the Board Liaison Com- mittee meet with Santa Clara County Parks Commission members to pur- sue an alternative site on, or adjacent to, County Park lands; or, b) If the stable operation is to remain in its current location, sub- stantial District subsidies would be required to pay for upgrading and maintaining the operation, and a more detailed economic analysis should therefore be pursued. The substantial public policy issue of subsidization of a boarding operation serving a limited number of District constituents (and others , perhaps) must be addressed, pre- ferably before any further studies are done. An option to sell the land containing the stable to the tenant may be a possibility but it must be understood that it would not be desirable in the long term due to the continuing environmental impacts and site planning con- straints . STABLE SITE ANALYSIS Site A - End of Ravensbury The area which has been examined is near the intersection of the Ravensbury trail and Rogue Valley. It is a relatively flat and open area on the valley bottom with densely vegetated side slopes . Many of the topographic characteristics of this site are similar to those of the current stable location. The valley is rather narrow, here, with an in- termittent creek bordering the north side. The intense use of this site for stable purposes could have a significant impact on the water quality of the creek. Three recreational trails converge at this location, and because it would be difficult to separate the trail users from the stable area, user conflicts could be expected. The intersecting trails include the Rogue Valley Trail , the Wildcat Loop Trail , and the Ravensbury Trail which connects to the Ravensbury and Mora entrance. It is estimated the Wildcat Loop Trail , itself , receives well over half of the site 's trail use. Access to this site would require the clearing and widening of the Ravensbury Trail . The trail is now approximately 10 feet wide, 700 feet long, and close- ly parallels a creek in a dense riparian corridor. The intrusion of vehicular traffic in this corridor as well as Rogue Valley would not be desirable. There are currently no utilities near this site. Electricity, telephone, and water could most likely be brought in via the Ravensbury trail . The cost would be high compared to the other sites analyzed but not nearly as high as the site of the existing stable. Site B - The Mora Drive Entrance The area surrounding the Mora Drive gate is a relatively flat open grassland site which was considered because of its ease of access and location along the edge of the Preserve. The major problem with this site is its visibility. The P.G. & E. trail and Wildcat Loop Trail have panoramic views of the valley and this open grassland is unique to the urban landscape. Because of its openness it also serves as a viewing area for wildlife, particularly deer and coyotes. Another disadvantage is the close proximity of the area to the adjacent neigh- borhood. There are a number of homes which are situated within viewing and hearing distance of the site which could very well lead to conflicts . The noise of a stable operation along with flies and dust would not be a welcome addition to the neighborhood. The off-site traffic impact would be significant as Mora Drive is a rural , narrow and steep street which is currently used only by area residents . The traffic generated by a stable would most likely be objectionable to the neigh- borhood. The potential trail conflicts should be mentioned because, although they would be considered moderate at this time, they would most likely become high in the near future. There are plans to construct a major trail from the Mora Drive gate to the valley floor which will provide two loop trails merging in this area. Site C - Meadow at Preserve Entrance This site is located north of the main entry road and consists of a large flat oak woodland bounded by creeks on three sides . It serves as a valuable wildlife habitat and picnic area. The open meadows on both sides of the entry road have been considered one of the major natural and scenic attributes of the Preserve. The addition of structures and traffic in this area would mean a significant change in the character of the Preserve, one that would not be received well by the majority of users . The area is already subject to a great deal of pedestrian and vehi- cular traffic and any new levels of use would be difficult to manage. Assuming that access were to be allowed through the St. Joseph' s entrance, there would undoubtedly be strong objection from the neighborhood residents . During the past few years , emphasis has been placed on deterring traffic and parking problems along St. Joseph ' s Avenue. It is probable the residents would find horsetrailer traffic even more objectionable than passenger vehicles. There are no developed utilities in this area with the exception of telephone lines which are underground along the entry road. Water and electricity would most likely have to be brought in to the site from the ranger facility. Site D - Existing Site A comprehensive analysis of this site was included in the Use and Management Review for Rancho San Antonio (see report R-84-41 , dated September 20 , 1984) . To summarize the analysis in that report, the major concerns include negative impacts on water quality in Rogue Valley, crucial conflicts with trail plan- ning and trail users in the area, high negative visual impact, very high costs of improving the access road the three-quarters of a mile from Ravensbury Road. The narrowness of the canyon in the area stymies trail development past the stable unless buildings are resited. Current manure disposal methods have a high impact on water quality in the creek and then, even with an actively managed manure removal program, coliform bacterial levels would remain high in the creek due to the intensity of many animals in stalls in a small area. Holding ponds to settle run-off from the stalls are not possible here. Regarding utilities , even with the latest technology (i .e. , cellular phones) , the costs for piping in water and electricity still would be well over the $200,000 figure. The visual impacts of the rambling, makeshift buildings, stalls, trailers , vehicles, and exercise areas are high and could only be mitigated by an approved architectural site plan, extensive landscaping, building resiting and improvement and a better circulation plan for foot and vehicle traffic. Implementation of this would be expensive. Site E - Ballfield The ballfield location is adjacent to the tennis courts at the County Park. It is a large flat turfed area which is accessible from the lower County parking area. The proposed vehicle bridge across Permanente Creek (near the restrooms) will enhance access to this area and would negate the need to increase traffic on St. Joseph' s. The site is in close proximity to a major creekand a stable operation would lead to a significant impact on water quality. The hillside rises sharply to the west which would make it difficult to position the facility far enough from the creek to allow for adequate erosion control. A major concern for any development in this area is the potential trail con- flicts that may occur. Almost all trail users pass through this site to gain access to the Preserve trails from the County park. It would be undesirable to direct visitors to the hillside trail as it would only dis- courage use by many, including families and the elderly. There is not sufficient width in the area for the major access trail and a stable facility without insurmountable management problems . In all other respects , it could be considered an acceptable site, but due to the strategic location in the trail system and the inability to control stream pollution, it is not recommended for consideration. Site F - South Eauestrian Lot This site would be the most desirable of the five sites analyzed, but even at that, it has some serious limitations. The area analyzed is immediately adjacent to and northerly of the equestrian parking lot within the County Park. It is a flat open grassland area bounded by Permanente Creek to the west and a hillside to the east. The limitations of this site are centered around its close proximity to the creek and an apparent underground seepage problem. The presence of water tolerant vegetation in the flat area indicates extensive grading and drainage work would be required. There is sufficient space, though, to try to overcome the drainage and potential water pollution problems, but it would be an expensive undertaking. Other limitations include potential trail conflicts, visual impact on the creekside corridor and moderately high cost of bringing utilities to this portion of the site. It should be noted that the potential trail conflicts could be minimized by rerouting the PG&E trailhead northerly towards the existing bridge. An area directly south of this site and outside the County Park was observed as having all the same characteristics of the above but without the serious drainage problems. In addition, it appeared to have existing utilities. It has not received the same considerations as the other five sites because it is under private ownership and thereby not feasible at this time. TABLE I. ALTERNATIVE STABLE SITE ANALYSIS Rancho San Antonio Preserve Rancho San Antonio County Park A. Ravensbury B. Mora Drive C. Meadow D. Existing E. Ballfield F. So. Equestrian Lot 1. Potential trail conflicts High Moderate Low High High Moderate 2. Negative impact on water quality High Low Moderate High High High 3. Negative visual impact High High High High Moderate Moderate 4. On-site traffic impact High Low Hig Moderate Low Low 5. Off-site traffic impact Moderate High High Moderate Low Low 6. Clearing requirement High Low Moderate Low Low Low 7. Grading requirement Moderate Moderate Low Low Low High 8. Cost of utility improvements High Moderate High High Moderate Moderate 9. Cost of access improvements High Low Low High Low Low 10. Potential neighbor conflicts Low High Low Moderate Low Low � w Ravensbury Mora Dr. r In to state 280 _ . St. Joseph's , _ •_• _ _ Ave. � _ B \ •- •—�• - _ ,q: �\ Preserve Entrance �(No vehicles) Los Altos '''� ~•� i ; Seminary .-•,.� �'�.,�:T•�.--•�•�_ '•-'�� Wildcat -•-•' J `• `•Gate �� E Park •.•� / '' %^• •�.� Loop Trail tJ�'-'`� Gate` �i �� ` Entrance •—• wildcat ��' Rancho .� Deer Hollow •� -"' - •� Canyon Farm ' San Antonio Parkin g Ranger • . �•�•-• (Hiking only) Office County Park F Foothill Blvd. .,• `.\ a Gate of Heaven Rancho San Antonio . Cemetery Private Property Open Space Preserve '� Equestrian •` Parking Trail (Hiking only) Trail (Hiking equestrian) _______ _ Trail (Hiking bicycling) North Public Road R E I G & A S S O C I A T E S January 4, 1985 Herbert A. Grench General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos, California 94022 Dear Mr. Grench: In response to a request from Craig Britten, I am writing to provide some basic information on the economics of boarding stables and related equestrian facilities that may be of assistance to you in your consideration of alternatives for the District's current stable lease in Los Altos Hills. My comments are based upon experience in evaluating equestrian and other outdoor recreation facilities in California and elsewhere for county and federal agencies including the San Diego County Parks and Recreation Department, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. They are not based upon a specific investigation of the High Meadow Boarding Stable or other equestrian facilities in the Los Altos Hills area. I have, however, confirmed the general validity of these comments to the midpeninsula area with knowledgeable local sources. Types of Facilities Equestrian stables can encompass a range of activities and facilities. Most local stables are, however, one of the following two types of operations: • Boarding and training stables; or • Boarding, training, and rental stables. The boarding and training stables board and feed horses for a fee, provide training for horses and may provide private riding lessons for riders. Rental horses are generally not available. Rental horses are found in the other type of facility which may maintain school horses for use in riding lessons or, in a few cases, a string of rental horses for use by the general public. Boarding can be provided in three types of facility: • Enclosed barns with box stalls (the most desireable); Real Estate Strategies 2040 Edgewood Drive Palo Alto,California 94303 Herbert A. Grench January 4, 1985 Page Two • outdoor paddocks, with or without sheds to provide partial shelter; or • Group corrals, with no shelter. Ancillary amenities provided by a stable can include jumping courses, riding rings, bull pens and show rings, grandstand facilities, a clubhouse with restaurant or vending machines, a tack shop, and access to a riding trail system. Services provided with boarding generally include feeding and cleaning, but can also include exercise, training, breeding, and sales. In addition to lessons, activities supported by a stable can include shows and meets, club membership and activities, and specialty rides (such as breakfast or barbecue rides) . Horse rentals to the public can be for lessons, for escorted or unescorted trail rides, or for specialty rides. Econcmic Characteristics Most equestrian facilities are not lucrative commercial ventures. The majority are operated by individuals motivated by a high level of committment to the sport rather than by profits. Owners, trainers, and industry observers agree that income from boarding operations are barely sufficient to cover costs, and that any profits come from fees for related activities and services such as training (for horses) , lessons (for riders), breeding, or sales of horses or tack. As a result, boarding is often provided only as an accomodation to potential customers for other services. The profitability of rental strings has been largely eliminated by the high cost of liability insurance and the threat of damage suits resulting from riding accidents. Even riding school operators providing close supervision usually require students to sign hold harmless agreements and disclaimers before allowing them to use school horses. In light of these factors, it is not realistic to assume that equestrian operations--particularly those devoted primarily to boarding--can pay a high lease rate for land or afford to build more than minimum cost structures. It is reasonable to assume, however, that a stable should be able to cover its own operating expenses and pay at least nominal rent while providing a good quality of service to its patrons. Herbert A. Grench January 4, 1985 Page Three Construction of a new stable facility on a better site within the park is likely to require some subsidy of initial capital costs if higher * quality buildings are to be specified or if major infrastructure improvements or extensions will be required at the new site. It is questionable whether a private, for-profit operator would be willing or able to commit to constuct more substantial and attractive new facilities given the marginal profitability of the existing type of boarding operation. Alternative Approaches Four basic apporaches appear to be available to the District for relocating the existing stable facility and/or replacing it with a new one. These are to: 1. offer a new boarding stable lease on a more appropriate site in the park for relocation of the existing operation or establishment of a new one. Specify minimum construction, maintenance, and operating standards that must be met by the lessee. 2. Seek a larger, more comprehensive stable operation that incorporates more facilities and services for the riding public--and is stronger economically. Specify minimum construction, maintenance, and operating standards as in the first option. 3. Design and construct new stables and related facilities to the District's specifications for lease to a concessionaire/operator. Tailor the facility to meet specific public recreational needs and to meet District environmental and public service objectives. Reserve the right to change concessionaires if maintenance and operating standards are not maintained. 4. Jointly develop an equestrian center with a combination of individually operated and shared multiple-use facilities for boarding, training, lessons, and/or riding events. Such a center could become a focal point for area equestrian activities. It could be participated in, and supported by, a variety of public and private entities. The center could be dedicated to specific types of activity--such as trail riding- -or incorporate more general purpose equestrian facilities-- such as riding rings and grandstands that could accommodate a range of local and regional equestrian events. Herbert A. Grench January 4, 1985 Page Four Under the first two alternatives, the District would provide a ground lease to an operator that would build and maintain a stable facility. These alternatives have the obvious attraction of minimizing the District's financial obligations, but realistically, may not result in a physical facility significantly more attractive than the current one. Requiring more expensive facilities may also produce a rapid turnover in operators. Providing or subsidizing construction of a new facility by the District (alternative 3) may be possible through grants from private or other public sources. While requiring a larger initial effort by the District, this approach provides much greater control over the nature and use of the facility and a better quality of service for the user- public. The final alternative requires the heaviest ccmittment to planning and organizational effort by the District, but could also produce the greatest public recreational benefit, limit demands on District resources to provision of the site, and provide a showpiece for the District illustrating a creative pooling of public and private resources. All of the above, however, assume that this type of use is reasonable and appropriate for the site and consistent with the District's management responsibilities and interests. I hope these observations and suggestions will be of assistance to the District in its consideration of alternatives. Clearly, a boarding stable should be viewed as a potentially self-supporting recreational facility rather a than as a profit-making venture likely to produce a surplus for the District. Please call me at (415) 424-0190 if you have any questions or if I can provide any further assistance. Sincerely, 'GREIG MSO D. Wylie tig Attachment. DW.,:is cc: David Hansen, Land Manager MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM January 16 , 1985 TO: B. Tannenbaum FROM: D. Hansen SUBJECT: High Meadow Stables - Lease Compliance Bill , I have attached Dave Camp's memo on the review of pertinent Land Management items regarding Beverly Fike 's lease. It appears she has made an attempt to comply but I am still very concerned with finishing thiS manure clean-up adjacent to the creek and with her making a con- sistent effort to remove manure mountain. Two other items of concern which you should be aware of are: 1) Stu Farwell of the L.A.F.D. is writing a letter to Beverly asking her to install, at the very minimum, a 5000 gal. water tank for fire protection by this summer. We may be able to assist Beverly by giving her a tank which is available on the former McNiel property if she can Pay for getting it moved, installed, and filled. 2) Jim B. tells me Beverly has lost the names and addresses of keyholders to our equestrian gate at Ravensbury. I am concerned about this as, aside from knowing (or not knowing) who holds keys to our gate, she still holds deposits which we should retain if she cannot find the list within a month. Attachment cc: - Del 1/15/85 V �• \il MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM TO: David Hansen, Jim Boland FROM: D. Camp SUBJECT: Observations at High Meadow Stables you requested. I visited 1/11/85. (Numbers/letters correspond to lease ) P ) 4b "Shall keep any buildings, fences, etc. in good repair." Some repair work to fences has been completed. They mentioned some more work that was in progress. 4c 1) Breeding operations - They have proposed screening one currently high roofed paddock area for breeding operations. It would not be visible from the trail, but will be visible from the road above. They have only 3 mares scheduled in at this time. (She stated they have not advertised as in the past because of our skepticism, i.e. , breeding operations) . It seems to me if screening from view is our concern, it would probably work, but I told her it would need your specific appro- val. 2) "Stallions shall be kept in a restricted area, stallion stalls will be labeled as such." All stallion stalls are labeled. Some are quartered inside the large barn which must be restricted; however, several are quartered adjacent to trail. Beverly said they are all very mild mannered, of course. 5. "Keep premises free from trash and other debris." Place has been cleaned up quite a bit. One pile area just below riding ring remaining she states is being removed by a jogger who, uses it for firewood. "Tenant shall provide garbage cans." 3 garbage cans I saw in riding ring area. a) "Tenant shall remove all shavings and manure adjacent to and in Permanente Creek." Quite a bit has been removed. There is still some adjacent to and in. Most of this is handwork. Manure mountain is still there and being added to. 3�7 doesn't appear that manure is being removed weekly, although I forgot to confirm. b) "Maintain and repair trails." Blue rock has been added to road near riding ring. c) Adequate drainage - Trail area entering from Rogue and past first two barn building� is still quite wet. Beverly said that income during last half of this year was $7000 less than first half due to people unwilling to board at stables due to stables' uncertainty. Because of loss of income, she states she has had to reduce hired helpers from 3 to 1. She would like to know date of next hearing, our plans to repair entrance road, and would like to be considered for "structure estimator consultant." (?) She also mentioned that she felt our consultant's figures may have been out of line with local figures, i.e. , lumber costs, feed, etc. (She said he was from Fairfield.) CITY OF LOS ALTOS FIRE DEPARTMENT JOHN T. SANDERS, Chief #10 ALMOND AVENUE TELEPHONES LOS ALTOS, CALIFORNIA 44022 BUSINESS-948.2404 January 22, 1985 EMERGENCY-948.1071 Mrs. Beverly Fike 23170 Ravensbury Avenue Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 Subject: Fire Protection - High Meadow Stable , Dear Mrs. Fike: As you may or may not know, the Los Altos Fire Department has been working with the Open Space District and the City of Mountain View on upgrading the fire protection needs in the Rancho San Antonio area. This currently includes a new 4" water line to the homes and farm in the lower Preserve area. Iamvr e concerned with fire protection needs in the Upper Rogue y p ee s e pp Valle where y area ere your stable operation is located. This is due not I� only to the adjacent expensive homes, the steep slopes with their highly combustible chaparral plants in the area, but the lack of adequate water to effectively fight even a small fire in or adjacent to your stable area. With this in mind, the Los Altos Fire Department requests that you install a 5000 gallon water tank minimum near the stable which will gravity feed a valve suitable for our fire trucks to utilize. This tank should be filled with water at all times, especially during the dry season, and should not be used for general stable needs. The tank should be installed at this time and be ready for use by May 1 , 1985. 1 have discussed this matter with Open Space District personnel . They concur with my request and have indicated that they have a surplus tank at the former McNeil ranch on Monte Bello which may be adequate for fire protection needs if you arrange to move and install it. Please do not hesitate to call me for details on the request. I would be willing to meet with you in person to discuss the matter. Very_ctruly yours, Stuart Farwell Assistant Fire Chief cc: David Hansen Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District JAN R-85-10 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13, 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 8 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Procedure for Implementation of Brown Act Amend- ments Regarding Land Negotiations Introduction: At your meeting of January 23 , 1985 you considered two reports regarding the effects of SB 2216. The first was report R-85-05, dated January 16, 1985, from S . Norton to you entitled "1984 Amendments to Government Code Sections 54956. 8 and 54956 . 9 (The Brown Act) by SB 2216" (copy attached) . That report dealt with the codifi- cation of the attorney-client privilege as it relates to discussing pending litigation in closed session. It also discussed requirements necessary to meet the wording and spirit of the bill for closed session discussions of land negotiations. My report R-85-06, dated January 17 , 1985, discussed a "Proposed Procedure for Implementing Brown Act Amend- ments Regarding Land Negotiations" (copy attached) . At that meeting you directed Legal Counsel to prepare a resolution and the General Manager to prepare the map and list to implement the proposed procedure regarding land negotiations. You scheduled the matter for further consideration in February. Discussion: Legal Counsel ' s draft resolution is attached and is self- explanatory. The parcel map overlay to the Master Plan and the list of owners will be available at your February 13 meeting. It must be emphasized that the map and list do not represent parcels the District intends to acquire; it represents no more than a compilation of par- cels which may properly be discussed in closed session. The effort has been to be as complete as possible in mapping parcels within the District ' s planning area rather than to make any judgments about speci- fic parcels, the potential acquisition of which would depend upon the many factors listed in the Master Plan document. Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Reqional Open Space District Approving Overlay to District Master Plan Dated February 13, 1985, in Conformity With Government Code Section 54956. 8 (S.B. 2216-- Chapter 1126 of 1984) . i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING OVERLAY TO DISTRICT MASTER PLAN, DATED FEBRUARY 13, 1985 IN CONFORMITY WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956. 8 (S.B. 2216--Chapter 1126 of 1984) WHEREAS, in the 1984 session the Legislature of the State of California enacted Section 54956. 8 of the Government Code (S.B. 2216--Chapter 1126 of 1984) to enable local legislative bodies to meet in closed session under specified conditions to give instruc- tions to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange or lease of real property, and WHEREAS, the author of the legislation, Senator Barry Keene, in his letter to District dated December 13 , 1984 , a copy of which is affixed hereto and by reference made a part hereof, set forth the intent of the bill by providing the District with "a procedure that gives the notice that the law contemplates without overburdening the District or compromising its ability to reach favorable acquisition agreements; " NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The Overlay to the Master Plan of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District captioned "Master Plan Map Overlay" , dated February 13, 1985, identifies the possible real property or real properties which future acquisition nego- tiations may concern, and the accompanying "Property Owners on Master Plan Map Overlay" , dated February 13 , 1985, identifies the names of the owners of the parcels as shown on the most recent assessment rolls of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties, which documents are and shall remain a matter of public record. Section 2 . The General Manager and his authorized representatives are authorized to negotiate regarding the purchase, sale, exchange or lease of any of the properties shown on the Overlay with the owners of record, and with the current owners as their interests may appear, and with their authorized representatives. Section 3. The purpose of this Resolution is solely to implement the provisions of SB 2216 to enable the Board of Directors to meet in closed session to confer with its land acquisition negotiator in appropriate circumstances. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the authority of the staff to conduct discussions with any land owner or his or their authorized representatives with respect to any property. Section 4. Nothing herein shall be construed to show an intent by the Board of Directors, or of the District, to acquire any, some or all of the parcels of property described on the Overlay. The purpose of this Resolution, as herein- above set forth, is only to establish the Board' s policy for meeting in closed session in appropriate circumstances. Section 5. The Board of Directors hereby reaffirms its policy that the District ' s decisions to acquire land, or interests therein, shall be made in open public meeting, after announcement in the District ' s publicly issued agenda. Section 6. The provisions of this Resolution shall not apply to pro- ceedings for the acquisition of real property by exercise of the District' s power of eminent domain, such proceedings being expressly excepted by the provisions of Government Code Section 54956. 8 and governed, inter alia, by the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure Section 1245. 235. STATE CAPITOL, ROOM 2032 STANDING COMMITTEES: SACRAMENTO.CA 95814 (916)"S-3375 CHAIRMAN, JUDICIARY BANKING AND COMMERCE S33 G STREET GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION EUREKA. CA 95501 INSURANCE, CLAIMS AND (707)443-4816 CORPORATIONS (IT tt�t�IIrntj* �� yY��A LOCAL GOVERNMENT 631 TENNESSEE STREET JOINT COMMITTEES: VALLEJO.CA 94590 (707)557-0190 CHAIRMAN, FISHERIES AND AOUACULTURE LEGISLATIVE RETIREMENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND BARRY KEENE COUNCILS: SENATOR, 2ND DISTRICT COASTAL CONSERVANCY ' JUDICIAL COUNCIL LAW REVISION COMMISSION DEL NORTE. HUMBOLDT, MENDOCINO. WESTERN STATES LEGISLATIVE SOLANO AND SONOMA COUNTIES FORESTRY TASK FORCE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD CHAIRMAN, SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SELECT COMMITTEES: FOREST LANDS ISSUES MARITIME INDUSTRY December 13 , 1984 Mr. Herbert Grench, General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 Los Altos , California 94022. Dear Mr. Grench: At Ralph Heim' s request, I 'm writing to clarify my intent as the author of Senate Bill_ 2216 of. 1984 , which added Section 54956 .8 to the Government Code . At the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District' s request, I amended the bill to state: 54956 .8 Notwithstanding any other_ provision of this chapter, a. legislative body of a local agency may hold a closed session with its negotiator prior to the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease of real property by or for the local_ agency to give instructions to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange, or lease. However, prior to the closed session, the legislative body of the local agency shall hold an open and public session in which it identifies the real property or real properties which the negotiations may concern and the person or persons with whom its negotiator may negotiate. ` For the purpose of this section, the negotiator may be a member of the legislative body of the local agency. For purposes of this section, "lease" includes renewal or renegotiation of a lease. Nothing in this section shall preclude a. local agency from holding a closed session for discussions regarding eminent domain proceedings pursuant to Section 54956 .9 . (Emphasis added. ) The general intent of the section is to give the public reasonable, timely notice of what parcels may be bought , sold, -2- exchanged or leased, and who may sell, buy, exchange or lease them. As I understand your specific question, it is : Does adoption of your district' s master plan in. an open and public meeting satisfy the requirements of the second paragraph of the section.? The answer is "yes" if each of three conditions is met: 1 . The master plan identifies specific parcels for possible future acquisition, as I understand it does . 2. When your Board of Directors adopted the master plan, it made it clear to the public that it was authorizing negotiation for the specific parcels identified in the plan. If there is a serious question about whether the board made this clear at the time of adoption, I suggest that the board resolve the question now by specifically authorizing negotiations concerning the parcels in the master plan, or as many of them as the board cares to include in the authorization. 3 . The master plan includes the names of the owners of each of the specific parcels . The phrase "the person or persons with whom its negotiator may negotiate" is intended to mean the potential sellers , buyers , exchangers and leasers , not their attorneys or other negotiators . Again, if the master plan g g does not clearly identify the current owners of the parcels identified for possible acquisition, the board should satisfy the requirement by identifying them now in an open and public meeting. If, after the board satisfies the requirements of the second paragraph, it decides to authorize negotiations for any other parcels or with any other owners , it can simply identify the parcels and owners in another open meeting. I hope this answers your question and provides you with a procedure that gives the public the notice that the law contemplates without overburdening your district or compromising its ability to reach favorable acquisition agreements . Please feel free to contact me if I can provide you with any further information. j Sincerely, <BARRY KEENE BK:bgd I R-85-05 (Meeting 85-02 %Is 140 Jan. 23, 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT January 16, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Stan Norton, Legal Counsel SUBJECT: 1984 Amendments to Government Code Sections 521956.8 and 54956. 9 (The Brown Act) by SB 2216 (Ch. 1126) In its 1984 session the Legislature passed the above two new sections as amendments to the California Open Meeting Law (The Brown Act) , effective January 1, 1985. Section 54956.8 provides that a local legislative body may meet in closed session under specified condi- tions "to give instructions to its negotiator regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase, sale, exchange or lease" of real property. Section 54956.9 essentially codifies the attorney- client privilege as it relates to local agencies in discussing pending litigation with legal counsel. A copy of Chapter 1126 is attached for your convenience. Section 54956.8 . This section, dealing with land negotiations, authorizes closed sessions after the District has identified in open public session the property or properties which the negotia- tions may concern and the person or persons with whom its negotiator may negotiate. A question was presented by the District to the bill ' s author, Senator Barry Keene, as to an acceptable procedure for the Board's giving "blanket" authorization by showing specific parcels on a master plan. Senator Keen's response dated December 13, 1984 is attached. He notes that he amended the bill to acco=. ,odate concerns of the District to avoid "overburdening your district or ccmpromising its ability to reach favorable acquisition agreements" and states a master plan approach satisfies the requirements of the section if three conditions are met: 1) The plan identifies 7- specific parcels for possible future acqui- sition. 2) The Board clarifies that it is specifically authorizing negotia- tions concerning the parcels in the plan, or as manv of them as the Board cares to include in the authorization. 3) The plan includes the names of the owner (s) of the parcels. Section 54956. 9. As previously stated, this section basically codi- fies the attorney-client- privilege as it authorizes closed sessions for a local agency to discuss pending litigation with legal counsel. R-85-05 Page two "Pending litigation" includes the following situations: a) An adjudicatory proceeding has formally been initiated. b) (1) A point has been reached where the legislative body believes, on the advice of counsel, there is a significant exposure to litigation, or (2) The legislative body is meeting to decide whether a closed session is authorized under subparagraph (1) above. c) The legislative body is deciding whether to initiate 'litigation. Before holding the closed session, the Board is to state publicly which subdivision applies and identify any applicable existing liti- gation. Before or within one week after the closed session, legal counsel for the agency shall present to the legislative body a memorandum stating the basis for the closed session, identifying any existing litigation, and the memorandum shall remain confidential until the pending litigation is finally completed or settled. Implicit in the holding of a closed session under this section is the view of legal counsel that a discussion in open session would prejudice the position of the local agency in the pending litigation or in attempts at settlement. IV R-85-06 (Meeting 85-02 Al A, lX1 00A Jan. 23, 1985) MIDPENINSI.JLA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT January 17, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Procedure for Implementing Brown Act Amendments Regarding Land Negotiations Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has boundaries which encompass a 330 square mile area of northern Santa Clara and Southern San Mateo Counties and about 550, 000 residents. The District was established by the voters to acquire and protect a regional recreational greenbelt in the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains and in the baylands at the fringe of the heavily urbanized midpeninsula region. The District manages about 18 ,500 acres of land for public use. Key to the success of the District' s program has been the ability to acquire property predominantly through open market negotiations with willing sellers, including many transactions that are initiated by the landowners themselves. This has enabled the District to acquire land at fair market value, or even as bargain sales or outright gifts, thereby stretching the District's tax dollars and returning those benefits in the form of additional open space lands. It is essential to the District' s program of acquiring open space shown on the District' s publicly adopted Master Plan for staff to be able to discuss negotiations on specific parcels in closed session with the District' s Board before knowledge that negotiations are taking place becomes public. Not only would the District be exposed to opportunistic third parties, good faith negotiations with landowners could suffer, since most owners consider such discussions to be per- sonal and confidential. On the other hand,. after an option has been obtained, the District' s Board of Directors has always made the actual decision to acquire (as opposed to the decision to negotiate) after- agendizing the item and inviting public comment at a Board meeting. The District' s Master Plan was adopted after many public Board meetings as well as a whole series of presentations to Boards of Supervisors, City Councils, Planning Commissions, and any other public body who would listen. The Master Plan document lists Open Space Acquisition Policies and has sections on Open Space Lands Evaluation and Implementation. The map in the Master Plan document is a composite rating for various land areas of the suitability of lands in meeting the various beneficial functions of open space, such as Protection of Natural Vegetation or Outdoor Recreation. The Policies and the practical Factors Affecting MROSD Land Acquisition Decisions that are listed all come into play during an acquisition decision. R-85-06 C Page two True to publicly adopted policy, the District has acquired 'Lee title to and easements over land within this planning area. Unlike the usual park acquisition programs where discrete proposed park loca- tions are publicly identified and then acquisition attempted, the District' s long-term greenbelt program allows for acquisition of virtually any undeveloped land within the planning area when that land is available. The result has been an evolution from an early checkerboard pattern of acquisition to a much more continuous assem- blage of lands. To implement such a cost effective program, the District has dealt with many, many landowners or their representatives throughout the planning area, sometimes being able to strike a deal and s_--etimes not. The ability of the Board of Directors in fulfilling its obligation to the electorate to give direction to staff while not tipping the District's hand before staff can privately negotiate and bring a solid proposal •to the Board in public has been a key to the District' s progra-m. SB 2216: Senator Keene's bill SB 2216 which was passed by the State Legislature * in 1984 and subsequently signed by the Governor took effect on January 1. As the accompanying report dated January 16, 1985 from the District' s Legal Counsel to you explains, the bill made a number of amendments to the Brown Act regarding criteria for holding closed sessions of governmental meetings in California. , In the letter of December 13, 1984 to me (attached to the report from Legal Counsel) , Senator Keene clarified his intent in the legislation regarding the conditions under which land negotiations can be discussed in closed session. The procedure proposed herein has been formulated to be in accord with these conditions. Proposed Procedure: The proposed procedure initially involves adoption of a resolution by the Board of Directors. The resolution would refer to a parcel map which would be an overlay to the District' s adopted master Plan. The parcels would cover the planning area (green area) on the Master Plan map as well as the three places where the Dis- trict's Sphere of Influence encompasses areas somewhat beyond the District' s boundaries. Parcels would be numbered and keyed to a list of -property owners. The map and list would, of course, be available to the public. Since the parcel map and list is not an acquisition plan, no discrimination or judgments will be made as to which parcels are to be included or excluded (except for obvious pockets of dense development) ; all parcels in the area defined above which are large enough to identify will be shown. If the Board later wishes to dis- cuss in closed session a parcel not on the list, the parcel would have to be added in open public meeting first unless it fell under some litigation-related exception. The resolution would also authorize staff to investigate the parcels on the list, to negotiate on them, and to bring them to the Board in closed session. Since there is so much detailed map work to be done and the procedure needs to be adopted promptly so that discussions can be held in closed session, the initial map and list will be somewhat incomplete. A few months after initial adoption, the map and list can be refined. Sub- sequent updates would be done as needed as parcel lines or owners changed. Recc=endation: I recommend that you direct Legal Counsel to prepare a resolution an the General Manager to prepare the rrriap and list to implement the procedure proposed herein and to return these to you on a February agenda for further consideration. M-85-47 r (Meeting 85-05 March 13, 198 5) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM March 7 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Process and Scheduling of Future Discussion of Procedures Pursuant to SB 2216 and Policies Regarding Use of Eminent Domain Introduction: As a result of written and oral communications, most recently at your February 27 meeting, you decided to discuss the District' s new procedures pursuant to SB 2216 (see report R-85-10 dated February 8 , 1985) and policies regarding use of the power of eminent domain. Recommendation: I recommend that you schedule a date to discuss these matters. Since there are very important policy questions involved, full Board participation is highly desirable. A Special Meeting on April 3 or the Regular Meeting of April 24 would be possibilities. The agenda of April 10 is expected to be very heavy with other items, so that meeting would not be suitable. k In the interest of giving some focus to the discussion and informing the public what the focus is likely to be, I recommend that staff or a Board member or members draft for consideration at the future meeting any policy statement (s) along lines you would specify on March 13 . M-85-16 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985) oe MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 5, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Resolution Endorsing Goals of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition Introduction: On January 9 , 1985 Ms. Debi Jamison, Proqram Director of the Peninsula Conservation Center gave an informational presen- tation and answered questions regarding the purpose and work of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition (see memorandum M-85-03 , dated January 3, 1985) . You requested staff to return by the second February meeting with a resolution for your consideration endorsing the goals of the Coalition and with further information regarding some items in the Coalition ' s Wetlands Resolution and Wetlands Resolution Addendum. Discussion: Paragraph number 3 of the Coalition ' s Wetlands Resolu- tion refers to State Concurrent Resolution Number 28 . Paragraph 3 of the Wetlands Resolution Addendum refers to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the federal Rivers and Harbors Act. Attached are a summary of the Corps of Enqineers regulatory jurisdiction and sections of a draft entitled "Status and Trends of California Wetlands" dated December 1983 prepared for the Assembly Resources Sub-committee on Status and Trends, which discuss these and other regulatory powers and policies . More detailed infor- mation is available. The attached resolution would endorse the goals of the Coalition as stated in the Coalition' s own resolution and addendum. This action would not make the District a member of the Coalition and would there- fore place a little bit of distance between the District and the day-to-day implementation of these goals by the Coalition. Non-member- ship by the District would also probably allow the Coalition more freedom to critique actions or proposals by the District itself, a healthy condition in my opinion. Staff would still continue attending Coalition meetings regarding topics relevant to the District as time allows. Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District endorsing the goals of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ENDORSING THE GOALS OF THE SOUTH BAY WETLANDS COALITION WHEREAS, the second objective of the Basic Policy of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District states that "The District will work with and encourage private and other public agencies to preserve, maintain, and enhance open space" ; and WHEREAS, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has had an active program of acquisition and of liaison with private organizations and with other governmental agencies to preserve and protect wetlands; and WHEREAS, at the regular public meeting of January 9 , 1985 of the District' s Board of Directors a representative of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition described the purpose and work of the Coalition and answered questions; and WHEREAS, the goals and objectives of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition are consistent with District policy and practice; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does endorse the goals and objectives of the South Bay Wetlands Coalition as expressed in the Wetlands Resolution and Wetlands Resolution Addendum attached hereto as "Exhibit A" . EXHIBIT "A" W E T L A N D S R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the marshes and wetlands of the San Francisco Bay estuarine system are an ecosystem of elegance, efficiency and economy of vital importance to the health and well 'being of the total Bay Community, and; WHEREAS, the marshes are the foundation of the marine food chain, providing the organic nutrients to feed both Bay and ocean life and are an irreplaceable nursery for fish and surface wildlife, and; WHEREAS, the marshes and wetlands of San Francisco have been reduced from 313 square miles to 59 square miles during this century, and now face extinction and the certain destruction of their great benefits to human health, economy and enjoyment, and; WHEREAS, the loss of some 75% of our California coastal wetlands means that San Francisco Bay, San Pablo Bay and the Suisun estuarine system now represent 90% of what is left of the State's wetland complex; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we shall promote i and aid the protection, restoration and enhancement Of' wetlands and marshes by URGING: 1. A Program of public education and information describing the nature and value of wetlands, their locations around San Francisco Bay and various ways by which they can be protected. 2. Strict application of the public trust doctrine to all wetlands and diked baylands and adjacent j uplands which can serve trust purposes of navigation, maritime commerce, fish, wildlife, recreation and open space. 3. Fulfillment of the intent of State Concurrent Resolution #28 (authored by Keene, cilante and I Kapiloff) adopted in 1979 to expand wetland areas in the state by 50% within the next two decades. I (over) � - f 4. Identification of marsh and wetland areas in General Plans, overlay maps and ordinances regulating development and subdivisions by cities and counties. Wetlands are seismically hazardous; subject to flooding; and act as reservoirs protecting developed areas. Wetlands should be identified in the elements for Open Space, Conservation and Land Use in General Plans. 5. We urge denial by the Army Corps of Engineers of permits to construct in wetlands, diked baylands or adjacent upland areas unless in furtherance of public trust goals and federal and state wetland preservation policies. 6. Support the serious consideration of inclusion of diked baylands and wetlands under the jurisdiction of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) . 7. Support the assignment of highest priority to marsh and wetlands by the State Resources Agency in its consideration of significant natural areas in San Francisco Bay. 8. Support the revision of EIR guidelines to protect wetland habitat. 9. Support state and federal programs to emphasize the cumulative environmental impacts of Bay shoreline use and development projects and for development of a procedure to evaluate such cumulative impacts on a continuing basis. 10. Support existing State and Federal regulations including the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act to preserve and enhance wetlands. WETLANDS RESOLUTICN ADDENDUM adopted by South Bay Wetlands Coalition, Oct. 1984 ;LND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: 1. Wetland Buffer Zone are lands bordering marshes which protect wetland species from human disturbance and provide habitat for marsh wildlife during periods of high water. Because wetland buffer zones are an integral part of wetland habitat, we advocate the protection of such areas when development projects are permitted near a wetland. 2. Bond Act Monies. Proposition 18 with $370 million and Proposition 19 with $85 million, both passed in the June 1984 California primary election provide a significant opportunity for the state to invest in the health and productivity of bay area wetlands. We encourage the state to maintain wetlands restoration and acquisition as one of their most important priorities in the expenditure of these monies within the bay area. 3. Enforcement. Strict enforcement of existing wetlands statutes such as Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the federal Rivers and Harbors Act is essential to the preservation of bay area wetlands. We call upon the Army Corps of Engineers, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to provide adequate funding for wetlands enforcement and to move rapidly in issuing citations and prosecuting violations of these important wetland laws. 4. Marsh Restoration is a viable and valuable means for repairing previous damage to wetlands_ It is our policy to actively search out and identify those sites suitable for restoration and to strongly support such efforts. 5. Mitigation' for wetland loss is only acceptable if there is no net loss of wetland acreage, mitigation acreage is of equivalent habitat value, and mitigation is accomplished within the same drainage basin as the proposed development or at least within the same count-y- monitoring and enforcement of mitigation to insureproject success shall be done on a six month basis for ten years after the development is completed. 6. Salt Ponds are historic baylands* which have been diked and developed to function as evaporation sites in the commercial production of salt. Numberous species of waterbirds have grown to favor these created environments over surrounding baylands of lower salinities. We urge that local and regional agencies, particularly BCDC, recognize the important habitat values of salt ponds and work to protect them as working salt producers or as wildlife habitat. 7. Seasonal Wetlands are areas which become saturated or inundated during the winter. These include diked historic wetlands now used in agriculture which often flood during the rainy season. Seasonal wetlands provide an important habitat for migratory wildlife in the Bay Area. Because seasonal wetlands are an essential part of the total Bay Area wetland resource, we urge their retention and protection. 8. Water. The quality and quantity of water flowing into S.F. Bay determines the overall character and the health of the bay wetlands ecosystem. We advocate that water quality and quantity standards which protect the ecological values of S.F. Bay be established. We urge the State Legislature to establish and maintain programs to monitor bay water quality with specific emphasis on urban/industrial toxic substances and chemicals contained in agricultural drain water. CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY JURISDICTION TIDAL WATERS FRESH WATERS SECTION 404 SECTION 404 disposal of dredged or fill material L disposal of dredged or fill material (if wetlands exist 1 I behind levees)i SECTION 10 SECTION 10 ' all structures and work: levees, dock, etc. I all structures and work UPLANDS unfilled areas behind (if watercourse is a navigable levees that are below, I historic MHW , water of the U.S.)' f I MHW Ae ORDINARY HIGH WATER ' V t oil\ LEVEES, i ' ` No DOCKS, I FRESH I '-� —_ - I FRESH PILINGS, `°,• COASTAL WATER 'i�� WATER ETC. I �� WETLANDS WETLANDS SWAMPS I TIDELANDS (Vegetation ' & ` associated MARSHES �+�j�••`i With salt or I I r brackish I I water) or High Tide 1 Line NOTE: IN ADDITION TO SECTIONS 10 AND 404 JURISDICTIONS, United States Army s of Engineers ...S rving the Army THE CORPS REGULATES THE TRANSPORTATION OF III 11 ! Corps DREDGING MATERIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISPOSING ...Seerving the Nation INTO OCEAN WATERS (SECTION 103). San Francisco District CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY JURISDICTION HERE IS A SUMMARY OF THE U. S. ARMY If you plan to perform any work that CORPS OF ENGINEERS JURISDICTION OVER may come under the jurisdiction of WATERWAYS AND WETLANDS. the Army Corps of Engineers, please call (415) 556-2752, or write: OREGON SECTION 10 of the ��]�rt��= U. S. Army Corps of Engineers River and Harbor Act 11V �~-- San Francisco District of 1899 requires a CALIFORNIA Regulatory Functions Branch permit for any 211 Main Street structures of work San Francisco, CA 94105 in or affecting ti navigable waters EUREKA of the U. S. SOME TYPICAL ACTIVITIES REQUIRING PERMITS SECTION 404 of the UNDER SECTION 10 UNDER SECTIONS 10 AND 404 Clean Water Act requires a permit for discharge boat ramps artificial islands of dredged or fill materials dolphins breakwaters into the waters of the U. S. dredging filling intake pipes beach nourishment mooring buoys artificial canals SECTION 103 of the Marine piers bulkheads Protection, Research and wharves groins and jetties Sanctuaries Act of 1972 requires outfall pipes road fills a permit for transportation of SAN pipes riprap dredged material for purposes of FRANCISCO cables dikes disposing it in ocean waters. UNDER SECTION 103 The San Francisco District of the U. S. ocean dumping of dredged material Army Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over the North Coastal Basins, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the Central Coast /f you know of or suspect a Basins. possible violation, i.e., unpermitted activity, please call this number: HELP US PROTECT OUR WATERWAYS AND WETLANDS (415) 556-5966. A a 0 m zmm m 0 N 0 -� 0 C D D m mni,n0 (D U) 0 o z � z D � -� 0 m D C � 0 > 0 U) I m D z m ,. , � � { • m K r 3 co ID D m Z - — � � D o m o �o m m 3 z m 13 co m 0 w m Section 306 also helped to fund Preparation of Local Coastal Plans through which wetlands and other critical resource areas should continue to re x Protection through local receive permit review. CZMA's influence on wetlands is felt in California in two ways: federally funded projects an federal lands must be consistent with the state Coastal Zone ManagementcProgram; and Section 404 (Clean Water Act) (below) permit g and actio ns with ons must also the state s Cbe consit CZ P r grams. Funding of state programs------------- --'. Zone P�i o Off' anagement has been curtailed since 1981 . Office of Coastal U.S. Armv Corps of Engineers Section 10/404 Regulator pro of Engineers is probably the most influential gram. The Corps public a California wetlands, with its permit powers and gency regulating project responsib Port maintenance dredging, deep water channel construction, leveeiTitrtes for construction, flood control , dam construction, shore stablilizati others. It is also the least known agency to local °n• among owners whose lands may be most affected by Corps p Cor governments and land jurisdiction. Two statutes provide principal direction the the Corps: - Section 9-10, Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 regulates filling, and placement of structures ("works') in navigable waterways. - Section 404, Clean Water Act, regulates disposal of dredge and fill materials in the waters of the United States, " including all streams to their headwaters (5 cubic feet per second, average annual water flow lakes over 10 acres; and contiguous wetlands, including those above the ordinary high water mark in nontidal waters and mean high tide in tidal waters. The 1899 law originally had the intent of protecting waterway navigability. In 1968, the Corps established " weighs local and regional interests such as land use, economiteresc review, " which control , in addition to fish and ildlife ecology, economics, and flood_ nav�gablility. Availability wof alternatives, errs ence p°llut�on, and traditional cumulative effects were ado ted as criteria inp1974. TheOf orps also add general wetlands policy. opted a -43- CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY JURISDICTION 4 . TIDAL WATERS FRESH WATERS SECTION 404 SECTION 404 disposal of dredged or fill material I disposal of dredged or fill materlal (if wetlands exist i behind levees)i SECTION 10 SECTION 10 all structures and work: levees dock. etc. I all structures and work UPLANDS ' unfilled areas behind I (if watercourse is a navigable levees that are below, , water of the U.S.)' historic MHW ," /T ORDINARY HIGH WATER MHYY —-� - - _- k " ' LEVEES, - - ---- -. ---- -- w DOCKS, FRESH I - FRESH COAST W PILINGS AL WATER WA _ TE R ETC. WETLANDS WETLANDS SWAMPS ems[ i TIDELANDS (Vegetation I & associated MARSHES 3 i with salt or � 1 i I brackish water) or High Tide Line I I NOTE: IN ADDITION TO SECTIONS 10 AND 404 JURISDICTIONS, THE CORPS REGULATES THE TRANSPORTATION OF DREDGING MATERIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISPOSING INTO OCEAN WATERS (SECTION 103). { it 1 Section 10 is applied in different kinds of situations by the three Corps districts in California. Los Angeles g s and Sacramento districts apply Section 10 primarilyto protect navigable capacity of waters. San Francisco District � h has also applied Section 10 behind dikes in areas where elevations fall within their purview (below the plane of Mean High Watwer [MHW]). This brings substantial areas (more than 50,000 acres in San Francisco Bay) under K potential Corps jurisdiction. y,4 Like Section 10, Section 404 extends shoreward to mean high water in tidal waters and the ordinary high water mark in nontidal waters. The 1972 amendments of the Federal eral Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCAA) called for : 4 restoring and maintaining the chemical , physical ,, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. The concepts of "water quality" and "pollution" were z III established, and "fill " (in various forms) and "dredged material " were defined , as pollutants. Wetlands were not specifically referenced, nor are they now. g t! Under 404 regulations, all saline brackish or fr hwater wetlands which f are adjacent to navigable waters (or, in some circumstances isolated) are subject to Corps jurisdiction. Such lands may occur in both tidal and diked situations in California. The San Francisco District exercises Section 404 authority in the San Francisco Bay diked lands where wetland conditions are , evident. In contrast, although a major part of the Delta falls well below MHW and large areas are seasonally flooded, they are excluded from the Sacramento f � District Corps jurisdiction, since they are reclaimed lands and not "historic navigable waters. " /55/ Similarly, the Los Angeles District has been reluctant to assert jurisdiction in marginal (e.g. , isolated wetland) situations unless other directives apply (e.g. , Endangered Species Act). t Certain activities are excluded from Section 404. These are noteworthy in California wetlands. For example, excavation, clearing, levelling, draining and removal of vegetation, including riparian, are not covered by the 404 9 program. A "nationwide permit" system for the headwaters of streams (under 5 cfs average annual flow) , and lakes under 10 acres, exempts a wide variet of riparian situations and ponds and springs from individual permits and from { F -44- r , I a� G effective surveillance. The seasonally dry nature of many of California ' s streams thus precludes many riparian corridors and small freshwater wetlands �. from Corps jurisdiction. The Corps Section 404 Program g has a complex judicial and dm' t a � i n s �rative history, in which wetlands have become the regulatory focus of "waters of the United States." Fundamental and controversial differences distinguish various interpretations by federal agencies of the intent and administration of the program. The Corps views its primary regulatory function as protecting water quality; the resource agencies like Fish and Wildlife Service who comment on all permit actions regard protecting the integrity of wetlands and their habitat as the primary function. In California, these differences are evident in varying degree in all three Corps districts. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) exercises 404 program oversight and has the power of veto over Corps permit decisions. In California, this power has rarely been practiced. EPA has developed 404(b) guidelines for review of permits and federal projects. EPA also has delegated to the states the authority to certify that permitted actions are consistent with the state'sI water quality objectives under Section 401 , Clean Water Act. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) does not have direct permit authority, but carries out basic responsibilities for migratory birds, fish, waterfowl , marine mammals, and endangerd species. For example, under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1958) the USFWS rev i ws Corps permit applications (404 program) and federally tt r constructed projects in or near wetlands with the goal of protecting and restoring the fish and wildlife values In this way, the USFWS Region 1 Ecological Services field offices in California play an important role in influencing Corps permit decisions and conditions placed on projects in wetlands. The Endangered Species Act requires federal and state agencies and private ' applicants to consult with Fish and Wildlife Service when a project might affect the habitat of an endangered or threatened species. The fact that -45- i California by requiring that environmental impact reports be prepared on major projects. However, its effectiveness in protection of those wetlands which are outside federal (Corps) or Coastal Commission jurisdiction, is highly variable, subject to the manner in which it is exercised in local communities and the nature of the action proposed. For example, most privately owned wetlands in the Central Valley can be converted to agriculture with no CEQA requirements. Keene-Nejedly California Wetlands Preservation Act (1976) , is the only state legislation other than the Coastal Act that defines wetlands in any degree. The act states that there "is a need for an affirmative and sustained public policy and program directed at their (wetlands) preservation, restoration, and enhancement (editorial emphasis) , in order that such wetlands shall continue in perpetuity." /19/ The act provided for acquisition of ten important wetlands, using funds from several sources, and was intended to support preparation of a statewide wetlands plan. These funds were not allocated in 1976, however. Wetlands Resolution - Senate Concurre ution (SCR) 28 1979, was enacted, in part, to replace funding removed from the Keene-Nejedly Wetlands Preservation Act. The resolution called for a plan to be developed by January 1 1983, which would identify wetland habitat sites such that the remaining acreage of wetlands in California could be increased by 50%• by the year 2000. The report was prepared according to schedule, but has not been released in 1983. The resolution does not contain any provisions or authority to protect existing wetlands. The focus of the plan, now in draft form by Department of Fish and Game, is on waterfowl habitat. The plan analyzes numerous innovative economic incentive programs, funding sources, and water sources, designed to encourage private Central Valley wetlands to remain in that use and to restore publicly owned or create new wetlands. The focus of the plan on economic measures and private initiatives, mixed with a range of public allocations and investments. The plan identifies the most critical needs of inland wetland -50- habitat. 3e include insuring continued food supply (waste grain) ; allocation and dSsurred delivery Of adequate water Supplies to wildlife Purposes and assurrance of moderate Pumping costs; research fund s; alternative water Supplies such as reclaimed wastewater and agricultural return water. The Plan Outlines a range Of Options and addressing these needs. recommendations State ReSou,rces_A2ency. The Resources- Agency functions as an "Umbrella" agency, setting major resource polic umbrella e-�1111 a I%A he�t —:and�7ov L state Game r the I member departments (Fish and Game, Water for the sta —------ e and ov ter Resources etc. ). wetlands, the Agency coordinated the development With respect to Plan (DMRP) and the Use Program in 1976, of a Delta Master Recreation which designated certain waterway zones in the Delta as "natural * " The few remaining natural tidal and nontidal marshes and riparian areas in the Delta were thus identified and their ecological sensitivity and significance acknowledged in a set of management guidelines.since its inception as a While the DMRP had no legislative authorit federal construction y, it served guide to the Corps permit Program and both state and is not programs in the Delta. The present status Of the program known. II The Resources Agency also established in 1977 a policy Wetlands in Perpetuity. This for Preservation of IS policy interests coalesced a number of disparate state in wetlands into one simple exp departments ression of statewide, boards and atewide policy projects that would commissions of t to guide he Agency not to authorize or fill or otherwise ham coastalrove wetlands. The policy estuarin . or inland did not define "wetlands, " but it did refer specifically to San Francisco Bay wetlands, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta the Col , and other natural water bodies such as Clear Lake and recognized that ma a policy pareas areas Of wetlands in the state are orado River. The federal nor State subject to neither In the absence Of either legislative wetlands polic authority or judicial test of the y, the policy still lent considerable weight to the comments of Resources Agency member departments in state and federally authorized actions. Secretary for Resources Without public 1--c notice i It was rescinded in 1983 by the Secretary for Resources wit R-85-14 (Meeting g 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 8 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager SUBJECT: Interim Report on Search for Permanent District Office Headquarters Background: At your meeting of April 11 , 1984 (see attached report R-84-20 dated April 5 , 1984) , you considered information on the proposed location and on alternative methods of financing permanent office space for the District. You approved the recommendations contained in that report, as follows: 1) Staff should be authorized to retain a real estate consultant who would search for an office site in the preferred location along the E1 Camino Real or Foothill Expressway corridor as described herein and develop a financing plan for the land and building. 2) Staff should be authorized to hire a financial consultant (perhaps the same person or firm as the real estate consultant) to complete the financial analysis of the alternatives, including minimizing the initial cash requirements which compete with open space acquisition. ainterim 3) Staff should be authorized to arrange for rental a f space,, if required. Discussion: Since that time, staff has continued to work on solutions to the permanent office space location question. After your decision, proposals were sent to some 17 possible real estate consultants . Unfor- tunately, all but a few wanted to work as an exclusive agent of the District on a 10% commission basis . The most promising group wanted $40, 000 to do the initial investigative process and acquisition. Because of the high cost, the real estate aspects of this project have been handled by staff working in conjunction with the Office Space Committee. Also, no financial consultant has yet been hired as it was deemed premature. Staff identified 44 possible sites within or near the corridors selected. Of these, 29 initial letters of inquiry were sent to owners of the second priority areas and direct contact was made with the owners of another 10 parcels of high interest. This activity produced seven sites which were shown to the Office Space Committee. Although all of these prospects were of some interest, two "finalists" were chosen (others could still i turn up) : R-85-14 Page Two 1) The vacant site owned by the City of Mountain View at the southwest corner of Bailey and Latham Streets. 2) The former Imperial Savings building located adjacent to the Crocker Bank building off El Camino Real near the San Antonio Shopping Center. The more promising of the two appears to be the City of Mountain View site since it is already off the tax rolls and contains over 37 ,000 square feet (which would allow room for a pleasing landscaped environment) . The City has already initiated a process to consider a rezoning in this area to accommodate a use such as the District might contemplate. It would be staff' s plan to continue to follow up on these two sites , the other sites considered by the Committee, and any others that can be found. However, because the Mountain View site appears so attractive, we would be hiring a consultant out of the current budget to analyze the site from an architectural standpoint (feasibility of fitting an adequately sized building, parking, and landscaping on the site) . Recommendation: I recommend that you accept this report. Staff would continue to work with the Committee which would monitor progress and help to formulate recommendations to the full Board. We would return to you with progress reports and necessary authorizations for the hiring of consultants if any contract were to exceed $10 ,000 . Please contact me if you would like to see either of the sites suggested as "finalists" in this report. R-84-20 (Meeting 84-08 April 11 , 1984) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT April 5, 1984 TO: Board of Directors FROM: K. Duffy, E. Shelley, and D. Wendin, Office Space Committee; and H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Long Term Office Space Needs and Location Introduction: The District has been leasing office space at 375 Distel Circle since August 25, 1977. The District's current lease expires on October 31 , 1985, and the owner-occupant of the office complex has indicated that they will need all the District's space at that time. In fact, they have offered to buy-out the District's lease as an incentive to advance our relocation plans. Therefore, there is serious pressure on the District to find a new office location. The issue of Long Term Office Space Needs and Location was last before you as an agenda discussion item on January 28, 1981 . The attached report R-81-2 dated January 6, 1981 provided the basis of that discussion. Although the financial analysis clearly showed that in the long term there would be a significant cost savings to the District to own space rather than to continue renting, the initial capital requirements might have diluted funds available for land acquisition, and purchase opportunities might be lost. Additionally, the project of finding a suitable site and possibly designing and building a structure could have taken substantial staff and Board effort at a time when those energies could not be spared from open space preservation activities. Therefore, you made the decision to continue leasing and, in fact, voted in 1980 to exercise the District's option to extend the lease term until November 1 , 1985. However, you also established a committee in 1981 "to review the long term location of the District's office and the question of buying versus renting." One of the Key Projects and Activities of the 1983-84 Action Plan calls for the Committee, full Board, and staff to work on this problem; a Key Project in the Preliminary Action Plan for 1984-85 calls for completing all necessary planning to move to different facilities by November 1 , 1985. Committee Work: Your Committee,currently consisting of Directors Wendin, Shelley, and Duffy, has met several times during the last few months to consider policy issues, such as preferred location, and technical matters, such as alternative methods of financing. The Committee has received valuable information on financing from your Controller, William Huck of Stone and Youngberg, and Jeffrey Higgins of Integrated Resources Equity Corporation. The Committee and staff approached its work as an information gathering and educational process in your behalf rather than trying to reach specific conclusions, which must be discussed and decided by the fdll Board. R-84-20 Page two' Current Space and Cost: The following table shows pertinent data regarding the District's current lease of space at 375 Distel Circle: Expiration Date of Lease October 31 , 1985 Square Footage 3900 gross 3510 net Monthly Total Cost $3354 Monthly Cost Per Square Foot $0.86 gross $0.96 net Approximate Monthly Market Rental Value Per Square Foot $1 .50 gross Approximate Current Total Monthly Market Rental Value $5850 gross Considering the additions to office staff which are being discussed (see afore- mentioned Action Plans), the assumption is that by November 1 , 1985 the District will need about 5000 square feet of office space. Preferred Location: The present office is very close to the population center of the District according to calculations done a few years ago. It is also adjacent to the El Camino transportation and business corridor, which means that access, including public transportation, is convenient and that necessary business services are close at hand. The Committee considered the possibility of moving to present or new District-owned open space and reviewed specific sites. The advantages would be that there would be no additional land costs, that the environmental setting would be pleasant, and that the office as an infor-miation center would be convenient to users of that preserve. One disadvantage is that there are no existing suitable buildings on District sites. Also, although a building could be constructed, the Committee felt that night access to District preserves is very problematical in terms of lighting, security, and public transportation. Additionally, office uses may be in conflict with current residential or open space zoning. Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserve was con- sidered in some detail , for example. Finally, from the standpoint of day to day office business functions and accessibility to the public, District sites are not very functional . The Committee concluded that the preferred location would be either (a) Within approximately one block of El Camino Real between roughly Highway 85 in Mountain View and Charleston Avenue-Arastradero Road in Palo Alto, or (b) Along Foothill Expressway between Interstate 280 and Springer Road in Los Altos . No priority was given to these locations. From an operational standpoint, I (not the Committee) would much prefer the El Camino Real corridor because it is close to needed services and has better public transpor- tation. In terms of the District's image as a regional agency, El Camino Real is perhaps more neutral than the Foothill Expressway option, which is strongly associated with a particular city. Foothill Expressway has some advantage in being closer to District preserves than El Camino Real for office-field trips. As a practical matter in searching for space, there is little land zoned for office uses along Foothill Expressway compared to El Camino Real , and it would simplify matters if the Foothill Expressway corridor were dropped. Financing Alternatives: Many financing alternatives were investigated. The table which follows shows the cost in terms of present value of a 20 year cash flow stream for five of these options. R-84-20 Page three Initial Alternative Present Value Financing Requirements I . Continue to rent space $1 ,586,000 0 2. Buy the land and build 10,000 sq. ft. of space, renting out unneeded portions $1 ,019,000 $1 ,300,000 3. Same as No. 2 but 20,000 sq. ft. $ 751 ,000 $2,300,000 4. Buy the land, lease it to a private party who builds 10,000 sq. ft. of building in which MROSD rents space at discount $1 ,073,000 $ 300,000 5. Same as No. 4 but 20,000 sq. ft. $1 ,073,000 $ 300,000 The assumptions are pessimistic in that the ownership costs are at the high end of the range and the revenues are at the low end. 1 . Land cost = $15/sq. ft. 2. Construction cost = $100/sq. ft. 3. Lot size = 20,000 sq. ft. to support a one story 10,000 sq. ft. or a two story 20,000 sq. ft. building. 4. District leases extra space at $1 .75/sq. ft. , increasing 15% every three years. 5. Discount rate for computing present value = 10%/year. 6. District rents space it uses at $1 .75/sq. ft. (market rate, alternative no. 1 ) or at 122% discount (alternatives 4 and 5). 7. District initially occupies 5,000 sq. ft. and adds 1000 sq. ft. every four years. 8. District manages building at cost of 25% of rental value (alternatives 2 and 3) 9. Repair and upgrading = 2.5% of original building value (+6% increase each year) per year starting at year 4. 10. Appreciation of land = 10%/year. 11 . Appreciation of building = 6%/year for years 1-5 0%/year for years 6-15 -2%/year for years 16-20 12. Vacancy rate on excess space = 15% 13. Land lease is 1211%/year of land cost. 14. District issues 10 year, 10% notes for its initial cash requirements. The Committee concluded that there would be a substantial savings ($835,000 in today's dollars, for example, comparing alternatives 1 and 3) in buying the office site rather than continuing to rent. These savings could be put to good use for the public benefit in the way of additional open space acquisition, development of pre- serves for use, and preserve management. Sensitivity analysis shows the key assumptions to be the vacancy rate and building management costs. Choosing less pessimistic value for these variables yields a much greater advantage for the ownership alternatives. These simplified calculations show no advantage in alternative 5 over alternative 4, but further refinement should show some difference since the District should get some of the advantage of greater site utilization. R-84-20 Page four Our investment banker indicates that financing for an office building project would be readily available through issuance of Certificates of Participation. Such certi- ficates would not count against the additional bonds covenant in the District's 1982 Notes. Financing for just the land could also be arranged in a manner that did not impair the District's official debt capacity. Although these alternatives assume a raw site and a new building, that scenario is not a specific recommendation of the Committee. An available lot might conceivably already have a suitable building on it or one that might be remodeled. Only a site search would tell . The Cornittl-ee favored an arrangement whereby the District did not manage the excess space, preferably not even indirectly through outside services. Interim Office Space: There probably is not sufficient time before November 1 , 1985 to locate a site, to arrange financing, and to erect a building. Therefore, one of the following interim arrangements would have to be made: 1 ) Extend lease on present space if owner's needs are not as great as expected. 2) Rent other space for an interim period. Clearly, an interim move should be avoided if possible since it would cause additional disruption and create an additional phase of problems for visitors trying to find the new office. . Recommendations: The Committee makes the following recommendations: 1 ) Staff should be authorized to retain a real estate consultant who would search for an office site in the preferred location along the El Camino Real or Foot- hill Expressway corridor as described herein and develop a financing plan for the land and building. (As stated earlier, I would prefer that the Foothill Expressway option be dropped. ) 2) Staff should be authorized to hire a financial consultant (perhaps the same person or firm as the real estate consultant) to complete the financial analysis of the alternatives, including minimizing the initial cash requirements which compete with open space acquisition. 3) Staff should be authorized to arrange for rental of interim space, if required. I recommend that the Committee continue in existence to monitor progress and to help formulate recommendations to the full Board. We would return to you as the process went on with progress reports, for necessary authorizations for hiring of consultants (if any contract were to be for more than $5,000) , and later of course, for approvals for the site, architectural contracts, building design, construction contracts, etc. R-81-2 (Meeting 81-1 January 14 , 1981) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT January 6, 1981 TC: .Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PR*'.PAP= BY: J. Fiddes,. Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Long Term Office Space Needs and Location Introduction: At your meeting of December 10, 1980, you deferred a discussion of this specific agenda item until the early part of 1981 (see memorandum M-80-98, dated December 4, 1980) , and pre- viously, at your meeting of June 11, 1980, you had accepted the Budget Committee's recommendation for the staff to re-analyze the criteria presented in earlier reports on the issue of long term office space needs and location. At the December 10 meeting, I indicated that. I would review previous discussions and material prepared on the subject, but I would not undertake any new re- search on the District' s long term office space needs and location until the full Board could discuss the matter in 1981_ It should be noted that the 10- 80-1981 Action Plan called for the evaluation of future office space requirements and alternatives_ Discussion: Since October 1, 1973, the main offices of the District have been located in leased office facilities, expanding from their initial 1,080 square feet of office space to the current 3,180 square feet of office space in Suite D-1 at 375 Distel Circle- In terms of office location, there have been several recurring criteria that have been discussed throughout the years (as far back as May 31, 1973) , and they are: 1. Adequate space and facilities 2. Setting and building - consist with image and aims of District 3. Proximity to District' s population center 4. Reasonable cost (space and services) 5. Access to major arterials 6. Proximity to geographic center of the District 7. -Proximity to necessary services a) County offices b) Postal service c) . Office supplies ~ 1 R-81-2 Page 2 8. Access by public transportation and non-vehicular traffic 9. Proximity to major portion of lands which the District will. acquire. _ In atd=tion, another recurring theme has been the question of w ether it would be more cost effective for the District to buy or build its own office facility, and in August 1977 , Leonard Schwartz, the District' s Financial Analyst at that time, undertook a major analYsis relating to the renting versus the buying of office facilities- in his findings (see memorandum M-77-160, dated August 16, 1977) , he rcted that the long-term economics clearly favored purchasing office s4aca, however, buying or building a facility Mould affect the District: short term cash flow. The cash flow problem may be alleviated by legis- lation passed last year which increased to $500,000 the maximum funds which can be borrowed for revenue producing uses_ Building or buying extra space for rental and possible future expansion would. produce revenue_ SubseTaently, a Board/staff workshop was held on November 2, 1977 to - discuss the District' s office location and the days in which the Distric, functions impacted this location, and staff was directed to develop alternate plans to show costs to the District of purchasing, including options such as: 1. Building or buying a building like the present office spaca 1375 Distel Circle) 2. Building an office building in a park-like setting 3. Building in a non-park like setting 4. Costs with and without a corporation yard S. Buying part of the present building and then leasing and selling 6. Costs to rent a school site 7. Construction costs on an arbitrary District site with and without a corporation yard 8. Consultant costs Although staff was directed to report back to the Board around March 1, 1978, other matters were of higher priority and then Proposition 13 was adopted. As a result, no follow-up on the workshop took place. except in Action Plans and budget discussions, and the issue of the District' s long term office space needs and location has been a low priority item since that time_ You did, however, at your meeting of June 25, 1980, authorize staff to negotiate an extension of the District' s lease for its office space in Suite D=1, 375 Distel Circle, for five years, or, a part thereof with renewal privileges. P-81-2 Page 3 In light of the fact that the issue of long term office space needs and location is a multi-faceted question, and since it has not been discussed in any depth by the full Board since 1977, 1 feel that your discussion of the issue on January 14 will help the staff de- te:-7'-"Ine whether we should actively research the possibility of making a purchase of property for the District's office needs. The dis- cussion should also focus, as suggested by Director Bishop at the De=_'Der 10, 1980 Board meeting, on whether the present office space is cr is not adequate and at what projected point the staff will out- grc-,.q its current facilities. If, in fact, a majority of the Board indicates on January 14 that the staff should pursue the issue of a permanent office space facility, then I would recor-anend (pending the outcome of your discussion) that a committee be established to in- vestigate the question. As I see it, such -a cormrattee would have to review and augment- the financial analyses prepared in the past, investigate- the alternative plans discussed at the November 2, 1977 workshop, a--id re-evaluate and determine if there are any new factors (such as surplus school sites) that must be considered when discussing office location at this tim.e. If established, this committee should report to the Board on a regular basis so that all Board members would be involved in the possible evolution of a major decisionfor the District to acquire or build its own office space facility. I- feel that process is very imoortant so that this matter does not seriously detract from the L main business of the District, namely, acquiring and managing open space. one partial answer to this may be engaging a paid or volunteer consultant(s) to coordinate one or more aspects of the total project Therefore, I feel that the committee should report back at an early date with its recommendations on process. If you do wish to proceed on the matter, then there are at least. the following two major policy questions to be answered early on: What is your preferred general location for a District office facility? Do you wish at the least to acquire a site to hold for future use? Recommendation: I recommend that you authorize the President to establish a two or three member Board Committee to -Anake recommendations to the full Board on the issue of the District's long term office space needs and location. The particular pressure I feel does not have to do urith present adequacy of the District' s office space. Rather, it relates to the acceler- ating loss of potential sites to new development, particularly along the El Camino Real corridor. Good planning may strongly indicate that a site should be tied down in the not-too-distant future_ Thisagenda item could be deferred to the meeting of January 28 if, due to the lateness of the hour that you would begin- your discussion on January 14 , you feel it would be more productive to postpone the item. M-85-20 (Meeting 85-03 , AP February 13 , 1985) OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 7 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Boland, Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: Appointment of Peace Officer Intr•duction: At your meeting of January 14 , 1976 , you accepted the ' recommendation that District rangers be appointed as limited status peace officers as outlined under Section 830 . 3 (1) of the Penal Code of the State of California (see report R-76-2 , dated January 7 , 1976) . In 1979 , the "limited status" designation which appears in 830 . 3 (1) was deleted, and a new section, 830 .31 (b) , became the new "appointing" section under the California Penal Code. Section 830.31(b) is attached. Ellis J. Wallace, the District' s newest Ranger, has completed the nec- essary courses required under the Penal Code. This course completion and the passage of the attached resolution will qualify him as a peace officer. Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Resolution of i the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Appointing Peace Officer, which will appoint Ellis Wallace as a peace officer pursuant to Section 830 .31 (b) of the Penal Code of the State of California. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPOINTING PEACE OFFICER The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve as follows : 1 . The following person is hereby designated as a peace officer of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Dis- trict pursuant to Section 830 .31 (b) of the Penal Code of the State of California and under Sections 5558 and 5561 of the Public Resources Code of the State of California, to enforce the Regulatory ordinance for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District lands and any applicable federal , State and local laws : Ellis J. Wallace PENAL CODE PENAL CODE designated by the Commissioner of Corporations, pro- g ftro protection ageney members other than anon vided that the primary duty of these investigators shall invustigntors when noting as peace officers shall by bu enforcement of the provisions of law adininistered III,) (III force Inont of laws relating to fire prevention by the Department of C;orpoviitions, Notwitlutlanding mid fire suppression. any other pruvinion of law, the peace officers desig- (b) Persons designated by a local ageney as park suited pursuant to this subdivision shall not carry firo- rangers, and regularly employed and paid as such, if arm% the primary duty of any such peace officer is the (o) persons employed by the Contractors' State protection of park property and the preservation of the License Board designated by the Director of Consumer peace therein. Affairs pursuant to Section 7011.5 of the Business and (e) Members of a community college police depart- Professions Code, provided that the primary duty of ment appointed pursuant to Section 72330 of the Edu- these persons shall be the enforcement of the law as cation Code, if the primary duty of any such peace of- that duty is set forth in Section 7011.5 of the Business ficer is the enforcement of the law as prescribed in and Professions Code and in Chapter 9 (commencing Section 72330 of the Education Code. with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and (d) A welfare fraud investigator or inspector, regu- Professions Code. The Director of Consumer Affairs larly employed and paid as such by a county, if the may designate as peace officers not more than three primary duty of any such peace officer is the enforce- persons who shall at the time of their designation be ment of the provisions of the Welfare and Institutions assigned to the special investigations unit of the Code. board. Notwithstanding any other provision of law,the (e) A child support investigator or inspector, regu- persons designated pursuant to this subdivision shall larly employed and paid as such by a district attorney's not carry firearms. office, if the primary duty of any such peace officer is S 830.31. Other peace officers the enforcement of the provisions of the Welfare and Institutions Code and Section 270. The following persons are peace officers whose au- (f)The coroner and deputy coroners, regularly em- thority extends to any place in the state for the pur- pioyed and paid as such, of a county, if the primary pose of performing their primary duty or when making duty of any such peace officer are those duties set an arrest pursuant to Section 836 as to any public of- forth in Sections 27469 and 27491 to 27491.4, inelu- fense with respect to which there is immediate danger sive, of the Government Code. to person or property, or of the escape of the perpe- (g) A member of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid trator of such offense, or pursuant to Section 8597 or Transit District Police Department appointed pursuant 8598 of the Government code. Such peace officers to Section 28767.5 of the Public Utilities Code, if the may carry firearms only if authorized and under terms primary duty of any such peace officer is the enforce- and conditions specified by their employing agency. ment of the law in or about properties owned, opera- (a) Members of an arson-investigating unit, regularly ted, or administered by the district or when perform- employed and paid as such, of a fire protection agency ing necessary duties with respect to patrons, em- of the state, of a county, city, or district, and mem- ployees, and properties of the district. bers of a fire department or fire protection agency of (h) Harbor or port police regularly employed and the state, or a county, city, or district regularly paid paid as such by a county, city, or district other than and employed as such, if the primary duty of arson peace officers authorized under Section 830.1, and the investigators is the detection and apprehension of per- port warden and special officers of the Harbor sons who have violated any fire law or committed in- Department of the City of Los Angeles, if the primary surance fraud, and the primary duty of fire department duty of any such peace officer is the enforcement of 294 295 R-85-13 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13, 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 6 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors i FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Boland, Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: The Experimental Dog Program Introduction: In accordance with Board direction expressed at your July 25, 1984 meeting, the Dog Committee held two recent meetings on October 30 and December 5 , 1984 at the District office to review the recent history and current status of the dog experiment. Report R-84-36 dated July 19 , 1984 and memorandum M-84-103 , dated December 3 , 1984 are attached to the accompanying report of the Dog Committee dated February 5, 1985. Staff indicated that the results of the experiment were mixed, with the Fremont Older Preserve receiving less than favorable review e e ec a b e g especially regarding non-compliance with the leash law and the increase of neighborhood dogs running loose on the Preserve. The results were considerably more favorable at the Foothills and Windy Hill Preserves. Discussion: (1) October 30th Meeting: Following the staff presentation, which re- iterated the concerns expressed at the July 25th Board meeting, public comment was generally in support of a permanent on-leash dog program on District lands. Members of California Rescue Dog Association (CARDA) and Palo Alto Foothills Tracking Association (PAFTA) explained the experimental tracking day which was to be held on November 4 , 1984 at the Fre- mont Older Preserve. They also requested other larger areas for this use such as the Monte Bello and Los Trancos Preserves . Representatives of the Humane Society felt that the District, by opening a few sites to dogs on-leash, has the right approach. They felt that the native wild-life could adapt to dogs in this manner. District neighbors expressed a desire for more sites to be opened to dogs , including Rancho San Antonio and Long Ridge, but not necessarily on-leash. A lengthy discussion then ensued on the stray dog problems, especially at the Rancho San Antonio and Fremont Older Open Space Preserves, and on identifying other potential District sites which could be opened up to dogs on-leash, including a portion of the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Committee indicated that it would like to open up one more site to dogs on leash, and that it felt a two year and not a one year period should be given to see if the off- leash problems at Fremont Older Open Space Preserve could be curtailed. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Dog Committee directed staff to return with the following for the December 5 meeting: Page 2 R-85-13 A. The results of the dog tracking day at Fremont Older Preserve, and recommendations regarding continuing this activity on a District site in the near future. B. A recommendation on opening up the grassy northeastern corner of the Long Ridge Preserve to dogs in the same manner the other three experimental sites are currently managed. 2) December 5th meeting: Dog Tracking Results : The results of the dog tracking day held Novem- ber 4th at the Fremont Older Preserve were very positive in terms of visitor safety and wildlife protection; however, the number of partici- pants far exceeded the carrying capacity of the Prospect Road parking lot, which basically prevented other visitors from parking there. In the tracking exercise, dogs are kept on a 6 foot leash until indivi- dual dogs are placed on a 40 foot leash to track a previously laid scented trail . Site requirements requested by PAFTA include at least 30 acres of fairly level grassland for major tracking meets . For this reason, Fremont Older Open Space Preserve can only be used for 4 or 5 dogs with handlers for training exercises . Windv Hill was suggested as a potential site for the tracking meets but was not well received by the PAFTA members at the meeting because of the steepness of the terrain. The use of Russian Ridge was also discussed for an experimental program. Staff recommended allowing the dog tracking program to continue at its present level at the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve hayfield area for up to two training events under permit per year. As it appears no adequate sites are available on District lands for a tracking meet as requested, staff recommended expansion only if and when a more compa- tible site with adequate parking becomes available. Consideration of Expanding the Dog Experiment to Four Sites : Staff reiterated that the leash compliance problem at the Fremont Older Pre- serve continues to be a serious problem. During a recent informal sur- vey Fremont Older Preserve neighbors living along Prospect Road indi- cated that over half the dogs they see accompanied by their owners in the Preserve are off-leash. District records support this contention. With these problems in mind, staff felt that it is premature to open up I one more site to dogs at this time. During the initial attempt at considering the Long Ridge Preserve as a potential fourth experimental site, several unanswered questions arose regarding the appropriate methodology staff should employ to: 1) Gather more meaningful data to be used as a baseline reference for the present and possibly future experimental sites; and, 2) Develop a more scientific means of measuring the leash compli- ance ratio against recorded violations, and the harmful effects that unleashed dogs have on both the wildlife and the other visitors ' experiences. To date, the method used for data collections has been limited to little more than recording observed or reported incidents involving dogs on District sites, and comparing those figures against a rather fragmented baseline. Unfortunately, due to staff workload (unless priorities are changed) , the time that would realistically be required to set up and closely Page 3 R-85-13 monitor a more scientific experiment is not readily at hand. Consulting wildlife biologists felt that a two year period to set up baseline data to measure the effects of dogs on wildlife and habitat were necessary at a minimum. While Long Ridge Open Space Preserve does rank fairly high on the staff site compatability rating chart for dog use, only one member of the pub- lic, a neighbor, has expressed interest in walking his dog there. The area considered would be the grassy slopes at the northern end of the preserve adjacent to Skyline Boulevard. Staff is concerned that it will be difficult to restrain dogs and handlers strictly to this area. Long Ridge Preserve, in addition, does have a high wildlife value especially in the creek areas , the wooded lands , and the west facing slopes. Long Ridge Preserve offers dog use primarily to visitors or residents in the Skyline corridor, is fairly close to Windy Hill , and does not allow daily use to those in the flatlands where the pressure for dog use is felt most at the preserves closer to the urbanized area. In the long term, staff recommends considering the Los Gatos Creek Park site and the Hassler Open Space Preserve for dog use. The Fremont Older Open Space Preserve should be closed to dogs in one year, or over a year and a half since this was proposed by staff, if the off-leash problems do not substantially diminish. If the need for a fourth site is imme- diate, the roads in the major Christmas tree area at Skyline Ridge Pre- serve would be preferrable to the Long Ridge Preserve. While 2M Asso- ciates , the site planners , agree that this location is a compatible area for dogs, they say this should only be a temporary solution until the site is returned to a more natural state. Recommendation: My recommendations concerning the dog program are as fol- lows: 1) Continue to allow dogs on-leash only on the three current sites as part of an ongoing experiment for one more year with closure of Fremont Older Open Space Preserve considered if the off-leash pro- blems do not diminish within one year. If one further site is to be considered by the Board, the Christmas tree farm area at Skyline Ridge could be opened to dogs on-leash on a temporary basis rather than Long Ridge until other sites closer to the urbanized area are studied and recommended for dog use. 2) Allow up to two training events per year for dog tracking to occur on the hayfield area at Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. In addi- tion, allow two additional experimental tracking events to be held in the coming year on the ridgelands at Windy Hill and Russian Ridge Open Space Preserves . -All M-84-103 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM December 3 , 1964 TO: Dog Committee FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Boland, Operations Supervisor SUBJECT: Review of Experimental Dog Program Introduction: The Dog Committee meeting was held on October 30, 1984 at the District office. During the review of recent history and current status of the dog experiment, staff indicated that the results of the experiment were mixed, with the Fremont Older Preserve receiving less than favorable review especially regarding non-compliance with the leash law and the increase of neighborhood dogs running loose on the Preserve. The results were considerably more favorable at the Foothills and Windy Hill Preserves . Following staff 's presentation, the meeting was opened for public comment. Public comment was generally in support of a permanent on-leash dog program on District lands. Members of C.A.R.D.A. and P.A.F.T.A. , dog search and rescue and tracking organizations , explained the experimental tracking day which was to be held on November 4 , 1984 at the Fremont Older Preserve. They also requested other larger areas for this use such as the Monte Bello and Los Trancos Preserves. Representatives of the Humane Society felt the District, by opening a few sites to dogs on-lease, was the right approach. They felt the native wild- life could adapt to dogs in this manner. District neighbors expressed a desire for more sites to be opened to dogs, including Rancho San Antonio and Long Ridge, but not necessarily on-leash. A lengthy discussion then ensued on the stray dog problems, especially at the Rancho San Antonio and Fremont Older Open Space Preserves, and identi- fying other potential District sites which could be opened up to dogs on- leash , including a portion of the Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Committee indicated that it would like to open upone more site to dogs on leash, and that it felt a two year and not a one year period should be given to see if the off-leash problems at Fremont Older Open Space Preserve could be curtailed. At the conclusion of the discussion, the Dog Committee directed staff to return with the following for the December 5 meeting : A-84-103 Page two (A) The results of the dog tracking day at Fremont Older Preserve, and recommendations for continuing this activity on a District site in the near future. (B) A recommendation on opening up the grassy northeastern corner of the Long Ridge Preserve to dogs in the same manner the other three experimental sites are currently managed. Discussion: A. Dog Tracking Results The results of the dog tracking day held November 4 at the Fremont Older Preserve were very positive in terms of visitor safety and wildlife pro- tection; however, the number of participants far exceeded the carrying capacity of the Prospect Road parking lot, which basically prevented other visitors from parking there. Staff recommends allowing the dog tracking program to continue at its present level at the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve hayfield area for up to two events under permit per year. As it appears no adequate site as requested for a larger program is available on District lands , staff recommends allowing expansion only if and when a more compatible site with adequate parking becomes available. B. Consideration of Expanding the Dog Experiment to Four Sites As noted earlier, the leash compliance problem at the Fremont Older Preserve continues to be a serious problem. During a recent informal survey Fremont Older neighbors living along Prospect Road indicated that over half the dogs they see accompanied by their owners in the Preserve are off-leash. District records support this contention. With these problems in mind, staff feels it is premature to open up one more site to dogs at this time. During the initial attempt at considering the Long Ridge Preserve as a potential fourth experimental site, several unanswered questions arose regarding the appropriate methodology staff should employ to: 1) Gather more usable data to be used as a baseline reference for the present and possibly future experimental sites; and, 2) Develop a more scientific means of measuring the leash compliance ratio against recorded violations, and the harmful effects that unleashed dogs have on both the wildlife and the other visitors ' experiences. To date, the method used for data collection has been limited to little more than recording observed or reported incidents involving dogs on District sites , and comparing those figures against a fairly fragmented baseline. Unfortunately, due to field staffs ' workload, the time that would realis- tically be required to set up and closely monitor a more scientific experi- ment is not readily at hand. Consulting wildlife biologists felt a two year period to set up baseline data to measure the effects of dogs on wild- M-84-103 Page three life and habitat were necessary at a minimum. Therefore, it is envisioned that prior to considering additional sites as part of an experiment that, at present, is not fully successful and, in fact, somewhat detrimental , staff should first develop an improved method which most likely would include the use of an environmentally oriented statistical consultant to gather baseline and ongoing data. Due to the expanded nature of the task, staff also envisions the project being included as a key project in the 1985/1986 action plan. Recommendation: My recommendations concerning the dog program are as follows: 1) Continue to allow dogs on-leash on the three current sites as part of an ongoing experiment. 2) Extend the duration of the experiment, using revised methods of data collection and the possible use of a consultant for up to two years beginning January 1 , 1985 . Formally include the experi- ment as a key project in the 1985/1986 action plan. 3) Refrain from expanding the scope of the experiment until after its formal conclusion and review, with the exception of the dog tracking group which may be permitted to conduct up to two events per year as previously mentioned on the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. M-85-22 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985) MEMORANDUM February 5, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: The Dog Committee (R. Bishop, K. Duffy, N. Hanko) SUBJECT: Report of Dog Committee Meetings of the Dog Committee were held on October 30, 1984 , and December 5, 1984. See the Staff Report of December 3 , 1984 , for a summary of the staff recommendations and the proceedings that took place at the meeting of October 30 , 1984 . The Committee generally concurred with the staff recommendation that dogs-on-leash be allowed on the three current sites for one additional year. It was the thinking of the Dog Committee that consideration should be given to allowing dogs-on-leash on one additional site during the year 1985 . At the conclusion of the meeting of October 30 , the staff was requested to consider the feasibility of allow- ing dogs-on-leash on a trial basis at Long Ridge Open Space Preserve during the year 1985. It was decided to discuss this matter further at the Dog Committee meeting of December 5, '1984 . At the meeting of December 3 , the Dog Committee decided that Long Ridge Open Space Preserve was the most suitable site for dog use if it should be determined that the Board wishes to allow dogs-on-leash at one additional site. However, the Dog Committee felt that the question of whether dogs should be allowed on-leash at any additional site was a matter of policy which should be decided by the entire Board, rather than by a vote of the three-person Committee. Therefore, the Committee is not making any specific recommendation on this point. It will attempt to present the pros and cons so that a decision can be made by the full Board. This is not meant to be a general pro and con on dogs, but on the specific extension of the program to Long Ridge. The pros and cons, as seen by the Committee, are as follows : PRO 1. We have very few places for people to take their dogs. We need another location. There is a substantial segment of the public which would like the opportunity of walk- ing their dogs on open space preserves. We need another loca- tion for dog use and a fairer balance of use areas around the District. Area residents have fewer and fewer places to walk their dogs. 2. There are too many variables to give pre- use environmental data much value. If we wait for "adequate" information, we may never open any more sites. -2- 3 . This is a small addition to the program with expected low use. The environmental risks should be low and staff time minimal. 4 . Women walking alone on our preserves feel more safe if accompanied by a dog. 5. The proposed area at Long Ridge is near the high- wayand the parking area and would therefore have only a very limited impact on the wildlife at Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. CON 1. We need more adequate "before" data on the site in order to measure effects of dog introduction to a new site. (Consultant Estimate - two years. ) 2. Insufficient data and some negative indications at the present dog experiment sites do not warrant extending the program at this time. (Unresolved is the question of what level of compliance with leash rule will be acceptable.) 3 . There is not enough staff to monitor a new ex- perimental site. 4 . There is no great clamor for more use. 5. Staff recommendation is against extending the dog use experiment to any additional sites at this time. DISCUSSIONS RE DOG TRACKING See Staff Report of December 3, 1984 , for a summary of the discussion on dog tracking which took place at the Dog Committee Meeting of October 30-0 1984. At the meeting of December 5, 1984, it was reported that the dog tracking event at Fremont Older Open Space Preserve which was held on Novem- ber 4 , 1984 , had been successful from the point of view of the District, and there had been no unfavorable incidents or adverse environmental impacts that were observed. The only negative factor was that the Fremont Older parking lot was filled with vehicles of the dog trackers, which left no room for vehicles of members of the general public who might wish to use the Preserve. It was the recommendation of staff that permission be given to use Fremont Older Open Space Preserve for additional similar dog tracking events, with a frequency of up to two events per year. People interested in dog tracking appeared at the meeting and requested that the District make additional sites r -3- available for dog tracking, such as Montebello Ridge or Windy Hill Open Space Preserves. It was the opinion of the Doc; Com- mittee that Montebello Ridge was definitely not a suitabie site J.or dog tracking events for the following factors: 1. Heavy public use. 2. Important wildlife area. 3 . Meadows are sensitive areas. It was the recommendation of the Dog Co=ittee that sta-ff should explore with the dog trackers the possibility of using Russian Ridge or Windy Hill for dog tracking events. The Dog Committee recommends that at least one dog tracking event, on a trial basis, be allowed at Russian Ridge. The dog trackers reported that they had in the past been allowed by San Mateo County to have dog tracking events at 3-Edgewood Park Open Space Preserve. For some reason which is not known at this time, San Mateo County Parks and Recrea- tion has advised the dog trackers that they will no longer be allowed to hold dog tracking events at the Edgewood Preserve. Cru,r own staff agreed to contact San Mateo County staff in order tc see if there was any chance of reversing this decision so th-at dog 'tracking 'events could be allowed at Edgewood. The specific recommendations of the Dog Commr±t-Lee can therefore be summarized as follows: 1. That the District continue to allow dogs-on-leash at the three current sites on a trial basis for one additional year, with the entire subject to be reviewed by Board and staff at the end of the second year. 2. That the Board decide as a matter of policy whether dogs-on-leash should be allowed on a trial basis on one additional site, and, if so, whether that site should be Ion Ridge Open Space Preserve. 3 . That additional dog tracking events similar to that of November 4 , 1984 , be allowed at Fremont Older Open S-=-=:-e Preserve, with a frequency of up to two events per year. 4. That no dog tracking events be allowed at Monte- bello Open Space Preserve. 5. That one dog tracking event on a trial basis be allowed at Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. -4- 6 . That the possible use of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve for dog tracking events be considered in the future, if the dog trackers decide that Windy Hill would be a suitable site. In that event the dog trackers should make an application designating the portion of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve which propose to use. Respectfully submitted by Dog Committee Members, Kay Duffy, Non ette Hanko and Richard Bishop. R-84-36 (Meeting 84-17 July 25, 1984) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT July 19 , 1984 TO: Board of Directors FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Boland, Operations Supervisor; A. Watt, Evironmental Analyst SUBJECT: Review of Experimental Dog Program Introduction: At your February 23, 1983 meeting, after hearing from the Dog Committee, District staff, and the general public, you decided that the District, on a one year test basis , would permit dogs on-leash and under owner control on three specified open space preserves (see minutes of February 23 , 1983 meeting and memorandum M-83-22 dated February 17, 1983) . At your meeting of March 23 , 1983 staff returned with a recommen- dation for using portions of the Fremont Older, Windy Hill, and Foothills Open Space Preserves for the test program you approved. The purpose of the one year test program was to determine the extent to which leashed dogs on preserves would effect native wildlife and the quality of the general Preserve visitors ' experience. The costs of the program, including direct expenses to the District and staff time and work load, were also to be monitored. Staff was directed to return to the Board with a summary and recommendations at the conclusion of the one year test period. You indicated at your July 11, 1984 meeting that the staff report would be referred to the Dog Committee which is currently comprised of two Board members. The Dog Committee will assess the staff report and return to the Board with its recommendation. The Committee meeting would be publically noticed and be the most appropriate forum for public input and testimony. Discussion: ,The Experimental Program A. Transition Phase (April-June 1983) During the three month transition phase, staff made the following preparations for the program: 1. Contacted wildlife biologists regarding methodology for monitoring the impacts of the dog program. 2. Contacted other agencies about their dog program regulations. 3. Conducted a visitor experience survey. 4. Modified District ordinances . 5 . Changed District signs . 6 . Developed and distributed informational brochures. R-84-36 c Page Two . B. Methodology At the beginning of the transition phase, staff contacted three wildlife biologists regarding the value of performing a three month wildlife inventory study in each area as a data base for determining the effects of introducing the Dog Program. All agreed that such a study would not produce statistically significant results . Wildlife numbers and behavior naturally fluctuate during the year and may differ at the same time in successive years , responding to variables such as weather, moisture, population dynamics , food sources, etc. Preferably two years would be needed to collect significant baseline data to adequately measure the effects of introduced elements such as an increase in the number of dogs on the Preserve as part of such a program. Dr. Michael Kutilek, professor of Wildlife Biology at San Jose State University, believed the question we really needed to answer was : "Do people keep their dogs on leashes?" If a significant contingent do not, the District may have a problem with adverse impacts on wildlife. Accordingly, staff monitored the rate of dog owner compliance with the leash requirement, as well as measureable impacts on the wildlife such as presence of dog excrement on trails , the amount of native animal scat, and observations of dogs chasing wildlife. Rangers also informally noted general increases or decreases in the number of actual sightings of larger mammals such as coyote, deer, bobcat, fox, and rabbit in the test areas . The test program began on July 1 , 1983 in portions of Fremont Older, Windy Hill, and Foothills Open Space Preserves. C. Results 1. The Three Test Areas a. Fremont Older Preserve Test Area As the attached Exhibit A illustrates, non-compliance with the leash requirement, and the incidence of loose, unattended dogs chasing and injuring wildlife were chronic problems during the test period on this site. of a total of 38 incidents recorded during the study period, 29 , or 76% , were for dogs off-leash while accompanied by their owners. A letter from Fremont Older Open Space Preserve neighbor, Donna Harris, dated March 17 , 1984 (attached) corroborated staff ' s data. Staff recorded 8 cases in which unattended dogs were observed running loose on the Preserve, a figure which is 4 times higher than recorded the prior year. Two known cases of dogs chasing and killing deer and a bobcat were also recorded during the test period. In both cases, the attacking dogs were not accompanied by their owners. Additionally, staff recorded one incident in which an unleashed dog attacked a jogger as he was exiting the Fremont Older parking lot on Prospect Road. In an effort to curtail the incidents of loose neighborhood dogs roaming freely on Fremont Older and Rancho San Antonio Open Space Preserves, approximately 50 letters were mailed to adjacent District neighbors requesting their cooperation on the matter (see Exhibit B) . R-84-36 Page Three It should be noted that the figures represent only those incidents which were reported or observed by District staff. Undoubtedly, additional dog related violations and attacks on wildlife went undetected. b. Foothills Preserve Test Area Staff recorded no dog related incidents of any kind during the test period. In fact dogs were rarely seen using this site. Wildlife appeared unaffected by the presence of dogs. Additionally, staff received no complaints regarding the presence of dogs on the Preserve, or the availability of parking spaces along Page Mill Road. C. Windy Hill Test Area Non-compliance with the leash requirement was again a sig- nificant issue. Thirteen of the fourteen incidents recorded were for dogs off-leash with the owner. However, there were no cases recorded in which unattended dogs chased or injured other visitors , dogs or wildlife. Staff received three complaints from dog owners whose dogs had difficulty nego- tiating the entrance stile at the Spring Ridge parking area. Dogs were also observed on the lower, restricted trail areas of the Preserve with owners passing "Dogs Prohibited" signs into these areas . 2. Questionnaire Results Two questions concerning leashed dogs were included in a 62-item questionnaire surveyed in May 1983 at Los Trancos and Monte Bello Open Space Preserves. Of the 154 individuals surveyed, 117 (or 76%) thought the presence of dogs would degrade a preserve, and 120 would not themselves bring dogs on trails. 3. Letters The District has received three letters concerning results of the dog program, all of which express dissatisfaction with dogs on District sites. Reasons included the low rate of compliance with leash regulations and unpleasant encounters with loose dogs. 4 . Visitor Comments Rangers informally polled visitors at the three test sites throughout the year to help determine whether or not the presence of dogs had affected the quality of their experience. The responses were mixed, and generally inconclusive. 5 . Enforcement Procedures Enforcement procedures used by the Ranger staff consisted of firm, educational contacts with violators . Fines of up to $75, which is the legal ceiling, were levied against those offenders whose actions were flagrant enough to warrant a citation. Loose dogs which could be captured by District Rangers were subsequently turned over to Animal Control officers who delivered them to the animal shelter. R-84-36 Page Four 6 . Staff Time During the initial planning phase of the dog experiment, it was estimated that approximately 5% of staff time would be diverted from routine duties to administer the Program and collect data, at a cost of $9 ,200 - $10,000 per year-. It is now estimated that the time required will be close to 6% at a cost of approxi- mately $11,000 - $12,000 per year, provided the scope of the program is not significantly altered. 7 . Expenses Staff spent approximately $430 on the development of infor- mational signs , maps, and brochures . Protective equipment costs for the Rangers totalled approximately $290. Replacement costs for both have been approximated at $500 annually. D. Conclusion In terms of comparing the "Public benefit" value against adverse effects on the wildlife and human visitors , the results of the dog experiment were generally positive on Windy Hill and Foothills Open Space Preserves but less so on Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. Dogs visiting the test areas as part of the experiment and under owner control were minimally involved in potentially harmful situa- tions. As mentioned earlier, a majority of the problems involved loose neighborhood dogs joining together in packs' and chasing or injuring wildlife. Staff will continue to deal with this problem as an ongoing peripheral issue. In terms of owner compliance with District use regulations , the experiment was certainly less than successful . As the data indicates, a very large Dercentage of the visiting dog owners failed to comply with the leash requirement and, most likely, will continue to do so. This situation is similar to experiences of neighboring resource management agencies , whose options have typically been either to discontinue the program or increase educational, surveillance, and enforcement measures at a cost of considerable staff time. Although the occurrence of owner attended dogs off-leash has not resulted in serious injury to date, staff continues to feel that the only 4 consistently safe measure of control is a strong six-foot leash under owner control. E. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Implications for the Program The test program to allow dogs on selected preserves is categorically exempt under Section 15306 , Information Collection. If you continue the experiment for any further length of time, it would continue to be classified as categorically exempt. However, if you decide to adopt the program, on an ongoing or more permanent basis, it would constitute a project. On the basis of an Initial Study (attached) , staff believes the project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A survey of local agencies has supported this opinion. Therefore, if the experiment is adopted as an ongoing program, a Negative Declaration would be prepared. P.-8 4-36 Page Five Recommendation: At the July 11, 1984 Regular Meeting, President B7[1'endinstated this matter would be referred to the Dog Committee. The Committee would hold a public meeting in the future to solicit public input and return to the full Board with recommendations based on its review and deliberations . At this time you should appoint a third member to the Dog Committee. My recommendations concerning the dog program are as follows : 1) Extend the dog program in the designated areas on the Foothills , Fremont Older and Windy Hill Open Space Preserves in the same manner as previously administered. 2) Review the dog oroaram on each of these sites at the time of the site's regular use and management review. 3) Discontinue the dog program on the Fremont Older Open Space Preserve if there is not a significant decline in the off-leash problems within one year. EXHIBIT "A" TWO YEAR COMPARISON OF DOG INCIDENTS Fremont Windy Hill Foothills Rancho San Monte Bello Las Trancos TOTALS Older OSP OSP OSP Antonio OSP OSP OSP 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 82-83 83-84 Number of off-leash incidents with owner N/R 29 N/R 13 N/R 0 N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R 42 Number of off-leash inc nts without 2 8 0 0 0 0 19 36 0 2 1 3 22 48 owner (loose dogs) Number of incidents in prohibited area 20 1 0 1 1 0 41 52 7 5 2 5 71 64 with owner total number mf incidents 22 38 0 14 1 0 60 88 7 7 3 8 93 155 Legend: N/R - not recorded CHIBIT B At IF, J- 0'am MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-11,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 Dear District Neighbor and Possible Dog Owner, It has recently come to my attention via District rangers that packs of dogs coming from your particular neighborhood have been observed chasing and, in some cases, destroying wildlife on District property. Naturally, such activity is in direct conflict with District Policy and is unacceptable to us. Fines totalling up to $150 .00 can be levied against those dog owners who, by whatever means, allow their pets to disturb or harm wildlife on District property. While State Fish and Game laws provide the authority for the destruction of dogs observed in the act of chasing or harming wildlife on public lands, it is not our current policy and we do not wish to follow this course. Therefore, if you are a dog owner, please exercise responsible ' control over your pet (s) , use a leash where required, and check for breaks or openings along your fence line. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at (415) 965-4742 . Thank you; your cooperation is appreciated. Sincerely, James Boland Operations Supervisor 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 Appendix C Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Initial Study PART I A. Name , location, and brief description of project : Program to allow dogs on portions of three open space preserves: Windy Hill Fremont Older, and Foothill . The dogs would be required to be on leash and underowner control at all times. B. A Description of the environmental setting: Trails within the three—preserves traversing various plant communities, including grassland, chaparral , oak woodland, and mixed evergreen forest. C. The project is/ixx=ot compatible with existing zoning and general plans-. If not , please explain below: D. For identification environmental effects, see attached checklist. (PART II) E. For a discussion of any potential significant effects and ways to mitigate them, if any, see attached sheets. F. Recommended Action: X Negative Declaration Environmental Impact Report G. Persons who prepared this Initial Study: Alice Watt Date : Jul 12, 1984 H. Name and Address of proponent: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District; 375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1 , Los Altos, CA 94022 Appendix C (co'.. Page two PART IT Identification of Environmental Impacts : (Explanations of "yes" and "maybe" answers are included on attached sheets) 1. Geology. Will the project-: YES MAYBE NO a. result in an increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off site? X b. be located on or adjacent to a known earthquake fault? X C. disrupt the soil causing substantial erosion, silta- tion or land sliding. X d. cause destruction or" modif- ication of any unique gologic feature? X 2. Water. Will the project: a. be located in a known flood plain? X b. involve alteration (s) of a streamcourse or body of surface water? X C. change the quantity of ground waters either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an acquifer by cuts or excava- tions? X d. change- absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount oiC surface water runoff? X e. involve discharge into; or alteration of, any surface water resulting in reduced water quality, including but not limited to, increased turbidity or dissolved oxygen? X 3. Air. Will the project result in: a. substantially increased air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X .ge three Appendix c (cont.) YES MAYBE NO b. the creation of objectionable odors? X C. alteration of air movement, r..Ioisture or temperature, or any change in local or re- gional climate? X d. the creation of dust smoke or fumes or the application of potentially hazardous ma- terials such as herbicides or pesticides? X 4 . Plant and Animal Life. Will the project: a. result in the removal or dis- turbance of any rare or endangered plant or animal? X b. reduce the acreage of any ag- ricultural crop? X C. result in the removal of substantial amounts of vegetation? X d. alter the ecological balance of an environment unit, either on or off site? X e. significantly affect a breeding, feeding, or Nesting area? X f. change the diversity or numbers of any species of plant or animal? X S. Natural Resources. Will the project : a. involve the removal or depletion of on-site rock, sand, gravel , trees, oil or minerals? X 6. Permit Application. Will the project: a. require the approval of any federal , state, regional or local agency or district? If yes, list below: X 7 . Noise. Will the project: a. increase ambient noise levels, either on or off-site? X Page four Appendix C (cont. ) 8 . Circulation/Traffic. Will the project: YES MAYBE NO a. generate substantial additional traffic in the area? b. generate the use of off-road vehicles of any kind excepting ranger patrol vehicles? X C. require alterations to present circulation patterns? X d. have substantial impact on existing road systems? X e. effect existing parking facilities or create a demand for new parking facilities? X f. increase traffic hazards for mot'-or vehicles.? bicyclists pedestrians? 9 . Public Services . Will the project: a. substantially affect a public water supply or sewage disposal system? X b. result in a need for increased L fire or police protection? X C. cause groundwater pollution as a result of new septic systems? A d. require the expansion or extension of any public utility? _X e. require any public service currently operating at or near capacity? 10 . Energy. Will the project: a. cause the use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X_ 11. Land Use. Will the project: a. result in substantial land use changes that would adversley affect the population either on or off site? X b. serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas , or increase development intensity of already developed areas? X C. vary from adopted an community or county policy. Page five Appendix C (cont. ) YES MAYBE NO d. involve lands currently protected under the Williamson Act or an open space easement? X 12 . Sociocultural. Will the project: a. result in an alteration of an historic, archeological or paleontological site, structure, object? X b. require the relocation of people or businesses currently on site? X C. obstruct scenic views or create an esthetically offensive site? Potential Significant Effects* and Mitigation Measures A potential significant effect is the chasing of wildlife or park visitors by unleashed dogs. This effect is mitigated by the provision that the dogs be on leash and under owner control at all times. This will be enforced by substantial fines for violators. *Mandatory Findings of Significance all listed in Section 15802 and Appendix G of the State Guidelines. r WE=,!E Preserve User/Dog 0.,mer: The t-Ldoeninsula Regional Open Space District is conducting a one year ex='-"'zi nt to al?cw dogs on selected open space areas and to detennine a-1y -Measurable impacts from pez utti.ng such a use. These inT j;P—cts could- inc?u:l-' such things as banning or diminishing nunbers of wildlife (lony ter--), threatening visitor safety, degrading the landscape, or inter- feri.^g with visitors' overall enjoyment of open space. This Preserve is one of three locations selected and approved by the District's Board of Directors. Dogs are allowed in designated areas only (see map on reverse side) and must be under aaner control and on a 6 toot (maxhm.in) leash at all times. The success or failure of this experiment is dependent Upon the level of cooperation shown by the District's ne*.;est user group; please co.-.,fine: your dog to a short leash and remain only in designated areas during your visit. , If you have a*ry questions or ccnnents regarding this exp?ri r,-ant, please con'act the Disc at (415) 965-4742.• •�S:S.:{'��:�i:•.}_}tiu�`w-�2�]::'r:.v'�:' '.\;t�ei1\r+�4•:'?:ivi't:?-:::1"v:r' _.... :t- rv�- ,� "�';-I �i\ \ - • ': .,3__;...�.-v may,..•:;'-"- :•.1r+:.�:�iiSC:'i:if'Y,1{�`:-_•_3.r"::::. ::. �:tii-a::.::;:::_::.:...-e{::•' ': AItb3 Mills` wr�•t00p %.� •.e i< \-1 �r • /`ram •-1nt 1\� �� , filh .-tom. -'J—r• %..-• -✓• /,J l� /)�• `� >s: '�,! } /-!v ? ��.ti••.''�� y91.�� 41 S� ....• �'� I.7Y.:Y' •�•� /�'•,/' ,` �400T IILL P� - 1b�li�f `��'/ �, `- •^!\\t�• a_ \SJp fl ,:/ f•=LL• -� ''-.��./_J.T yc�� .J WCOLLEC \,1�-+� �v � cri.•�.r` },;-�`-.;V�1'�7�\��.ry ��1\ p'1�,. /, .��_^\`.\? �` �-� .�j VE'-`�r•a�.�4�I l� �� , C� o••s�. ..��, �'r-•_� ��I��v:ate:• 1 \. \_._'�J .�>>. r ree " j��:• a �� 1�� --�- •�` ..-��,;. ,1t.i„-r�a�ss.�;� �:��: ��.+��( C�(utt ltal,sn� .aj ` � . . A des'��_ �- `�.•.i1•/ , J/i 0=�..�'itil. \ r t pia as / �� /�. •7! -� .o" jr\\ •�: n'•• tom...- _ 1 �-��'�'o � 4 �� f \^�/ .v- _t'• l - i *' w Nt a!e+\Jam-- �r`• . 1,' ,-/r.•, �. i •� 'r--y..�� •,`\- . l 1 '�..' f r � J >` t \ -4 E 5 A 1 / 'l ,/ i y\..•ram`- '� / ,� 1 3[1 '� ♦•' -� ✓. �-M�i-�;l�t o Site biap /,�-f '�, `1 ��✓ :'�� 1 FTIT.T S OPEC SPACE PRESERVE < . ` . / r ��.` 'RVE Dogs Permitted Here 1J f' `-,•- )'>r\�; /%% +� �� '.L"_`'� - ;��• P Limited Parking +��.. `-"�-r-�' J� �_ = -,Fiase:�err � ,�J , ` `, ' � ')• Scale 1"-2000' ANorth Carryon Villa M,- r Parkins H i I 1 Regnart Road _ — ------ -- , San tc,:;a �r Jf, Ro?d .. . .., rE_.. Private SleTling Property Road t �7 Spring > + r i J L rt Hunters Point �L rLoa � Hayfield 0 L L ; \ - s 1� .:r � _+ Prospect Road Stevens Creak I ' H:kin g Reservoir ` j .+� on:y '' •�, Parking Fremont Older Trail (Hiking. eques'ri Open Space t Stevens Creek --.Preserve ----------- Trail (Hiking. bicyc+.ine; A County Park equestrian) Public Road Private Residence ) Property ' i -- j lb,rs Pe=Li.t--ec' To La Road Portola Valley 4_Portola Road Private 1 Property I--- ~\ Portola Valley Corte f -• Ranch Madera t Vhr dy Hamms Gu1ch ` Creek i �% `Jones Alpina- i Gulch Road I r' Fitzpatrick s/ \ r Private Creek Property 11 � Skyline UOLJIevard 1' �, v` i�♦ OZmiana � Creek North � Scale in M:les Parking area �`,.% Public Road p %z --- Trail (Hiking, Equ^strian) �.� Cogs 1'erTnittcci It+,rc To Page Mill Road R-85-09 (Meeting 85-03 oe February 13 , 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 6 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Hansen, Land Manager; W. Tannenbaum, Real Property Representative; M. Gundert, Associate Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Proposed Addition to Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Mt. Umunhum Area (Lands of Stour Investments , Inc. ) Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District currently has the opportunity to purchase approximately 65 acres of land located east of Highway 17 within unincorporated Santa Clara County. The property adjoins the eastern boundary of the District ' s existing Mt. Umunhum Area of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve and is an important link in con- necting the District-owned properties on the eastern face of Mt. Umunhum. A. Description of the Site 1. Size, Location and Boundaries This 65 acre property is located south of the City of San Jose on the east-facing slopes of Mt. Umunhum. The District-owned Mt. Umunhum Area borders the site to the west, and private property surrounds the site to the north, east and south. The non-contiguous portions of the Mt. Umunhum Area (former McCoy and Mariscal prop- erties) are located approximately one-tenth mile to the east. The subject property is located outside the District 's boundaries but within the District 's Sphere of Influence. The property is also within the Sphere of Influence of the City of San Jose. The property is approximately 3 miles southwest of the inter- section of Loma Almaden Road and Hicks Road. 2. Topography, Geology and Natural Landscape The property is comprised of the steep east-facing side slopes of Mt. Umunhum. An east-facing ridge on the southwestern corner of the property is relatively level and affords magnificent views of the south Bay and south Bay hills . Guadalupe Creek, a perennial stream, traverses the site, entering the property in the southwest corner and flowing through the property to the northeast corner. R-85-09 Page Two Elevations on the site range from 2900 feet in the southwestern corner to a low of approximately 2000 feet along the northwestern boundary. Vegetation is comprised principally of chaparral com- munities of manzanita, chamise, and ceanothus with an occasional knobcone pine. The banks of Guadalupe Creek are lined with California bay trees mixed with madrones and coast live oak. Soils on the property are of the Los Gatos-Maymen Association, derived from shale. B. Current Use and Development Vehicular access to the property is from Loma Almaden Road via a 60 foot easement across the southerly adjoining property. The easement enters the property in the southeastern corner. This road eventually forks to the east and west, with the east fork connecting with the road system on the former McCoy property. The western fork of this road winds up the southermost ridge on the property to leave the south- western corner of the property and tie back into the Loma Almaden Road across private property. A second access road enters the property in the northeastern corner. This road branches from Loma Almaden Road through the former McCoy property to connect eventually with the El Sombroso trail network and on to the Kennedy Road Area of the Preserve. The road provides ease- ment access to the subject property, as well as to the four parcels beyond this site. A road maintenance and use agreement exists between the current owner and other property owners holding easements on this road. An 11. 11 percent share of the costs of maintaining the road is associated with the proposed acquisition. This amounts to an esti- mated cost of $125 for work to be completed this year. There are no structures on the property. C. Planning Considerations The property is zoned Hillside by the County of Santa Clara, which requires a 20 to 160 acre minimum lot size per dwelling unit based upon a slope density formula. The parcel would allow one building site. The site is currently under a Williamson Act agricultural contract which, according to the Government Code, would be terminated upon acquisition by a public agency. Open space use of the land is in conformance with the General Plans of the County of Santa Clara and the City of San Jose. The site did not receive a rating in the District' s Master Plan since it lies out- side the District boundaries. D. Potential Use and Management The site should be managed as a natural area and be open to hikers and equestrians gaining access from Loma Almaden Road and adjoining properties. Parking for 2 to 3 cars is available at a roadside turn- out adjacent to the southeastern access road. R-85-09 Page Three E. interim Use and Management Recommendations 1. The maintenance and use agreement for the northeastern access road should be continued between the District and six involved parties . 2. Boundary plaques should be installed where appropriate. The cost is estimated at $30. 3. Logs should be placed across the trail in the southwestern corner of the property to limit motorcycle access. Cost is estimated at $150. F. Dedication This property should be withheld from dedication as public open space to allow for future transfer of development rights or other property rights or to allow for trade if advisable. G. Naming This property should become an addition to the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Mt. Umunhum Area. H. Terms The total purchase price for the subject property as set forth in the attached Purchase Agreement would be $58 ,000 payable in cash at the close of escrow. On a per acre basis this represents a payment of approximately $900 per acre, which is reflective of the real estate market sales in the area and represents a fair price for the property. Funds for this purchase would come from the New Land Commitments budget category. Escrow for this purchase would also include the conveyance of certain water rights by the District to Robert W. Barlow, an owner of property contiguous to the subject property. During earlier successful negotiations for other nearby property owned by Mr. Barlow (see report R-84-52 , dated December 5 , 1984) , Mr. Barlow requested that his unrecorded but prescriptive water rights in the subject property be formally recognized in the event the District completed the Stour Investments acquisition. Mr. Barlow agreed in advance to make certain concessions which would benefit the District in exchange for this formalization. These concessions included his withdrawal of a competing offer on the subject property. Further, it is the opinion of staff, due to Mr. Barlow' s apparent open and notorious exercise of these water rights for more than 10 years , that a claim for prescriptive rights to the water could well be supportable in a court of law. The attached deed will , when recorded, formalize Mr. Barlow rights to water from Guadalupe Creek while simultaneously limiting how these rights may be exercised. (Report R-84-52 also included mention of a Right of First Refusal obtained by the District. This Right of First Refusal is recorded and pertains to the Barlow property benefitting from the prescriptive water rights mentioned above. ) R-85-09 Page Four Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the accompanying resolutions , as follows: A. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Stour Investments , Inc. Property) B. Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving and Authorizing Officer to Execute an Easement Deed in Favor of Robert W. Barlow and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Stour Investments , Inc. Property) I further recommend that you tentatively adopt the interim use and management recommendations contained in this report, including the naming, and that you indicate your intention to withhold the property from dedication. - �� _ � � _ � p0^ �� ,/r�``� "��\ ! N ��` �-••. may,f v -��..- �=ter,-�_ ` _-�;]J�? � `��`\.�'�r•'� ,,�-, .� �'' �� "��j ti t �-`�-'�, "� _r-=., =��_ � � ,,� :•�•. - '�':�� ', it �' .-��-: J ee_R O.S.D. Boundary ?�iT"• �/ '' � ',' !I', „' -`� > sga, C Approx. IAcation .a� �_r _ `: , . .•�. '� �a Barlow Pro bo l of Water F.as�nent- \ � •,7�i;, .! � •- �^ i 1' 'ice i✓/ .•. ;��.: �\ 1n•3�_.`�•,.'—_ '��' -�: y' ��?• Area E•-';i.�• ;�;C � ;l:' ): SeC� Additi _ •�' { PIO O tr �-,.�- _ ,r � .'�i.,.l,,ti�-. :�;::-r,s�t .., •:'r - � _ � t 1?O n ( ,fie�'�.-._. • 1 rr' `ram v �� st / �7 � "r:%r::••yam;. ,.,F•y_ ,.�-� �i.. .�./\.— � 1c• �`- �, a"fir i- y�ei F ; 3 'r * i Jrase ent�� ✓ c cA ``�� i. c _ ' ��••��. ..t� °� ..'sue •�,� ( - -- �Y~"� :r�_� � �r3-'+-:-��•:t �_� >T ' -ram \�'= •\r- Easementt;� Loma Almade Road �\ ^' _ / : - ".�1`ice `�/ ,.-•. - � c--..- -.��,y '� 3. :'_' �.,-�� Former Barlow Property 1 x2�i:r \� •J �� 1� �� Site clap 571 SIERRA AZUL ✓�'. � _ram_ � h ,•� OPEN SPACE PRESERVE Scale 1" = 2000' A\orth RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - STOUR INVESTMENTS , INC . PROPERTY) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in that certain Purchase Agreement between Stour Investments, Inc. and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President or appropriate officer to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District. Section Two. The President of the Board or other appro- priate officer is authorized to execute a Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed conveying title to the property being acquired by the District. Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized to expend up to $3 , 000 to cover the cost of title insur- ance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * i PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into, by and between STOUR INVESTMENTS, INC. , a Delaware Corporation, hereinafter called "SELLER" and the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, herein- after called "DISTRICT. " I 1. PURCHASED PROPERTY: SELLER agrees to sell to DISTRICT, and DISTRICT agrees to purchase from SELLER, SELLER' S real property located within an unincorporated area of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, containing approximately sixty-five (65) acres , and commonly referred to as Santa Clara County Assessor' s Parcel Nos. 562-07-023 , -024 , -025 , and being more particu- larly described in Preliminary Title Report No. 550563, dated April 29 , 1983, from First American Title Guaranty Company, attached as "Exhibit A" hereto and by this refer- ence incorporated herein and made a part hereof . Said property to be conveyed together with any easements , rights of way, or rights of use which may be appurtenant or attri- butable to the aforesaid lands , and any and all improve- ments attached or affixed thereto. 2. PURCHASE PRICE AND MANNER OF PAYMENT: The total purchase price shall be Fifty-Eight Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 Dollars ($58 , 500 . 00) , payable in cash at such time as escrow may be closed and title conveyed to DISTRICT under the terms and conditions set forth herein. 3. TITLE AND POSSESSION: Title and possession of the subject property shall be conveyed to DISTRICT at the close of escrow by Grant Deed, free and clear of all liens , encumbrances , judgments , ease- ments , taxes , assessments, covenants , restrictions , rights , and conditions of record except: I A. Taxes for the fiscal year in which this escrow closes shall be cleared and paid for in the manner required by Section 4986 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. I B. Typewritten exceptions numbered 8 through 12 and 14 listed in said Preliminary Title Report ( "Exhibit A") . I� I I Purchase Agreement Page Two Stour Investments, Inc. 4. COSTS: DISTRICT shall pay all escrow, recording, and customary title insurance charges and fees incurred in this trans- action. SELLER shall be responsible for, and pay all costs of any reconveyance of Deed of Trust, full release of mort- gage, payment of liens , discharge of judgments , or any other charges , costs , or fees incurred in order to deliver market- able title to DISTRICT. 5. WAIVER OF STATUTORY COMPENSATION: SELLER understands that they may be entitled to receive the fair market value of the Property under the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisi- tion Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646) and California Govern- ment Code Section 7267 , et �. SELLER acknowledges that they are familiar with the applicable Federal and Cali- fornia law. SELLER hereby waives all existing and future rights they may have to receive the fair market value of the property under any applicable Federal or California law. 6. COMMISSIONS: Neither SELLER nor DISTRICT shall have any obligation to pay any real estate agent 's commission or other related costs or fees in connection with this transaction. 7 . LEASES OR OCCUPANCY OF PREMISES : SELLER warrants that there are no oral or written leases or rental agreements affecting all or any portion of the subject property, or any person lawfully occupying the property, and SELLER further warrants and agrees to hold DISTRICT free and harmless and to reimburse DISTRICT for any and all costs , liability, loss or expense, including costs for legal services , occasioned by reason of any such lease, rental agreement or occupancy of the property (including, but not limited to, relocation payments and expenses provided for in Section 7270 , et seq. , of the California Code) . 8. ACCEPTANCE AND TERM OF ESCROW: DISTRICT shall have sixty (60) days from and after the execution hereof by SELLER to accept and execute this agreement, and during said period this instrument shall constitute an irrevocable offer by SELLER to enter into a contract with DISTRICT on the terms and conditions set forth herein; in consideration of which DISTRICT has paid Purchase Agreement Page Three Stour Investments , Inc. and SELLER acknowledges receipt of the sum of Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10. 00) . In the event DISTRICT does not deliver to SELLER a signed copy of this agreement within said sixty (60) day period, this agreement shall be auto- matically terminated and of no further force and effect. 9. TIME OF ESSENCE: Time being of essence and provided that this Agreement is accepted and executed by DISTRICT, within the time period stipulated herein above, this transaction shall close as soon as practicable , but not more than thirty (30) days following the acceptance and execution by DISTRICT through an escrow (No. 550563) to be conducted by First American Title Guaranty Company, 329 South San Antonio Road, #8 , Los Altos, California 94022 , or other such escrow holder as may be designated by the DISTRICT. 10. ACCRUAL: The provisions hereof shall accrue to the benefit of and bind the respective heirs, devisees , assigns , or successors in interest of the parties hereto. Purchase Agreement Page Four Stour Investments, Inc. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE SELLER: DISTRICT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: STOUR INVESTMENTS, INC. a Delaware Corporation By: Stanley Norton, DI-strict Counsel ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION: Date: By: William S. Tannenbaum Real Property Representative APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: Date: President, Board of Directors ATTEST: District Clerk Date: First American Title Guaranty Company Title Officer : Lois L. Burris 445 So- San Antonio Road Los Altos, CA 94022 Escrow Officer : JoAnn M. Cardinale Order No.: 550563 Midpeninsula Your No.: 375 Distel Circel D-1 Property: NONE SHOWIJ Los Altos, CA 94022 Attention: Bill Tanenbaum Subject to a minimum charge required by Section 12404 of the Insurance Code. Form of Policy Coverage Requested: CLTA Dated as of: April 29, 1983 at 7:30 a.m. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: STOUR INVESTMENTS, INC., a Delaware corporation The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Report is: A FEE AS TO PARCEL ONE; AN EASEMENT AS TO PARCEL TWO At the date hereof exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed exceptions and exclusions contained in said policy form would be as follows: 1 . TAXES for the fiscal year 1983-84, a lien not yet due or payable. 2. TAXES for the fiscal year 1982-83 1st installment : $3.85 Delinquent - Penalty $0-38 2nd installment : $3.85 Del.-Pen. $0.38/Costs $5.00 Assessors No. : 562-07-023 Code Area : 72-007 3. TAXES for the fiscal year 1932-83 1st installment ; $3.85 Delinquent - Penalty $0.38 2nd installment : $3.85 Del.-Pen. $0.38/Costs $5.00 Assessors No. : 567-07-024 Code Area : 72-007 EXHIBIT gage Of 6 Order Not :5.05063 Page: 2 4. "LA.XS for the fiscal year 1982-83 1st installment : $7.72 Delinquent - Penalty SO.77 2nd installment : $7.72 Del.-Pen. $0.77/Costs S5.00 Assessors No. : 562-07-025 Code Area : 72-007 5. A SALE to the State of California for taxes for the fiscal year 1960-81 and subsequent delinquencies. Amount to redeem prior to May 31 , 1983 is 535-12. APN: 562-07-023 Code Area: 72-007 6. 1 SALE to the State of California for taxes for the fiscal year 1,080-81 and subsequent delinquencies. Amount to redeem prior to May 31 , 1983 is 535-12. APN: 562-07-024 Code Area: 72-007 7. 1 SALE to the State of California for taxes for the fiscal year *,c,60-81 and subsequent delinquencies. Amount to redeem prior to May 31, 1983 is 557-37. APN: 562-07-025 Code Area: 72-007 8. ELSEMENT for the purposes stated herein and incidents thereto ?or : Underground electrical conductors with above ground appurtenances thereto Granted to : The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, a corporation Recorded : March 29, 1956 in Book 3459, Page 508, Official Records Affects : A strip of land 20 feet in width, 10 feet on each side of the centerline as surveyed and staked by Grantee 9. TE"'RY-S AND CONDITIONS contained in the instrument last above referred to. 10. EAS"EXENT for the purposes stated herein and incidents thereto For : SEE BELOW Granted to : Robert W. Barlow Recorded : July 25, 1969 in Book 8616, Page 734 of Official Records Affects : A strip of land 60 feet in width over and across the South half o Sec. 8, T. 9 S. , R. 1 W. , M.D.H. FOR: A non-exclusive easement for use as a roadway for vehicles of all kinds, pedestrians and animals, for water, gas, oil, and sewer pipe lines, and for telephone, television service, electric light and power lines, together with the necessary poles or conduits 11. LAND CONSERVATION CONTRACT executed by and between County of Santa Clara and Rich Gallagher and Esther Gallagher, recorded February 27, 1970 in Book 8842, Page 582 of Official Records. EX141BIT Page 2 of 67 Order No: ,j0563 Page: 3 12. AGREFAENT FOR : Road Maintenance and Use of Private Road Between : Rich Gallager, et ux Robert W. Barlow, W. David Schrader et ux, David Vossbrinck, et ux And : Fred I. Drews, et ux On the terms and conditions contained therein, recorded December 16, 1970 in Book 9159, Page 318 of Official Records. 13. Injunction recorded April 1 , 1971 in Book 9276 of Official Records, Page 702, the nature of said action being to bring construction of center improvements into conformance with County Standards. Notice of Violation of Grading Ordinance by the County of Santa Clara, State of California, dated August 31 , 1971 and recorded August 31 , 1971 in Book 9487 of Official Records, Page 96. 14. SATISFACTORY ASSURANCE to First American Title Guaranty Company that Stour Investments, Inc., a Delaware corporation is in good standing in the State of California, and that its corporate charter has not been revoked by reason of failure to pay corporate taxes. LENDER'S SPECIAL INFORMATION According to the public records, there have been no deeds conveying the herein described property recorded within six months prior to the date hereof except as follows: NONE EXHIBIT Page of Order No: _,0563 Page: 4 LEGAL DESCRIPTION in the Unincorporated Area of the County of Santa Clara, State of Ca--foraia, described as follows: PAZ-'_"ZL CN---: The So'=thwest 1/4 of Section 8 in Township 9 South, Range 1 East, M. D. B. & M. EXCE?_'_-X3 from said Parcel One that Portion thereof described as follows: BZ^11zM-_NG at the Northeast corner of said Southwest 1/4; thence from said point of beginning, West along the Northerly line of said Southwest 1/4, 1320 feet; thence S. 2640 feet, more or less, to the Southerly line of said Section 8; t)___=,ce 3. 89 degrees E., along said line 1320 feet, more or less, to the South-east corner of said Southwest 1/4; thence North along the Easterly line of said Southwest 1/4, 2640 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Pkp'C77 7io: A nton--i--xclusive easement as appurtenant to Parcel One above described or any por-tiom thereof, for use as a roadway for vehicles of all kinds, pedestrians and a=z-_ ls, for water, gas, oil and sewer pipe lines and for telephone, tele- vissicn service, electric light and power lines, together with the necessary poles or conduits over a strip of land 60 feet wide across the Southerly and o.�_ Westerly portions of the Southwest 1/4 and the West 112 o.-!' the Southeast 1/4 of Zevzicn 8, T. 9 S., R. I E., M.D.B. & M. , and over a strip of land 60 feet wide across Lot 2 of Section 17, T. 9 S. , R. I E., M. D. 3. & M., which latter strip of land extends from the Southerly line of said Section 3, Southerly to the Xoz-therly line of the so-called Loma-Almaden Road Corssing said Lot 2. EXICEP'=NG from said Parcel Two any portion thereof lying in Parcel One above de&cr_4-=)&d. A.?. No: 562-07-023, 562-07-024, 562-07-025 EXHIBIT A page- I/ of-5 t:by►c�CD !M COM/OAyAMC[ WIT/1 .« UfE ^ •�f`` �►J�K-- �aaE ' or TM! �t�! %U! A%L, TAWATIOM CODL \ �C� Of 11,.11, UAII. YA11CM I.t.7t1 �. 562 7 pv�IGni E MAiMILSEN-ASSESSOFIZ .�� 1� O4,yr -J (40 K) AC) 1 ssEs i20 P G 9 - �,."2199K) Tf♦ t` � - '� LpEE $&.a)we TOTAL �� `1 Coll* 1 f T C _ _ 1 � -- -- - - - -- - ---J - "�(37.2d►Ci 40 K. —�40.AC) �4C AC) .¢ - 101 IM AC TOTAL 1 �xo ---T- 20AC 26.66K TOTAL I(160.At) 7 HIS PLAT IS INSERTEO AS A HAT ER OF INFORM T N ONLY. ( {AND WHILE THE SAME IS COMPI ED FROM INFORN A ION WHICH NVE BELIEVE TO BE CORRECT. O LIABILITY IS AS U ED BY 1 20AC -� --- J 14f9 COMPANY AS TO THE CO `ECTNESS OF SA4 1 ORMAT►ON. Ill ?*9C TOTAL 4 Zb 66 K 1oTaL 40AC , /4 ^l ; 26 66AC.Urf-L _ - 40 AC. 40 AC 4 AC 60 AC. i 1 � �W AC /2 Air- M \X = EXCEPT OM i E i �. "' EXi IBIT o to 'M .RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE AN EASEMENT DEED IN FAVOR OF ROBERT W. BARLOW AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - STOUR INVESTMENTS, INC. PROPERTY) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section One. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby approve that certain Easement Deed conveying certain water rights to Robert W. Barlow, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, and authorizes the President or other appropriate officer to execute said Easement Deed on behalf of the District. Section Two. The General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of approval to Robert W. Barlow. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. Section Three. The General Manager of the District is authorized to expend up to $100 to cover the cost of title insurance, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction, if required. Section Four. The Board of Directors finds that the granting and releasing of these water rights is in accordance with the Basic Policy of the District and is not detrimental to the open space char- acter of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Order No. Escrow No. Loan No. WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Robert W. Barlow P.O. Box 1107 Los Gatos, CA 95031 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: CITY TRANSFER TAX S DOCUMENTARY TRANSFER TAX $ Same as above SURVEY MONUMENT PRESERVATION FUND $ ......Computed^n the consideration or value of property conveyed;OR ......Computed on the consideration or value low liens or encumbrances remaining at time of sale. Signature of Declarant or Agent determining tax—Firm Name A. P. N 562-7-023,-024 -025 EASEMPIT GRANT nD E E D FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, MIDPENIINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a Public District hereby GRANT(S) to ROBERT W. BARLOW, an unmarried man, the real property in the City of County of Santa Clara State of California, described as The right to take 25% of the water from Guadalupe Creek and Springs, located in the Southerly portion of the West 4 of the Southwest 4 of Section 8 , Township 9 South, Range 1 East, M.D.B. and M. , along with a 10 foot easement for maintenance purposes originating from said Guadalupe Creek, by the shortest and most direct route, North to the lands of Grantee being the Southwest k of the Northwest 4 of Section 8 , Township 9, South, Range 1 East, M.D.B. and M. (according to the Official Plat of the Survey of said lands on file in the office of the Bureau of ~ R-85-12 A. (Meeting 85-03 , ANEW February 13 , 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 7 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; D. Hansen, Land Manager; A. Cummings , Environmental Analyst SUBJECT: Proposed Land and Water Conservation Fund Applications Introduction: The federal Land and Water Conservation Fund program, as administered by the California State Department of Parks and Recreation, has been a major source of supplemental funding for local park agencies . The agencies ' share of the funds is allocated to each of the State ' s ten planning districts primarily on the basis of population. The types of lcoal projects funded are the acquisition or development of neighborhood, community, and regional parks. The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a reimbursement program based upon the funding allocation. Fifty percent of the actual expenditures will be refunded (to a maximum of the grant amount) when the project has been completed. Projects are judged on their ability to meet the recreational needs of the applicant' s constituency, with priority given to proximity to high density residential areas , population mix, ready access , and to serv- ing areas with the least amount of comparable recreational acreage. I am recommending submittal of two grant applications for the Land and Water Conservation Fund program, one for development and one for acquisi- tion. The site development total project costs are in the amounts of $173 , 565 for the Purisima Creek Redwoods Public Access Project, and the acquisition application is in the amount of $310 ,000 for a Coal Creek Open Space Preserve and a La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve addition. The grants would be one-half of these amounts , or $86 , 783 and $155 ,00 respec- tively. Discussion : A. Purisima Creek Redwoods Public Access Project (for map, see Exhibit A) This is the same project previously described to you in report R-84-45 (dated October 24 , 1984) when it was submitted for the Proposition 18 grant program. Recipients of these grants have not yet been announced. Since the development of access to this Preserve is such a high pri- ority, staff recommends applying under both programs to increase the probability of funding this year. This J project proposes development of the 2511 acre Purisima Creek Red- woods Open Space Preserve to improve accessibility and expand recrea- tional opportunities by providing three parking areas , new and improved trails , a backpack camp, a trail for the physically limited, and rest- rooms. R-85-12 Page 2 The Preserve is the only public recreational facility on the western slope of the Santa Cruz Mountains in the central part of San Mateo County. The project will provide access to the key western link in a "City to the Sea" trail in San Mateo County, offering a scenic creek- side route through magnificent redwood forest between Huddart County Park and the coast, and close to the proposed Burleigh Murray State Park. The project will also provide the only public staging facilities (parking , restrooms , trailheads) on the Skyline Scenic Corridor (State Route 35) between Routes 92 and 84 . The outstanding physical beauty of the site and the large internal trail network coupled with ease of ac- cess from the urban midpeninsula ensure this will be a popular and hea- vily used preserve when development is complete. B. Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Addition The project involves the acquisition of two parcels. The first, the addition to Coal Creek Open Space Preserve, would be purchased on a bargain basis with grant funds, while the second, the addition to La Honda Open Space Preserve, would be received as part of the matching gift. Both properties will be highly desirable acquisitions for the District. 1) Acquisition Parcel (Addition to the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve (for map, see Exhibit C) The Coal Creek parcel is a 2160 foot high grassy knoll which will become the center of Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. The knoll overlooks the rest of the Preserve, affords fine views in all di- rections and would be a scenic destination easily accessible from Skyline Boulevard. The knoll lies about 200 feet below a Caltrans vista point parking area on Skyline Boulevard. Just north of the vista point is the terminus of a road connecting Skyline Boulevard and Alpine Roads. This road will provide an easy access route to the knoll from the Skyline vista point or Alpine Road for hikers, equestrians, and ranger patrol vehicles. The road continues across Skyline Boulevard through Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The knoll would become part of a major trail route paralleling Sky- line Boulevard connecting the District's Monte Bello, Los Trancos, and Skyline Ridge Preserves with Coal Creek and Russian Ridge Open Space Preserves. 2) Gift Parcel (Addition to the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve (For map, see Exhibit B) La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve is a 255 acre preserve located within unincorporated San Mateo County about 500 feet west of La Honda Road. The only access to the Preserve is across a 50 foot easement from La Honda Road adjacent to a private residence. The easement, approximately one-half mile in length, is impassable due to its steepness , inaccessability, and the collapse of a bridge spanning La Honda Creek where the easement connects to the Preserve. Since private property surrounds the Preserve on all sides else- where, the Preserve is currently landlocked and difficult for the public to reach. The proposed gift parcel adjoins La Honda Road to the east and La Honda Open Space Preserve to the west. Approxi- mately 2 . 2 miles south of the intersection of La Honda Road and Sky- line Boulevard, it would provide trail access from La Honda Road to the Preserve. There is a 3-5 car pullout next to the trailhead on La Honda Road which could provide parking for Preserve visitors . Page 3 R-85-12 The trail descends steeply through mixed evergreen and redwood forest to the Preserve boundary at La Honda Creek. There is a dilapidated cabin on the property which would need to be demo- lished when the property is acquired. Acquisition will open La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve to public use. D. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance Staff has determined that each of the proposed projects qualify for a Categorical Exemption (see attached Notes of Exemption) . Normally, for a project such as the Purisima development, compliance with CEQA would not be considered until the Board 's review of detailed plans contained in the use and management plans . However, a determination is being made at this time to comply with the application process . The application and the subsequent CEQA determination do not preclude the normal planning process which includes the Board' s review of the site 's use and management plan and public workshops if deemed necessary. In addition, the award of a grant does not finally commit the District to accepting the grant. Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the following attached Resolu- tions : a) Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving the Application for Land and Water Conser- vation Funds for the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Public Access Project. b) Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving the Application for Land and Water Conserva- tion Funds for the Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Addition Acquisition Project. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS OPEN SPACE PRESERVE PUBLIC ACCESS PROJECT WHEREAS , the Congress under Public Law 88-578 has authorized the establishment of a Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Grant-In-Aid Program, providing matching funds to the State of California and its political subdivisions for acquiring lands and developing facilities for public outdoor recreation purposes; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation is responsible for the administration of the program within the State, setting up neces- sary rules and procedures governing application by local agencies under the program; and WHEREAS, said adopted procedures established by the State Department of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the approval of applications and the availability of local matching funds prior to submission of said applications to the State; and WHEREAS, the proposed Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Public Access Project is consistent with the Statewide Comprehensive Recreation Resources Plan: Recreation in California, Issues and Actions: 1981-1985; and WHEREAS, the project must be compatible with the land use plans of those jurisdictions immediately surrounding the project: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the District hereby: 1 . Approves the filing of an application for Land and Water Conser- vation Fund assistance; and 2. Certifies that said agency has matching funds from the following sources (s) and can finance 100 percent of the project, half of which will be reimbursed, and 3. Certifies that the project is compatible with the land use plans of those jurisdictions immediately surrounding the project; and 4 . Appoints the General Manager as agent of the District to con- duct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents including but not limited to applications , agreements , amendments , billing statements, and so on which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. Property tax revenue "� 1` / �, Exhibit A — SITE PLAN INE 6 =v PURISIMA CREEK REDWOODS OPEN SPACE PRESERVE ` 1 „�� ■�■ ',�� Existing hiking/equestrian trails i Hiking/equestrian trails to be cleared ` Cam- . � � _�s---� —�:� . •. a U o8�� /� +��■■ Hiking/equestrian trails to be constructed f ( il��-_� �%1; • �; SCALE 1" = 2000' NORTH C} � _ r i r _ r , /_J e -PARK I NG — E P E J \) CITY TO SEA TRAIL Ak PROPOSED:;(. s ��— f S — ; r '•� �' Y a ',,PROJECT AREA ,�•.� �� o PARKING �.�--f-- ��-" - ✓ ��o ) 1, u •, J, 0 �HIGG NS—P ISI ,' J�1J.` � . � l ,PROPOSED GJ� Ij� ..N KING +11 �� ,\ ' �" L \ l._i HUDDART C COUNT-Y_PARK\ BACKPACK CAMP Y o C v 1l I -- S S �, r• ) " 1 fl �. „ O � ( 11. I \' � �i. �l �� ba"i ce --' 1(1i�%�`� /, �M ,��,�• , %'emu►n�,� �� << AV J( i '�lTUNITAS CREEK ROADt, �¢, ll ,v,r • _��f i i •�, 1 /;; � $o �� \ N�WFte • �� ij -� �_ $ \� Wa(eL "� I 1 ar•i b�J I( _ I CALIF. RIDING CL . �� „1 "� al _/, -- -- ". ..• ' HIKING TRAIL RAIL. /QQ ao� 14-c r ' 13 13NDORS�O (-��CJ f:T THE GUl'CF THE [ UYFY CCE;?K OF 1-11DPF_N SL=i REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DI-STRIE 84 ,ftkil!►'VO h[TlF2 H.919 County Clerk C. Notice of Exemption Ey Q—=-PZY AmAt Kid! tISrR,o DEPUTY CLERA Project Title Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Public Access Project Project Location* Purisima Creek Vatershed - between S 'Ilne Boulevard, Tunitzs Creek P.na3 and Higgins-Purisima Road in unincorporated San =teo County _ Description of Project Development of an existing open space preserve to Im- prove accessibility and recreational opportunities- Constriction consists of 3 un- paved car?:ino areas with a total capacity of 65-75 cars, aoDroxinately 21� miles of nec: trail and clearing 3� miles of existing trail, installation of foot brides and small restrooms. Exewct Status : (check one) Ministerial_ .-(Section 15073) 'ET-Mergeacy Project X Categorical Exemption (State type ancd section number) Section -15304, Class 4, Minor Alterations to land; 15311, Class 11, Accessory Cr- r••-oc- 15303, Class 3, New Construction of small str- ^tune Reasons why project is exempt Yro oses li ht construction which will not have significant environmental impact: (1) parking lots will be unpaved and located so as to have minimal visual impacts; (2) trails will be alio ed at- a 10% maximum grade; end (3) restrooms will be small structures and most likely self-contained units- Date of Finding Staff Person Making De-er i nation 10/17/84 Alice Cummings Environmental Analyst RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUNDS COAL CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE ADDITION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Congress under Public Law 88-578 has authorized the establishment of a Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund Grant-In-Aid Program, providing matching funds to the State of California and its poli- tical subdivisions for acquiring lands and developing facilities for public outdoor recreation purposes; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Parks and Recreation is responsible for the administration of the program within the State, setting up necessary rules and procedures governing application by local agencies under the pro- gram; and WHEREAS, said adopted procedures established by the State Department of Parks and Recreation require the applicant to certify by resolution the ap- proval of applications and the availability of local matching funds prior to submission of said applications to the State; and WHEREAS, the proposed Coal Creek Open Space Preserve Addition Project is consistent with the State Outdoor Recreation Plan Recreation in California, Issues and Actions : 1981-1985; and WHEREAS, the project must be compatible with the land use plans of those jurisdictions immediately surrounding the project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the District hereby: 1 . Approves the filing of an application for Land and Water Conserva- tion Fund assistance; and 2 . Certifies that said agency has matching funds from the following source (s) - and can finance 100 percent of the project, half of which will be reimbursed; and 3 . Certifies that the project is compatible with the land use plans of those jurisdictions immediately surrounding the project; and 4 . Appoints the General Manager as agent of the District to conduct all negotiations , execute and submit all documents including but not limited to applications , agreements , amendments , billing state- ments , and so on which may be necessary for the completion of the aforementioned project. Gift of a 5.1 acre parcel as an addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve and "bargain sale" of the 10 . 6 acre addition to Coal Creek Open Space Preserve. /,019a a+ ++ �� rre �_ ! r, J � d a,- �• 1• `' °p „ ,� �hibi� C - SITE MAP Proposed Creek Addition to •; !��' ��'; ; \'1. � .` CPen Srzce Preserve Scale - 1�� _ 2000' North-I V Yf �. �` o i. �' • rr C� Ih (�//;.I � as ,� o• \ \-�/' ' ; F � 'V �f �- ,�7�� •! �r1�+o�iile !i J 0 ^� � 5�X�'�1 7 >>�` V �! . 1 `Coal Creek S R �,� oa ��,'•; w �J •`�o� d i� r - \ j/1 (�f J Cpen Space Preserve Proposed0000 rp Cd1Ttc3I]g Vista Po � -wo `--r , � �l ~�}�` ,�� -l�N/ `�� `/ � \�• � „\"-��`??�� .1� �i ` a� as me Bello 'Space Preserve Russian adage Space Preserve + '�t �`1i� I yro� S1�T�y��`� '• r ' mil\ •\� ^'�!' \ ��.� ` �,� � '� 0 ;\``�\\•`�.0 . 1 ((�f—/ . � . •• ( � ti - N�,;,It,,,��" �'�1,��Y�'-'/\�:�1 R:LjdgL- SPace Preserve `V`�"i•.�. t�� --� I, �ti1� � � )�: ram'•, t /J;�/r ( +, � C �:��.x /600 1786 �� : "- ��t/J•,�� J :_ '!r��.--�:;\��\\11 f! �V/,JABM �• ,11• , ,°, r \ 90 �: :\ er .*�?7 �` r r J1„ l r ,, rY'_A \ �_ �o� ys � r•� P/ C�-. I.M '. ;.� . Ik <( f Q Y n�u 1' t{1 1 -/% � ' f 'I g i't+�.. t t�' \\ f. i f'�,,, '1 j , 4; 7 � 1� I'I l�' _ .� �•..�Ji � J/ � .�\ (1\ ! /r � Jf \1G,t �, y� 1 �`(��\VIJ �7+�� L•I�`-� '' 1 ��i j�1600 fe o1'I� �',•l'� t K • I�� V S •`_: I UP t�,�� `\ ll�lllY f 1 Pb\`'�\ � �f � ,`�'�'. ',�'�1 /�!V..•�l ''1 j •.'I�.,i•�J ,r u•t �'�`.:`. `\�1 '\ e\ �1 ! � � '�ti• �• _ �M+ �;rh '1 w, V�D t `/l I{fI � i�'•• F'• lb 0� '/. � 7l - 9 . U 1i� 0 �' / A.I� - `/1f,00 •u,l, ) 0 ��;. � �GAlob ._ ' 2r91�o�v I I �� l k` i� ,. 2 U 1� p.1� 1 �," 4i • _ t 25 l�•1 �� i 34 �� °1� �/'!'000 �`' 1) a m`� a a's��°_`��r =!�' 1 Al �� _�-� .ems � T � \SM y., .$��♦a ` s'� ��.% � ,,;;- .�� \�� _ - �' ? 1sRo0 M��1 � `-- I �'L/J �t♦ �' `�\ r`as\\ti��i i J ( 1 O La Honda Creek , 1�l Open S ace Prserve,. I t l .•-,. � e_ - _ _ -� j �\ q I� /� _�� ♦ ,.5�. �•• ff a ti Y ` '� f�J t.A,'� �� \J `1�� pu,@r�/M l/ � ,_: r 111)) �)1�!, o: // � •�. ` a' ��.�_� \-� � •mil � � � '.C! � / I�1��. .�____ ,9 •% ,� �• tosed Hail Wrinectionk I� If �• I '� �" �w� \I• �� 1t+vi)� > � \o �• h. �\�Lri- ram_` . i /V � r I ''•• � .gyp-.' ` �' � ' �O ` J�- �• �`��. a�'� � � %` / � �. �Exhibit B - SITE MAP Gt_ rx� `�� Windy H i 11 '• ,Open pace reserve r La Honda Creek � S P � • q• Space Preserve Open p G tt = 20001 1 North Scale 1 11 �,� �� I )z � -� 3� � 1/ ,_� •� \� � t` - _r`L��`~ f�`�1-7'-'--/"1t 1, 'C:.�•-+y �'--� M � �� `�.�� \ ` r�q C1�� /l! r` - ENDORSED i L E D IN THE OFFICE OF Tk REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DIS COUNTY CLERK OF DISTRICT CT SAN MAT'�0 COUNTY, CA41F. Notice of Exemption �4ARWN CHU CH 1Conty CEetk BY p=o3e== =stle Pr se OEPUTYCIERK_ ,o�•,__d Addition to Coal Creek 0 en S ace ?reserve Catloi: East of Skyline Boulevard (State Hi¢h -av 35) in uninco F J-arp(i San "—�Zeo Countv. oa Of P. fact Acquisition of 10.6 acres of land on a grassy knoll between Skyline Boulevard and Alpine Road. The property is surrounded on three sid-s bv Coal Creek Open Space Preserve and will become an addition to the pre— serve, providing a public staging area, trailhead and scenic overlook for preserve users. Recreational uses would include hiking and horseback riding. Stat-us _ (check one) -Ii nisteri al (Section 15073) E-ergenc, Project XX Categorical Exemption (State type and section nu--ber) : Section_ 15116, Class 16 Transfer of ownership of land to create parks Section 15125, Class 25 Transfer of otmership of land to preserve open s ace Reasons why project is exempt Project consists of the acquisition of land to establish a park where the land is in a natural condition and the ro osed ana,P-=2�t plan would keep the area in a natural condition, consistent with that of tre surrounding recreational land. Date o= Finding Staff Person Making Deterrination Jant�ry 3, 1985 Alice G. Cummings Q 1985 ENDORSED IN THE 1-I L L D CO N Y CLOERK rE Of ih_ MIDPE:�ItiSUyA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT JAN ? 19$5 "VIN L;hURCH County Clerk Notice of Exemption By �JAT y A— � Irk DEPUTY CLERK PrOjec= ^_tle Proposed Addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve P=oje== Toeatiorl West of La Honda Road in unincorporated San Mateo County; c-e - :e south of Skylonda. _ Des:.=:_--on of Project Acquisition of 5.10 acres of forested land between La r=n-a ?pad and La Honda Creek. The property adjoins La Honda Creek Open Space P_ese-:e and would provide access to this currently landlocked preserve. Recr=__t=oral uses would include hiking and horseback riding. Exem_t Status : (check one) Ministerial (Section 15073) Emergency Project Categorical Exemption (State type and section n;_T_ber) : Sectioa 15116, Class 16 Transfer of ownership of land to create parks Section 15125, Class 25 Transfer of ownership of land to preserve open space Reasons why project is exempt Project consists of the acquisition of land to establish a park where the land is in a natural condition and the proposed r?na &--ent Dian would keep the area in a natural condition, consistent with that of t_Ie s_rrounding recreational land. Date o= .7inding Staff Person Making Determination JanL_ry. 3, 1985 Alice G. Cummings i M-85-14 (Meeting 35-03 4 61 Feb. 13, 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 5 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Initial Legislative Program for 1985-1986 Introduction: At your meeting of October 10, 1984 you considered and accepted my "Review of District ' s Legislative Program" (memo- randum M-84-80, dated October 4 , 1984) . That was my final report on the Program for the 1983-84 two-calendar-year session of the Legislature. At this time it is appropriate to consider a new program as the 1985-86 session gets underway. Discussion: Last year' s Legislative Committee, consisting of Direc- tors Bishop, Duffy, and Henshaw, met on October 3, 1984 to begin to formulate a new program. This work was continued at a meeting of February 4 , 1985 by the new Legislative Committee, whose members are Directors Bishop, Hanko, and Wendin. The Committee is reporting to you in the accompanying report (R-85-08 dated February 5, 1985) . The new Initial Legislative Program proposed on the attached table focuses oninitiatives to be taken by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) . As we get further into the year, new MROSD or EBRPD ideas may surface, and legislation will. be introduced by others that the District will want to follow and perhaps take a position on. The table has been or(Tanized to reflect my sense of overall priorities for the nine items listed. I do not anticipate the District initiating legislation on item one, but we will have to maintain a very close watch and possibly take positions on or seek amendments to legislation that is considered by the Legislature. Also attached is the specific suggested language for the amendments to the Public Resources Code MROSD would sponsor and the discussion of the proposals. Changes have been made to the language and discussion as a result of the Committee' s review. Subsequent to the Committee meeting, S . Norton and I also reviewed P . R.C. Sections 5540 . 5 and 5540. 6 to see if any changes were necessary relative to exchange or transfer of dedicated less-than-fee interests in land, but felt that it is only marginally useful to change the wording there . In discussing these amendments with Ralph Heim, the District' s Legislative Consultant, we felt it would give the most flexibility to have two separate bills for the two different areas of subject matter we would be addressing. Be- cause of a time deadline for submission by legislators of new bill proposals to the Legislature 's Legislative Counsel , Mr. Heim has already obtained an author for the proposed bills, Assemblyman Byron Sher. I have been discussing with EBRPD staff possible joint sponsorship of one or both of the proposed MROSD bills. 1 M-85-14 Page two Finally, a copy of AB 355, sponsored by EBRPD, and referred to in the attached table, is also attached. Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Initial Legis- lative Program of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for the 1985-1986 Legislative Session, including the positions and priorities listed therein, after determining your position and priority on item nine. The Committee ' s recommendations are the same as my own for items one through eight. Note their recommendation for item nine where I felt it was not appropriate to make a recommendation of my own. PROPOSED INITIAL LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR 1985-86 SESSION Item Bill Prime Lead Support/Oppose/ No. No. Sponsor Author No Position Priority Summary 1 MROSD A Protection of District' s current share of property tax 2 MROSD S A Funding for proposed Bear Creek Redwoods State Park if property becomes available at reasonable cost 3 MROSD S A Funding for trail corridor con- nections, in fee or easements, from MROSD lands to State parks 4 MROSD Sher S B Clarification and strengthenin- of dedication rules to assure that trail and open space ease- ments can be protected by dedi- cation - P.R.C. 5540 5 MROSD Sher S B Modernization of repayment schedule for district debt and sales requirements to allow, for example, equal payments of prin- cipal plus interest rather than just principal-P. R.C. 5544 . 1 and 5544. 2 6 EBRPD S B Housekeeping changes to bring rules regarding filling of board vacancies into conformity with Elections Code-P.R.C. 5536 (c) 7 EBRPD S C Change audit publication date from not later than 90 to not later than 120 days after end of fiscal year-P.R.C. 5554 8 AB 355 EBRPD Klehs S C Housekeeping changes regarding disposition of district records - P.R.C. 5557 . 1 9 EBRPD ?* Allowance of up to $100 compen- sation for board member atten- dance at committee meetings and field trips, but maintaining $100 daily and $500 monthly maximum *Legislative Committee recommends NP for all meetings-P.R.C. 5536 (b ) 2/5/85 Proposed Housekeeping Changes to the Public Resources Code Affecting Regional Park and Open Space Districts Modernization of Schedule for Repayment of Debt A. Discussion P. R.C. Sections 5544 . 1 and 5544 . 2 authorize the board of directors to incur indebtedness subject to certain limitations . Both sections call for the indebtedness to be repaid in approximately equal annual installments. Bond counsel has advised that this statement means equal annual installments of principal only. Since interest can be substantial and declines over time for a particular debt, total cash flow of principal plus interest is heavier during the early part of the term. It would be helpful if regional park and open space districts had the flexibility of paying in equal annual payments of principal plus interest or in some other manner in order to smooth out overall cash flow. This would bring these districts into confor- mity with modern practice for public agency note or bond issues. Common modern practice for public agency note or bond issues allows for sale below par. The second proposed change to these sections allows for sale at up to a 5 percent discount. Sale of notes at a discount could be more attractive under certain market conditions and produce greater net note proceeds after costs. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has incurred debt pursuant to Sec. 5544 . 2 but has been hapered by the uneven cash flow repayment requirements. B. Proposed Amendments 'S'5544.L' Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article, the board may borrow money by issuance Of promissory notes or other evidences of indebtedness in an amount,or of a value,not exceeding in the axxregate at any one time the greater of 5 percent of the total of the district's general fund and development fund budgets for'the year in which the loan is made,or the sum of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000),to be used for any revenue-producing purpose for* which the district is authorized to expend funds. A district,shall not exercise the borrowing authority conferred by this section if the district,at any time during the previous two years, has not met the loon repayment requirements of this section and the repayment provisions set forth in the -promissory note 'or other evidence of indebtedness issued for a loan entered into pursuant to' this section. A district shall not expend in any one year"any amount of money in excess of'what it collects in property.tax.taxes, state and federal subventions, grants, loans, fees, gifts, bequests, or.income from other sources. 0 -repaid in Indebtedness incurred pursuant t this section Deletion )L 9 -equ a' period not to exceed five years from June 30th of the fiscal year in which it is 'incurred and shall bear interest at a rate not exceeding 10 percent per annum, or the. rate, allowed -under Section'. 53531 of the Government Code,if higher,'payable annually or semiannually or in part annually and in part semiannually. Each indebtedness incurred under this section shall be authorized = by a resolution of the board unanimously adapted, and shall be and shall be sold at evidenced by a promissory note or contract signed by the president not less than 95 percent of the board and attested by the secretary or treasure ne o t e of the principal amount two signatures may be by facsimile reproduction.., ,-,_, _ • thereof in such manner as The indebtedness authorized to be incurred by this section shall be' the district board shall in addition to,and the provisions of this section shall not apply to,any determine. bonded indebtedness authorized by vote of the electors. Nothing herein shall be construed so' as to limit or restrict the . authority of the district to issue promissory notes or deeds of trust in- the acquisition of real•property or the exercise of its right of eminent 'domain subject to the limitations in Section 5W. Nothing herein shall limit the authority of the district to borrow pursuant to Section 5544.3. 5544.2. '� (a) A district may acquire all necessary and proper lands- and facilities, or any portion thereof, by means of a plan to borrow n money or by purchase on contract. , (b) The amount of indebtedness to be incurred shall not exceed an amount equal to the anticipated tax income for the next four-year, period derived pursuant to Section 5545 or the anticipated tax income for the next 10-year period derived pursuant to Section 50M of the Government Code, or both; or, with respect to the East Bay Regional Park District only, the anticipated tax income for the next two-year period derived pursuant to Sections 5545 and 5545.5 or the anticipated tax income for the next 10-year period derived pursuant to Section 50077 of the Government Code,or both.All indebtedness which is incurred on or after July 1,1982,pursuant to this section shall be repaid4 a appscx. ' er�ua" l•4iw4s s-during a period 4- Deletion not to exceed 10 years from the date on which it is incurred and shall bear interest at a rate not exceeding•10 percent per annum,'or the rate allowed pursuant to Section 53531 of the Government Code, if higher,payable annually or semiannually or in part annually and in part semiannually. Each indebtedness shall be authorized by a resolution adopted by the affirmative votes of at least two-thirds of and shall be sold at the members of the district board and shall be evidenced by a not less than 95 percent promissory note or contract signed by the president of the board and of the principal amount attested by the secretary or treasure . ne oFfTief,.vo signatures may thereof in such manner as be by facsimile reproduction.At the time of making the general tax the district board shall levy after incurring each indebtedness and annually"thereafter until determine. the indebtedness is paid or until there is a sum in the treasury set apart for that purpose sufficient to meet all payments of principal and interest on the indebtedness as they become due, a portion of the taxes levied and collected pursuant to Section 50077 of the Government Code,if any, and pursuant to Sections 5545 and 5545.5 shall be levied and collected.and set aside sufficient to pay the interest on the indebtedness and the part of the principal that will become due before the proceeds of a tax levied at the next general tax levy will be available. (c) The indebtedness authorized to be incurred by this section shall be in addition to, and the provisions of this section shall not apply to, any bonded indebtedness authorized by vote of the electors. 2/5/85 Proposed Housekeeping Change to the Public Resources Code Affecting Regional Park and Open Space Districts Clarification of Park Dedication Rules A. Discussion The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District owns both trail and open space easements and would like assurance that they can be as securely dedicated as fee interests in land. Public Resources Code Section 5540 states that a district may acquire " . . .rights in real and personal property. . .necessary to the full exercise of its powers. " Section 5541 lists these powers and allows, for example, acquisition of trail easements. Section 5540 goes on to state that "a district may not validly convey any interest in any real property actually dedicated and used for park or open-space, or both, purposes without the con- sent of a majority of the voters of the district. . . . " . This language is somewhat ambiguous as to whether less-than-fee interests such as trail and open space easements are included in the dedica- tion language. B. Proposed Amendment 5540. Acquisition, use, and disposal of property A district may take by*grant, appropriation, purchase, gift, devise, condemnation, or lease, and may hold, use,enjoy, and lease or dispose of real and personal property of every kind, and rights in real and personal property, within or without the district, necessary to the full exercise of its powers. Lands subject to the grant of an open-space easement executed and accepted by the district in accordance with this article shall be deemed enforceably restricted within the meaning of Section 8 of Article XIII of the California Constitution. A district may not validly convey any interest in any real property actually dedicated and used for park or open-space, or both, purposes without the consent of a majority of the voters of the district voting at a special election called by the board and held for that purpose. Consent need not first be obtained for a lease of any real property for a period not exceeding 25 years;and consent need not first be obtained for a conveyance of any real property if the Legislature by concurrent resolution authorizes a conveyance after a resolution of intention has been adopted by at least a two-thirds vote of the board of directors of the district, specifically describing the property to be conveyed. Additional An easement or other interest in real property may be dedicated for park I�dnguag�e or open-space., or both, purposes by resolution or adopted motion of the board of directors, and any interest so dedicated may not be conveyed or otherwise alienated except as provided in the foregoing subparagraph. JAN 2 9 MS CALIFORNIA LECISLATURE_1983_W ASSEMBLY BILL RECULAII SESSION No. 355 Introduced by Assembly Member Klehs January 22, 1985 An act to amend Section 5557.1 of the Public Resources Code, relating to regional park, park and open-space, and open-space districts. LEGISLATIVE COUNSELS DIGEST AB 355, as introduced, Klehs. Regional park, open-space districts: documents. Under existing law, the board of directors of a regional park district, regional park and open-space district, or regional open-space district may authorize the destruction or disposition of any duplicate record, paper, or document, the original or a permanent photographic reproduction of which is in the files of the district. This bill would specify that the board may authorize the destruction or disposition of any duplicate record or paper, or any other document,the original or a permanent photograhic reproduction of which is in the files. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. an State-mdated local Appropriation: program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: I SECTION 1. Section 5557.1 of the Public Resources 2 Code is amended to read: 3 5557.1. The board may authorize at any time the 4 destruction or disposition of any duplicate record 3 or 5 paper, or any other document, the original or a 6 permanent photographic reproduction of which is in the 7 files of the district. 0 99 60 M-85-17 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985) oe MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 5, 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Legislative Committee (R. Bishop, N. Hanko, D. Wendin) SUBJECT: Initial Legislative Program for 1985-86 Discussion: The Legislative Committee met on February 4 , 1985 to review the General Manager ' s draft recommendations for the new Legislative Program. Among the items considered was the legislation proposed by the East Bay Regional Park District regarding compensating Board members for committee meetings and field trips . In view of the fact that the Board voted last year not to accept as much compen- sation for Board meetings as it is entitled to under current law, additional compensation for less-than-a-quorum functions would also appear not to be sought by our Board. The Committee recom- mends taking no position on this proposal . The Committee also agreed that the General Manager should check with the East Bay Regional Park District regarding the legisla- tion they had proposed two years ago relative to referal to districts by cities and counties of development proposals within 300 feet of district lands. Recommendation: We recommend that co h t the Board adopt the attached Initial Legislative Program for 1985-86 , including the positions and priorities indicated. I -7- PROPOSED INITIAL LEGI,c;LATIVE PROGRAM FOR 1985-86 SESSION Item Bill Prime Lead Support/Oppose/ No. No. Sponsor Author No Position Priority Summary 1 MROSD A Protection of District ' s current share of property tax 2 MROSD S A Funding for proposed Bear Creek Redwoods State Park if property becomes available at reasonable cost 3 MROSD S A Funding for trail corridor con- . nections, in fee or easements, from MROSD lands to State parks 4 MROSD Sher S B Clarification and strengthenir- of dedication rules to assure that trail and open space ease- ments can be protected by dedi- cation - P.R.C. 5540, 5 MROSD Sher S B Modernization of repayment schedule for district debt and sales requirements to allow, for example, equal payments of prin- cipal plus interest rather than just principal-P.R.C. 5544 .1 and 5544. 2 6 EBRPD S B Housekeeping changes to bring rules regarding filling of board vacancies into conformity with Elections Code-P.R.C. 5536 (c) 7 EBRPD S C Change audit publication date from not later than 90 to not later than 120 days after end of fiscal year-P.R.C. 5554 8 AB 355 EBRPD Klehs S C Housekeeping changes regarding disposition of district records - P.R.C. 5557 .1 9 EBRPD NP Allowance of up to $100 compen- sation for board member atten- dance at committee meetings and field trips, but maintaining $100 daily and $500 monthly maximum for all meetings-P.R.C. 5536 (b) R-85-07 (Meeting 85-03 Feb. 13 , 1985) �I MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REPORT February 4 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager; W. Tannenbaum, Real Property Representative SUBJECT: Approval of Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Communications Sublease by Gill Industries Introduction: Under the terms of the current lease with the District, Gill Industries has approached the District with a sublease proposal. In accordance with the "Policies for Black Mountain Communications Facilities" adopted at your December 8 , 1982 meeting (see memorandum M-82-27 dated November 19 , 1982) changes in existing facilities are to be considered on a case by case basis pursuant to the Board' s "Procedure for Reviewing Special Use Proposals of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands and Facilities" as adopted on August 23 , 1978 . This p P v articular proposal , which involves a long-term commitment, is also -required to be resented to the Board for review under the Policies q Regarding Improvements on District Lands" as adopted by the Board of Directors on January 11 , 1978 and amended on February 22 , 1978 , March 23 , i 1983 , and October 10 , 1984. Discussion: If approved by the Board, the sublessee (Communication Systems and Electronics Company) would install seven (7) antennae on the existing Gill Industries tower. No new microwave or satellite dishes would be added to the site, nor would any new supporting structures be installed. Open Space Management staff feel that the additional antennae would be a minimal additional visual intrusion. This sublease request appears reasonable both in light of its minimal intrusion on the environ- ment and its financial return to the District. Under the terms of the Sublease (Lease Agreement) and the Consent to Sublease (attached) all terms and conditions of the sublease are subject to those of the Master Lease between the District and Gill Industries. In the event that any of the terms and conditions of the sublease conflict with the provisions of the Master Lease, the Master Lease will prevail . The Consent to Sublease further stipulates that, for the privilege of being permitted to sublease, Gill Industries will be charged additional rent in the amount of 25% of the Fixed Minimum Rent set forth in the Master Lease. If the gross revenues of the sublessee increase to a specified level , the District will receive 25% of the charge paid to Gill Industries by the sublessee over and above the additional rent charge. R-85-07 Page Two The fee schedule described above will result in an estimated net increase of $700 per month to the District for the coming year. Additional rent charges for the sublease and the term of the sublease are dictated by the Master Lease. The Master Lease was originally approved by you on May 11 , 1983 (see memorandum M-83-50) and was for an initial term of five years with four, five-year options. Use: Should the sublease be approved, Communications Systems and Electronics Company will be providing link-up services and operations support for users of various types of communications radio equipment. Among their potential customers would be the City of Mountain View and the San Jose Mercury News. Recommendations: I recommend that you adopt the accompanying Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving the Ground Communications Sublease Between Gill Industries and Communications Systems and Electronics Company (Monte Bello Open Space Preserve Black Mountain) i i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING THE GROUND COMMUNICATIONS SUBLEASE BETWEEN GILL INDUSTRIES AND COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY (MONTE BELLO OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - BLACK MOUNTAIN) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows: Section One. The District may, under the provisions of Sections 5540 and 5563 of the Public Resources Code , lease property owned by the District for a period of up to twenty-five (25) years , and the Board of Directors reaffirms that the premises to be leased for Communication Facilities are temporarily unnecessary for park and open space purposes and considers that a sublease of such pre- mises for Communication Facilities is in the public interest, on the terms hereinafter set forth. Section Two. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby approve the Sublease between Gill Industries (as Master Tenant) and Communications Systems and Electronics Company (as Sublessee) as memorialized in the Lease Agree- ment (Sublease) and Consent to Sublease, copies of which are attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof , and does hereby authorize the President or appropriate officers to execute said Consent to Sublease on behalf of the District. Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the Master Tenant and Sublessee. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. CONSENT TO SUBLEASE THIS CONSENT TO SUBLEASE is made and entered into this 1.1th day of February, 1985, by and between the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a public district (hereinafter called "District's), and GILL INDUSTRIES, INC., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter called "Tenant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, District and Tenant have previously entered into a Ground Lease for Communication Structures dated May U, 1983 (hereinfter referred to as "Master Lease"), concerning certain premises situated in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California (hereinafter referred to as "The Premises"); and WHEREAS, Tenant, pursuant to Paragraph 16 of said Master Lease, wishes to sublet a portion of The Premises to Communication Systems and Electronics Company (hereinafter called "Subtenant"); and WHEREAS, Tenant has entered into a separate Lease Agreement (hereinafter called "Sublease") (as attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference made a part hereof) with Subtenant which is subject to the provisions of the Master w Lease and is contingent upon District approval; and WHEREAS, Tenant covenants and pledges that alterations of The Premises as a result of the Sublease will be minor and unintrusive to the surrounding open space (see Exhibit "B" as attached hereto and made a part hereof); and WHEREAS, Tenant has agreed to pay additional monthly rent to District in consideration of District's approval of said Sublease. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto mutually agree and covenant as follows: 1. Additional Rent. Over and above the Fixed Minimum Rent set forth in Paragraph 3 of the Master Lease, Tenant will pay to District additional rent in an amount equal to twenty-five percent (25%) of the Fixed Minimum Rent set forth in Paragraph 3. For the period February 14 through February 28, 1985, this amount shall be $334.00. Except for the month of February 1985, said additional rent will be due and payable on the first of each month in advance. The preceding paragraph is intended to provide rent in addition to the Fixed Minimum Rent as set out in Paragraph 3 and is not intended to amend Paragraph 3. (The Communications Systems and Electronics Company sublease shall be a separate additional sublease to the previously existing agreement between Tenant and Home Box Office.) ^1- I - 2. Percentage of Gross Revenues. Over and above the additional rent set forth in Paragraph 1 hereinabove, Tenant shall pay to District twenty-five percent (25%) of the gross revenues which it receives from Subtenant pursuant to Paragraph ILB.(2) of the Sublease, which shall be reported by Tenant to District as provided in Paragraph 13 of the Sublease. Said payment due to District from Tenant under this provision shall be payable within five (5) business days of Tenant's receipt of payments from the Subtenant as set forth in Paragraph 12 of the Sublease. 3. Term. It is understood and agreed that the Sublease shall be coterminous with the initial five-year period of the existing Master Lease which expires on March 31, 1988. Future options granted to Subtenant will be reviewed and approved by District in accordance with Paragraphs 16 and 22 of the Master Lease. 4. Waiver of Claims and Indemnification and Insurance. The requirements of Subtenant in Paragraph 23 and 24 of the Sublease shall also accrue to District. Subtenant shall name District as an additional insured under its general liability insurance olio and Tenant shall provide District g Y policy with written evidence of said coverage on or before February 28, 1985. 5. Priority of Master Lease. a In the event that any of the terms and conditions of the Sublease conflict with the terms and conditions of the Master Lease, the provisions of the Master Lease shall prevail in all cases without exception. Additional modifications and amendments of the Master Lease may be made through written agreement only when executed by the parties hereto. Except as hereby amended and modified, all other terms and conditions of the Master Lease shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Consent to Sublease as of the date first above written. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN TENANT: GILL INDUSTRIES,awt, SPACE DISTRICT a Qettibrrft ccomora��tion LA APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: By 4'� �� !� Title: Y� P r.�e-• - C +f-►*+ cc i President, Board of Directors By i ATTEST: Title: District Clerk -2- II .. LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated April 13, 1984. by and between GILL INDUSTRIES, 234 Gish Road, San Jose, California 95112 (hereinafter referred to as "GILL"). and COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY. 1334 North Tenth Street, San Jose, California 95112 (hereinafter referred to as "COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS"). is entered into with reference to the following facts: A. GILL provides cable television service in San Jose, Campbell and portions of the unincorporated part of Santa Clara County, California, by means of a cable television system. L owns B. GILL a communications tower 75 feet in height hereinafter referred to as the "Tower") and a radio equipment building (the "Building"), both of which are located near the peak of Black Mountain near San Jose, California, specifically with coordinates of the Tower being 370 19' 01" N. and 1220 08' 47" W. C. The aforementioned GILL facilities are situated on land leased by GILL from the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (hereinafter referred to as the "District") in accordance with that certain agreement entitled, "Ground Lease for Communications Structures" dated May 11, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as "Master Lease"), which is attached to this Lease Agreement marked Attachment "A" and incorporated herein by reference. D. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS provides engineering, installation, maintenance and operations support for users of various types of communications radio equipment. E. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS desires to expand its business operations by placing certain radio equipment within GILL's building and placing additional antennas on GILL's tower, and GILL is willing to permit such use of its facilities, all in accordance with the terms, conditions and provisions set forth below. NOW, .THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises set forth below, and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows: GILL leases to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS and COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS leases from GILL portions of the building and the Tower described hereinabove (hereinafter referred to as "leased premises") for the uses and on the terms and conditions set forth hereinafter. THE BUILDING 1. GILL leases to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS unrestricted non- exclusive access to the Building and all of the floor space therein with the exception of an area of approximately fifty (50) square feet of floor space which includes the area now sublet to Home Box Office, Inc., and a similar sized area immediately adjacent thereto along the east wall of the Building, the use and control of which excepted area will be retained by GILL. Any and all use or uses of the Building together with access thereto shall be subject to the terms, conditions and provisions contained in Attachment A regarding use or uses of the building and access thereto which are applicable to GILL. 2. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS may install properly licensed radio equipment in the building, except within the floor area retained by GILL. subject to the following conditions: A. No equipment shall be installed in such a way so as to block access to the area retained by GILL. GILL's access to said retained area shall be sufficient to allow routine servicing and installation or removal of all equipment in its area. `lr EXHIBIT "A" B. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall Amediately discontinue the use of any radio or other equipment or combinations of radio or other equipment installed by Col1',JU:71 CATiON SYSTE-NIS which causes interference to the operations of GILL's reception and transmission equipment upon COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS receiving notification by GILL of such interference and said equipment shall not be reactivated until such interference has been eliminated. C. COMMUNICATION SYSTEiNJS may connect radio equipment either to commercial power exclusively or to that line which is backed up by GILL's emergency power generator. In the latter case, however, the total load connected, including the connected equipment of GILL, must be at least three kilowatts lower than the name plate rating of the emergency power generator. D. All installation and maintenance of equipment must be done in a neat and workmanlike manner and left in a condition such that no safety hazard is present to GILL, its agents or employees, or to any other person. THE TOWER 3. GILL leases to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS all space on the Tower not presently occupied by antennas. 4. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS may install such antennas as required on the Tower subject to the following conditions: A. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS Will comply with all of the terms, conditions, and provisions applicable to GILL regarding the Tower contained in Attachment A, including the requirement of approval from the District prior to the installation of any additional antennas. B. The antennas added by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS must cause no interference, either mechanically or electrically,, with the presently existing antennas or the radio or other equipment of GILL or Home Box Office, Inc., located within the building. C. All installation and maintenance of antennas must be done in a neat and workmanlike manner and left in a condition such that no safety hazard is present to GILL, its agents or employees, or to any other person. MAINTENANCE 5. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall be responsible for maintenance of the building, the Tower, the emergency power generator, the buildines air conditioning system, and the general leasehold site as described in Attachment A except that GILL shall be responsible for the maintenance of the satellite receiving antennas and the connecting cables to those antennas. 6. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall maintain a level of maintenance such that the building (1) shall continue to have a high level of security. (2) shall continue to remain leak-free, (3) shall have a highly reliable emergency power system, and (4) shall have a continuously operating air conditioning system. 7. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall maintain the Tower to a level of maintenance that is consistent with good practice for similar structures. 8. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall maintain the ground area surrounding the building site in a good and safe condition and in accordance with the terms, conditions and provisions of Attachment A regarding said area and shall, further, cause said area to be completely free of debris of any kind. -2- 9. In the event that COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, for any reason, should fp-31 to achieve the level of maintenance required by this Lease Agreement. 0 GILL g may, at its option. perform or cause to be performed the work required to bring 0 said level of maintenance into conformity with this Lease Agreement and charge 4> COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS for all expenses incurred in connection therewith. C0.1411UNICATION SYSTEMS shall promptly reimburse GILL for any amount so charged by GILL. 10. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS acknowledges that it has inspected the building. the Tower and the premises covered by this Lease Agreement and that they all are in good condition. Upon execution of this Lease Agreement, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS accepts said building. Tower and premises in an "as is" condition. The responsibility for all maintenance and necessary repairs to the building, Tower and Dremises from the effective date of this Lease Agreement shall be borne by COWMUNIi-��ATION SYSTEMS. RENT AND FEES 1L In consideration for the lease of space in GILL's building. on GILL's Tower and for the use of other improvements to and upon the premises leased by GILL pursuant to Attachment A, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall pay to GILL a monthly rental as set forth hereinafter. A. For the period from the effective date of this Lease Agreement through November 30, 1984, (1) One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,500.00) per month plus (2) Thirty percent (30%) of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' gross revenues, if any, in excess of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) per month. B. For the period from December 1, 1984, through March 31, 1988, (1) An amount equal to the monthly rent payable by GILL to the District in accordance with Paragraphs 3 and 22 of Attachment A, per month plus (2) Thirty percent (30%) of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' gross revenues, if any, in excess of the sum of (a) the monthly rental payable by GILL to the District pursuant to Paragraphs 3 and 33 of Attachment A. and (b) One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per month. 12. All rents set forth under Paragraphs II.A(I) and ILB(I) shall be payable in advance on the first of each month. All rents set forth under Paragraphs II.A(2) and ILB(2) (hereinafter referred to as "percentage rental") shall be computed monthly and payable on the thirtieth (30th) day following each calendar month during the term of this Lease Agreement. "Monthly" rent periods are calendar months of each lease year (as defined in Paragraph 13.A herein) for the term of the lease. All rents are payable to GILL INDUSTRIES at 234 Gish Road, San Jose, California 95112, or at such other place as GILL may specify. 13. A. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall furnish to GILL a statement of CONUMUNICATION SYSTEMS' gross revenues within fifteen (15) days after the end of each calendar month and an annual statement of gross revenues within thirty (30) days after the end of each lease year. A "lease year" is defined as a calendar year except that the first lease year shall commence on the date the term commences and the last lease year shall end on the date the term expires or terminates. Each statement of gross revenues shall be signed and certified to be correct by COMMUNI- CATION SYSTEMS or its authorized representative and if COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS is a corporation. the statement shall be signed and certified to be correct by an offlicer of said corporation. -3- B. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall keep at its main office full and accurate books of account, records, cash receipts and other pertinent Bata showing C> its gross revenues. Such books of account, records, cash,, receipts and other pertinent data shall be kept for a period of not less than two (2) years after the end of each lease year. The receipt by GILL of an statement or any payment of percentage rent y 0 for any period, shall not bind GILL as to the correctness of the statement or the payment. C. GILL shall be entitled during the term and within two (2) years after the expiration or termination of this Lease Agreement to inspect and examine all COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' books of account, records, cash receipts and other pertinent data, in order that GILL can ascertain COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' gross revenues. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall cooperate fully with GILL in :Waking-akinCD, the said inspection. GILL shall also be entitled,, once during each lease year and once after expiration or termination of this Lease Agreement, to an independent audit of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' books of account, records, cash receipts and other pertinent data to determine COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS gross revenues. by a certified public accountant to be designated by GILL. The audit shall be limited to the determination of gross revenues as defined herein and shall be conducted during usual business hours at COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' office. D. If the audit shows that there is a deficiency in the payment of any percentage rent, the deficiency shall become immediately due and payable. The cost of the audit shall be borne by GILL unless the audit shows that COM.'11UNICA- TION SYSTEMS understated gross revenues by more than two percent (2%) in which case COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall pay all GILL's costs of the audit. E. GILL shall keep any information gained from such statements. inspection, or audit confidential and shall not disclose it other than to carry out the purposes of this Lease Agreement. 14. For purposes of calculating the percentage rental due to GILL, "gross revenues" of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall be defined as all revenues not specifically excluded below derived in any way from the building and the space located therein, the Tower, other improvements, site, grounds,0 or the equipment, improvements or personal property of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS located thereon or therein including but not limited to the use or operation of any of the foregoing either C. located at or used in connection with leased premises located on Black 7,lountain. Specifically included in gross revenues are floor space rental, repeater use fees and interconnect fees. "Gross revenues" shall not include any revenues derived from the sale of any fixtures, leasehold improvements, radio equipment antennas, installations or any other personal property which constitutes a capital asset of CONIMUNICATON SYSTEMS. Specifically excluded from gross revenues are maintenance and repair fees on installed equipment and master antenna connection fees. 15. COMMUNICATON SYSTEMS shall directly and promptly pay all utility bills to the charging authority for utility service, including electrical power, supplied to the leased premises. GILL shall retain a separate power meter which shall control and meter all electrical power supplied from the utility service meter to GILL and Home Box Office. Upon notification by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. GILL shall reimburse COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS for the electrical power supplied through GILL's separate power meter. 16. In the event COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS desires telephone service at or upon the leased premises, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall directly arrange for such telephone service and for the direct billing to it for such telephone se.-Vice. In the event GILL desires to have any telephone service, GILL will separately arrange for and pay for any such telephone service. 17. COMMUNICATIOtj SYSTEMS shall separately file the requ;.-.ed forms with the appropriate public agencies reporting personal property for taxation purposes and shall deliver copies of said forms to GILL for its records. Said forms filed by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall include all personal property owned by COM'MUNI- CATION SYSTEMS and located within or upon the leased premises. -4- ii 'I promulgated (collectively "regulations"), and shall at its oven expense abide by and comply with any and all such regulations regulating the use of the leased improve- ments or premises. 2. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER LEASE COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS agrees to comply with all of the covenants contained in said Master Lease insofar as they pertain to the use of the leased premises by GILL as the tenant, namely, the following paragraphs of said Master Lease: 1. Lease of Premises. 2B. Term. 8. Use. 9. Access to Premises. 10. Maintenance and Repair. 11. Alterations. 12. Liens. 13. Utilities. 14. Waiver of Claims and Indemnification. 16. Assignment and Subletting. 17. Default. 18. Entry by District. 19. Waiver. 20. Surrender of Premises. 21. Holding Over. 23. Notices. 24. Attorney's Fees. 25. General. Some of the above paragraphs of the Master Lease have been modified by the terms of this Lease Agreement. In the event those modifications conflict with any of the above paragraphs of the Master Lease, the modifications as they appear in this Lease Agreement shall prevail. If the modifications are not in conflict with the above paragraphs of the Master Lease but rather add to, expand or restate the conditions or burdens imposed upon COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, both the paragraphs of the Master Lease and the modifications contained herein shall be applicable to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. As long as COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS is not in default of any provision of this Lease Agreement, GILL shall be obligated to perform all its obligations under the Master Lease, and during the term of this Lease Agreement COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall have quiet enjoyment of the premises. 23. WAIVER OF CLAIMS AND INDEMNIFICATION. A. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS waives all claims against GILL for loss of business or for damage to property, including the improvements and any additions or alterations thereto and any equipment or machinery therein, or injury or death to persons occurring in, on, or about the premises, the improvements, or the -6- J 18. GILL shall pay all property taxes associated with the real property leased from the District. the Building, ,. the Tower. the emergency power the ID,air conditioning system, GILL's satellite receiving stations, and all other personal property owned by GILL affixed to or permanently located on the leasehold property as described in Attachment A. Notwithstanding the foregoing. all possessary interest Q foregoing, taxes, if any,, shall be prorated between GILL and COMMUNICATION' SYSTEMS based on the nurnber of square feet of the Building occupied by GILL and CON.I.MUNICATION SYSTE'MS. respectively. For purposes of this Paragraph.. GILL shall be determined to occupy fifty (50) square feet of the Building. a TERM 19. The term of this Lease Agreement shall commence as of 'May 1, 1984, and shall expire on March 31, 1988, unless terminated sooner or extended in accordance with the provisions contained in this Lease Agreement. The parties hereto acknowledcre that this is not only a lease of a portion of a building, Tower and personal Q property and equipment as set forth hereinabove, but is also a sublease of a portion of the Master Lease refe.7red to herein as Attachment I and is controlled by Paragraph 16 a said Master Lease entitled. "Assignment and Subletting." In the event the vriderlying "Master Lease for Communications Structures" between GILL and the District (Attachment 1) should terminate or otherwise cease to remain in effect. for any reason, then this Lease Agreement shall, at that time. become null and void. 20. A. GILL hereby grants to COMMUNICATION SYSTE-NIS four (4) additional condition:,1 options to extend this Lease Agreement, each for an additional period of five (5) =s upon expiration of the immediately preceding five (5) year period so that the rn.;-:imum term of this Lease Agreement including the initial five (5) year term of this `ease Agreement shall be a total of twenty-five (25) years. Each of said four condition"' options to extend the term of this Lease Agreement for an additional five-year period shall be exercised by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, if at e,14 by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' delivery of written notice of exercise of such option to GILL at least three (3) months, but not more than six (6) months prior to expiration of the lease term or lease term as extended. Each of the said five-year extension periods shall be on all of the terms and provisions contained in this Lease Agreement except as to rent. As a condition precedent to the exercise of this option k. to extend this Lease Agreement, the total rental amounts paid by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS to GILL under Paragraph ll(B)(2) of this Lease Agreement must have equalled or exceeded the total rental amounts paid by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS to GILL under Paragraph Il(B)(I) of this Lease Agreement for the twenty-fou:- (24) month period immediately prior to the termination of the lease term or lease term as extended. This condition precedent may be waived by GILL at the sole discretion of GILL. B. Rent for any of the four options to extend this lease term for a period of five years shall be negotiated by the parties hereto. If the parties agree upon an amount for rent for the said extended five-year term prior to the expiration of the previous lease term, they shall immediately thereafter execute an amendment to this Lease Agreement stating the amount of rent applicable to the extended term of the lease which rent shall become payable on the first day of the month of the new extended term of the lease. In the event the parties are unable for any reason to agree upon the amount of rent for the extended term of the lease prior to the expiration of the previous lease term, the amount of the rent for the extended term shall be established by mutually binding arbitration. The costs of arbitration shall be borne equally by the parties and such arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. GENERAL PROVISIONS 21. USE. The leased premises may be used for purposes of installing,, operatin,gr and maintaining the equipment and improvements set forth in Paragraphs 2 and 4 of this Lease Agreement for*,the transmission and reception of electromagnetic and other communications signals and for all lawful uses incidental thereto and for no other purpose without GILL's prior written consent. COMMUN'ICATION SYSTEMS shall not use the premises or permit anything to be done in or about the premises which will in any way conflict with any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or other statement of lawful governmental authority now in force or which may hereinafter be license area (as defined in the Master Lease), from any cause arising at any time. C, except as may be caused by the negligence or wilful conduct of GILL. CO%BlUN ICA- TIO,',,; SYSTEMS hereby indemnifies GILL and holds GILL exempt and harmless from and against any damage to property or injury or death to persons arising from the use a CP by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS of the premises and improvements, or the license area, or from the failure of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS to keep the premises. the improvements, or the license area in good and safe condition as herein provided. GILL shall not be liable to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS for any damage, injury. or death arising out of the act or negligence of any owner, occupant, or user of any property adjacent to or in the vicinity of the leased premises and not leased by GILL from the District. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall pay for all damage to the leased premises and surrounding areas caused by its agents, licensees, invitees and contractors. B. In the event the District prematurely terminates the underlying Master Lease between District and GILL pursuant to Paragraph 2B thereof, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS waives any and all claims against GILL which it may at that time have or which may develop in the future for any loss of business. revenue or prof-it resulting from the premature termination of this Lease Agreement. CP 24. INSURANCE. A. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, at its sole expense, shall obtain and keep in full force and effect during the term of this Lease Agreement a general liability insurance policy with an insurance company satisfactory to GILL, protecting o GILL and COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS against any and all liability arising from COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' use of the leased premises, the improvements, or the license area, or from any occurrence in, on, about, or related to the leased premises, the improvements, or the license area with a single combined property damage and personal injury limit of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00). All such public liability insurance shall insure performance by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS of the indemnity provisions of Paragraph 23A hereof, and the policy shall contain a cross-liability endorsement. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS agrees to furnish a certificate of such insurance to GILL naming GILL as an additional insured on or prior to the commence- ment date, and again upon any renewal or modification of such insurance. The limits of said insurance shall in no event be deemed to limit the liability of COMMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS hereunder. - B. GILL shall have no obligation to insure against loss to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS leasehold improvements, fixtures, machinery,, equipment, or other personal property in or about the premises occurring from any cause whatsoever, and COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall have no interest in the proceeds of any insurance carried by GILL. 25. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall not assign this Lease Agreement or sublet the premises, or any interest therein. 26. DEFAULT. A. The occurrence of any of the following shall constitute a default by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS: (1) Failure to pay rent when due, provided the failure continues for more than ten (10) days after notice has been given to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS by GILL. (2) Abandonment and vacation of the premises. (Failure to occupy and operate the premises for thirty (30) consecu- tive days shall be deemed an abandonment and vacation.) (3) Failure-,to perform any other provision of this Lease Agreem'ent if the failure to perform if not cured within C,thirty (30) days after notice has been given to COMMUNI- CATION SYSTEMS by GILL. If the default cannot reasonably be cured within thirty (30) days, COINBIUNF= CATION SYSTEMS shall not be in default of the lease if COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS commences to cure the -7- default within the thirty (30) day!!period and diligently and in good faith continues to cure the default. B. Notices under this paragraph shall specify the alleged default and the applicable lease provisions and shall demand that COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS perform the provisions of this Lease Agreement or pay the rent that is in arrears, as the case may be, within the applicable period of time, or quit the premises. No such notice shall be deemed a forfeiture or a termination of this Lease Agreement unless GILL so elects in the notice. C. GILL shall have the followinc, remedies if COMMUNICATION C, SYSTEMS commits a default. These remedies are not exclusive; they are cumulative in addition to any remedies now or later allowed by law. (1) GILL can continue this Lease Agreement in full force and effect, and the lease will continue in effect as long as GILL does not terminate COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' right to possession. and GILL shall have the right to c C50 ollect rent when due. During the period COIMUNICA- . TION SYSTEMS is in default. GILL can enter the premises and relet them, or any part' of them, to third parties for COMMUNICATION SYSTE*LV11s account. CONIMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS shall be liable immediately to GILL for all costs GILL incurs in reletting the premises. Reletting can be for a period shorter or longer than the remaining term of this Lease Agreement. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall pay to GILL the rent due under this Lease Agreement on the dates the rent is duc, less the rent GILL receives from any reletting. No act by Landlord allowed by this paragraph shall terminate this Lease Agreement unless GILL notifies COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS that GILL elects to terminate this Lease Agreement. (2) GILL can terminate COMMUNICATION SYSTE-NIS' right to possession of the premises at any time. No act by GILL other than giving notice to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall terminate this Lease Agreement. Acts of maintenance, efforts to relet the premises, or the appointment of a receiver on GILL's initiative to protect GILL's interest under this Lease Agreement shall not constitute a termination of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' right to possession. On termination, GILL has the right to recover from COMMUNICATION SYSTE*NIS: (a) The worth, at the time of the award of the unpaid rent that had been earned at the time of termina- tion of this Lease Agreement; (b) The worth, at the time of the award of the amount by which the unpaid rent that would have been earned after the date of termination of this Lease Agreement until the . time of award exceeds the amount of the loss of rent that COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS proves could have been reasonably avoided; (c) The worth, at the time of the award of the amount by which the unpaid rent for the balance of the term after the time of award exceeds the amount of the loss of rent that COMMUNICATION SYSTENNIS proves could have been reasonably avoided; and (d) Any other amount, and court costs, necessary to compensate GILL for all detriment proximately caused by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' default. -8- 4 I I� "The worth, at the time of the-"award," as used in (a) and (b) of this paragraph is to be computed by allowing interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum. "The worth. at the time of the award," as referred to in (c) of this paragraph. is to be computed by discounting the amount at the discount rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco at the time of the award, plus one percent (1%). (3) GILL, at any time after COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS commits a default, may cure the default at COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' cost. If GI LL LL t a an time, r b reason of COMMUNICATION 'ICATIO� SYST y E.IS default, pays any sum or does any act that requires the payment of any sum, the sum paid by GILL shall be due immediately from COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS to GILL at the time the sum is paid, and if paid at a later date shall bear interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum .from the date the sum is paid by GILL until GILL is reimbursed by COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. The sum, together with interest on it. shall be additional rent. (4) Rent not paid when due shall bear interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum from the date due until paid. 27. WAIVER. The waiver by GILL of any breach of any term, covenant or condition herein contained shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term. covenant or condition or any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition herein contained. The subsequent acceptance of rent hereunder by GILL shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding breach by COMMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS of any term, covenant or condition of this Lease Agreement, other than the failure of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS to pay the particular rent so accepted. 28. SURRENDER OF PREMISES. A. On"expiration or within ten (10) days after termination of the term, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall surrender to GILL the premises and all COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' improvements and alterations and improvements in good condition, ordinary wear and tear excluded, except for alterations that COMMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS has the right to remove or is obligated to remove under the provisions of this Lease Agreement. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall remove all of its radio equipment, antennas and all other personal property from the leased premises within the above-stated time. B. GILL can elect to retain or dispose of in any manner any alterations or COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' personal property that COMMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS does not remove from the premises on expiration or termination of the term as allowed or required by this Lease Agreement by giving at least ten (10) days' notice to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. Title to any such alterations or COIIMUNI- CATION SYSTEMS' personal property that GILL elects to retain or dispose of on expiration of the ten-day period shall vest in GILL. COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS waives all claims against GILL for any damage to COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS resulting from GILL's retention or disposition of any such alterations or COMMUNICA- TION SYSTEMS' personal property. COMMUNICATION SYSTE-NIS shall be liable to GILL for GILL's costs for storing, removing, and disposing of any alterations or COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' personal property. C. If COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS fails to surrender the premises to GILL on expiration or ten (10) days after termination of the term as required by this paragraph, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall hold GILL harmless from all damages resulting from COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS failure to surrender the premises. including without limitation, claims made b a succeeding- tenant resulting oa re5u from � Y a COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS' failure to surrender the premises. -9- i i 29. HOLDING OVER. Any holding over after t e expiration of the term of this Lease Agreement, with the consent of GILL. shall be construed to be a month to month tenancy terminable on thirty (30) days notice given at any time by either party. All provisions of this Lease Agreement except those pertaining to term and option to extend shall apply to the month-to-month tenancy. 30. NOTICES. All notices, statements, demands, requests, approvals, or consents (collectively "notices") given hereunder by either party to the other shall be made in witing and shall be served personally or by first class mail, certified or return receipt requested, postage prepaid, and addressed to the parties as follows: GILL: GILL INDUSTRIES 234 Gish Road San Jose, CA 95112 COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS: COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY 1334 North Tenth Street San Jose, CA 95112 or to such other address as either party may have furnished to the other as a place for the service of notice. Any notice so served by mail shall be deemed to have been delivered three (3) days after the date posted. 31. ATTORNEY'S FEES. If any action at law or in equity shall be brought to recover any rent under this Lease Agreement, or for or on account of any breach of or to enforce or interpret any of the provisions of this Lease Agreement, or for the recovery of the possession of the premises, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable attorney's fees, the amount of which shall be fixed by the court and shall be made a part of any judgment rendered. 32. GENERAL. (a) This Lease Agreement contains all of the terms, covenants and conditions agreed to by GILL and COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. and this Lease Agreement may not be modified orally or in any manner other than by an agreement in writing signed by all of the parties to this Lease Agreement or their respective successors in interest. (b) The covenants and conditions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and bind the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, sublessees, and assigns of the parties. (c) Whenever consent or approval of either party is required, that party shall not unreasonably withhold such consent or approval. (d) If either party is a corporation, that party shall deliver to the other party on execution of this Lease Agreement a certified copy of a resolution of its board of directors authorizing the execution of this Lease Agreement and naming the officers that are authorized to execute this Lease Agreement on behalf of the corporation. (e) Rent and all other sums payable under this Lease Agreement must be paid in lawful money of the United States of America. (f)' All attachments to this Lease Agreement are incorporated herein by reference. (g) All provisions, whether convenants or conditions, on the part of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS shall be deemed to be both covenants and conditions. (h) The definitions contained in this Lease Agreement shall be used to interpret this Lease Agreement. -10- (i Sf (i) Whenever required by the context of this Lease Agreement, the singular shall include the plural. (j) The unenforceability, invalidity, or illegality of any provision shall not rendere the other provisions unenforceable, invalid or illegal. (k) All persons who have signed this Lease Agreement shall be jointly and severally liable hereunder. x (1) When the context of this Lease Agreement requires, the mascu- line gender includes the feminine, a corporation, or a partnership, and the singular nu-nber includes the plural, (m) The captions of this Lease Agreement are for convenience only and are not a part of this Lease Agreement and do not in any way Ii►nit or amplify the terms and provisions of this Lease Agreement. (n) This Lease Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. (o) Time is of the essence as to all of the provisions of this Lease Agreement as to which time of performance is a factor. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Lease Agreement as of the date first above written. GILL INDUSTRIES COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND a California, corporation ELECTRONICS COMPANY Title a �„ Ae -By �C`R l�TitleX 4' �+- IY TF, �!' -11- ffi;� Y .,,� i '9s.d. .�� „� � '��s.jr �'• l I STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) On this 13 L day of _ K 1984, before me. the undersigned Notary Public, personally r appeared// !)! Cl _ G �L1�rf �o � /r/ ' �J Ci S 1'•l ��t personally known to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to/ be the person(sT—who executed the within instrument as , 51"c1e ILf � GiheCV� and . 0 Fj c�/�yI!,i: — or on behalf of GILL INDUSTRIES, a lifornia corporation, and acknowledged to ine that GILL INDUSTRIES• a California or oration. executed it. P WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public, State of California OFFICIAL SF-AL DIANE F FLO(?-S NOTARY PUBLIC - CALL-pizT;;,:, SANTA CLARA CUUh7Y ?Ay comm. expires SAP 18. i9: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) Ss. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) On this day of 1984, before me, the undersigned Notary Public. personally appeared v o b Q personally known t me proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence, to be the person(s) who executed the within instrument as i cC' Pre5ide qL—O .a tCX— and e.-� or on ` behalf of COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY. and acknowledged to me that COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND ELECTRONICS COMPANY executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. (�X V1� Notary Public, State of California OFFICIAL SEAL DIANE F FLC;>ES NOTARY PUuL'C SANTA C1JtRA COUNTY My comm. expires S:? 18, ._Z7 -12- I v if c L 31 BLACK MOUNTAIN SITE 4 t_ACG� Q 81 Prodelin 10' -Andrew I214-700 P10-122B Dual-Polarization Dual Polarization _ 1 �Z f t JV�� 6 Prodelin b Pro elic4 213-700 213-740 Veri al Dual-P larization Z uAcE � t N co 00 Co QO r I N r 1 r1 N Ex) 571 t-A G� EXHIBIT "B" M-85-21 (Meeting 85-03 , AA, Ads; February 13 , 1985) MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMORANDUM February 7 , 1985 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes , Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Conversion of Public Communications Coordinator Position from Three-Quarters to Full-Time Basis Background: Charlotte MacDonald, who has been with the District for six years , will be leaving her Public Communications Coordinator position at the end of March. This position has been filled on a three-quarters time basis , except for a period during our Tenth Anniversary year when it was increased to full-time. Since Charlotte announced her plans to leave, I have been reviewing the Public Communications Coordinator position with members of the District' s management and administrative staff and with Gary Foss , the District Personnel Consultant. Discussion: Based on these discussions , I am requesting that you approve the conversion of the Public Communications Coordinator position to a full- time staff position. The demands on the Public Communication and Govern- mental Liaison Program have grown substantially since C. MacDonald joined the staff, and I do not see such demands diminishing in the future. In light of the expanded scope of the Program and the greater emphasis being placed on educating members of the public about the District and its goals , I feel the Public Communications Coordinator 's position has expanded to a 40-hour per week job. Some of the key projects and activities in the proposed Action Plan for 1985-1986 that will demand an increased amount of the Public Communications Coordinator 's time during the coming year include scheduling events to encourage site use and to publicize the District; targetting low awareness areas for special publicity about the District; and expanding the program of public presentations and displays with emphasis on noontime presentations to business and industry. My recommendation to expand the position to full-time does present you with a policy question. Specifically, what amount of staff time and proportion of the District' s resources should be directed to a public communications program? I do not feel that the expansion of the position to full-time violates any previous decisions you have made regarding the role and level of the District's Public Communication and Governmental Liaison Program. During the advertisement period for the position, I intend to continue reviewing the Public Communications Program, the job of the Public Communi- cations Coordinator, and the relationship of this position to other staff positions . This review will assist me in determining the type of person I M-85-21 Page 2 am seeking to fill the position. In addition, I will be reviewing the support staff needs of a full-time Public Communications Coordinator and what impact any increased support time would have on the Administrative Study recently completed by our Personnel Consultant. Financial Impact: I do not foresee any probable financial impact by ex- panding the position to full-time since the new Public Communications Coordinator would be hired probably at the lower end of the salary scale. When the top of the scale is reached costs would increase by 25% plus any support staff or other program costs due to increased activity. The cur- rent salary range for this position, based on a 40-hour week, is $2235 - $3013 monthly. Recommendation: I recommend that you approve the conversion of the Public Communications Coordinator ' s position to a regular, full-time staff posi- tion and authorize me to fill the position as soon as possible. v a MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors er FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: F.Y.I. DATE: Feb. 13, 1985 22400 Skyline Blvd . Box =' La Honda, Ca . 94020 Patrick Miller- February 8, 19H5 1 N Associates 1780 Sonoma Avenue Berkeley , Ca . 94707 Re: Skyline Ridge open Space !Weserke Preliminary Plan Dear Mr . Miller : The proposal to implement the practice or prescription burning is ill -advised . trip burns will adversely affect the normal flora and fauna cycles. !'hey will also damaqw insect life in the area . the normal fire cycle in the Skyline Ridge area is one every hundred years . Prescription burns by MROSD till certainl -y be much more often than that . Rather than disturbing the natural processes. they should look to more veasonable all "i native methods. For example, manual removal of brush by volun Leers would be much more sensible . The mulch material created could be used to benefit disturbed areas . The whole concept of piesrription burning is misguided . H"i-Ang introduces short and long term negative effects like smoke pollution . There is "I so the great likelihood that 4a controlled burn ran become an uncontrolled burn . The MROSD should preserve nature, not place it in dt:ancger of being destrojed . jr you do decide to carry out this had plan . I must urge you to provide the fire hyUrants, fire equipment and adequate water systems planned for Phase 11 Upfory any burning is begun . Sincerely , Leslie Wadsworth f ' l6:4�Q/ At, Agor Xh I OV-7 r,< MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-11,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 February 7, 1985 Mr. Robert Marks Executive Director Governmental Research Council of San Mateo County 555 Veterans Boulevard Suite 110 Redwood City, CA 94063 Dear Bob: Thank you for your letter of January 4 , 1985, which I shared with my Board. In response to your hoping to receive an official reaction from the District on the Governmental Research Council ' s report, I want to let you know that the staff and various members of the Board are continuing to review and digest the document. As I hope you gleaned at the December 12 Board meeting, some of the recommendations included in the GRC report are already in the works. The District is currently in the process of developing its Action Plan for Implementation of the Basic Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for the 1985-1986 Fiscal Year, and at their January 23 meeting, the Board tentatively approved the key projects and activities that would be incorporated into the Action Plan. As you can see from the partial list of key projects and activities on the attached sheet, we have turned several of the suggestions and recommendations made in the GRC report into Dis- trict Action items on which we ' ll focus during the 1985-1986 fiscal year. Others may show up as "Typical Projects and Activities" . I feel that many of the projects noted above will allow more and more residents of San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties to become familiar with their open space lands and the District. I 'm sure you ' ll be pleased to know that the District ' s Board of Directors is planning to hold a joint meeting with the San Mateo 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 Mr. Robert Marks Page Two County Board of Supervisors this spring. This initial meeting, which will be a land tour of District property in San Mateo County, will allow both Boards to learn more about each other and related goals, to discuss items of mutual interest, and to foster a spirit of cooperation between the two agencies. Although the Boards of the District and the County may be polarized with respect to the buildings on the former Hassler Health Home property, the joint acquisition ofthe Edgewood property indicates that these two govern- mental bodies can work together on projects that benefit the citizens of San Mateo County. As Director Hanko indicated at the December 12 meeting, any help GRC can provide to the Public Transportation Committee would be greatly appreciated. In addition, Charlotte MacDonald, the District's Public Communications Coordinator, will be contacting you, if she hasn' t already, to ascertain whether there' s more detailed survey data by subarea that would help the District in targetting publi- city toward low awareness areas. Bob, thank you for your January 4 letter. Despite the short amount of time that has passed since we received the completed Governmental Research Council report on the District, I feel that the District' s Board and staff have made a significant first-step effort to incor- porate some of the GRC ' s recommendations and suggestions into next year' s Action Plan. Sincerely yours, Herbert Grench General Manager HG:ej cc: MROSD Board of Directors Partial L of Key Projects and Act- -ties Proposed for the 1985-1986 Action Plan Seek and encourage agencies and groups to undertake sole or joint acqui- sition projects which will preserve additional open space such as the San Mateo County section of the Bayfront Trail. Continue the 'Liaison efforts of multi-jurisdictional projects, specifi- cally the Planning and implementation of the Bayfront Trail and the Purisima Creek Redwoods open Space Preserve. Commence or continue implementation of the Master Plan for the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve in cooperation with Peninsula Open Space Trust. (It should be noted that four public meetings were held throughout the Master Plan ' s Preparation to solicit input from the public as to the types of activit ies and uses that should occur on the Preserve. ) Complete a plan of action for Natural Resource Categorization and Manage- ment Planning of District preserve under policies adopted by the Board. Implement at least one new site development project with Peninsula Open Space Trust utilizing volunteer support. Increase volunteer support by 30% by utilizing the Trails Information and Volunteer Center, the Cali- fornia Conservation Corps, and Peninsula Open Space Trust for site development and maintenance. If interest continues, conduct another bus tour of District lands for public officials and key staff. Hold a joint meeting with San Mateo County Parks and Recreation Commission. Schedule Board members to make presentations sometime during the year to each city in their wards that wishes a presentation. Send annual progress report to government officials throughout District. Schedule one or two special events to encourage site use and to publi- cize District. Possiblities include photo contest, orienteering, birding, geology day, etc. Consider also a big picnic with all the groups involved with the District. Based on demographic date from GRC Survey and other information, target low awareness areas for special publicity about MROSD. Continue to Print and distribute the Openspace newsletter and/or other District z)ublications in line with the consensus of the Board which followed the publications workshop. Expand program of public presentations and displays with new materials and participants, with emphasis on noontime presentations to business and industry (if these prove successful in 1984-1985) . If feasible, try a pilot program of placing permanent MROSD "handout stations" in selected libraries or other public buildings in each county. Complete production and distribution of series of public service announce- ments for airing on public access cable and commercial television. MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: F.Y.I. DATE: February 8, 1985 Meeting 85-01 Ni 1v-0 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT SU %YOF JANUARY 9, 1985 REGULAR BOARD Recitation ofP dge of Allegiance to the Flag T'he Pledge of Allegiance was le by members of Boy Scout Troop 80 of Mountain View and was followed by a brief slide showpf District scenes. Informational Presenta *on on South Bay Wp'tlands Coalition - Debi TEn'. 1—son, Program Directo-r\of Peninsula nservation Center, briefed the Board on the purpose a"nd objectiveof the South Bay Wetlands Coalition. The Board voted\to place/ he adoption c-C a Wetlands Resolution on a future agenda,,for c nsideration. C4 b Election of Board officers for 5 - The followin-f members of the Board were elected to serve as f ers for the coming year: Presi- dent - Harry Turner; Vice Pre ident\- Teena Kenshaw; Treasurer - Katherine Duffy; and Secret y - Non`l,�te Hanko. 'Appointment of Board Committees - The Board reviewed, but took no action, on the staff mem6randum outlinin"4, current composition of Board committees Ap o ntments to Board 6�71 ittees will occur at p the Jan Regular 23 R a 7meeting. Dedication Status of District Lands The Boa d accepted the staff report on the dedi tion status of District 11 nds. .AdoDtion of New dative Site Emphasis Plan and 'se and Management Review Schedule ?4 The Plan and Sch—e-U—ule were adol#ed by the Board. Jean H. Fiddes District Clerk aao 0-eo- 0 anmn4c MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 February 1, 1985 Assemblyman Byron Sher California Legislature State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Byron: Thank you so much for agreeing to author the District's proposed amendments to the Public Resources Code! But even more important than that, congratulations on your appointment as Chair of the Natural Resources Committee! I hope you can get the support you need from the Committee and Assembly to accomplish some good things. With warm regards, Herbert Grench General Manager HG:ej cc:w'MROSD Board of Directors R. Heim Herbert A.Grench.General Manager Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G-She;!ey,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin 41wh 4- 0"no'N"nc MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-11,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022 (415)965-4717 January 29 , 1985 Ivor J. James, Jr. , Trustee 2120 Briarwood Drive San Jose, California 95125 Dear Mr. James: As promised at the public meeting of January 23 , 1985, 1 am responding in writing to your letter dated January 7 , 1985. Should you need clarification on any of the topics covered here, please do not hesitate to contact my office. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is a special district formed by voter initiative in 1972. It' s main purpose is to acquire (through donation or purchase) , preserve and manage remote undeveloped acreage in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. As part of its land management philosophy the Dis- trict encourages low-intensity public use of its preserves. Such uses could include hiking, horseback riding, photography, meditating, kite-flying, etc. The District is not a park agency and does not construct extensive public facilities on its prop- erties. The emphasis is upon leaving the land in its unaltered state, for preservation of the natural flora and fauna. Currently, the District lands are divided into 19 open space pre- serves including approximately 18 ,000 acres. The Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve is the southern-most area in the District and it contains approximately 2700 acres. Some of this preserve actually extends outside of the District's formalized boundaries. Perhaps this is a good time to address your inquiry vis a vis the District' s boundaries and sphere of influence. Sphere of influence is actually a political/geographical definition used by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) . (For detailed information on LAFCO and its jurisdiction you may want to contact Kathy Lazarus, Executive Director, (408) 299-2424 . ) When the District was originally established in 1972, a legal description of its boundaries was required. In general, legal descriptions used by existing special districts in the area (e.g. , school , soil conservation, flood-control, etc. ) were the most expedient method of describing District boundaries. The 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 Ivor J. James, Jr. , Trustee January 29, 1985 Page Two result was that the boundary of the District was limited to existing property lines when in fact natural boundaries, (e.g. , creeks, ridges, canyons , etc. ) often comprised the more logical open space parameters. In 1983 , LAFCO required the District to formally designate its sphere of influence as determined by these natural boundaries. Theoretically, this sphere of influ- ence represents the "outer boundary" of the District. Enclosed is a map showing the location of the District boundary in relation to its sphere of influence. I should point out that the area in which you have expressed particular interest is located in the southeast portion of the District and its sphere of influence. A discussion of boundaries would be incomplete without some reference to the process of annexation. District boundaries may be enlarged by formal petition to LAFCO to annex certain proper- ties. The District only initiates annexation of those parcels which have already been acquired, and it is not our policy to seek the annexation of property not owned by the District. Paragraph 3 of your letter refers to the "two small dirt roads which fork from Loma-Almaden Road. " A majority of the District' s acquisitions result from unsolicited owner offers to sell, as was the case with Mr. Barlow's 120 acre property. With this acquisi- tion the District assumed no interest in the dirt roads leading to Loma Prieta, 'except 'as it actually exists on the former Barlow property, nor would it be our intention to prevent anyone from passing through District property to gain access to these roads although we are not aware of recorded rights in favor of third parties. On rare occasions, the District Rangers might use these roads but ordinarily only in an emergency situation (e.g. , fire, injury, etc. ) . Indeed, the presence of District Rangers should provide some peace of mind and security to the occupants of the area. On the subject of roads you raised some question regarding the status of Loma Almaden Road. Loma-Almaden Road (referred to by some as Mt. Umunhum Road) has actually been in existence for many decades. Since that time the public, as well as adjoining prop- erty owners, have used the road to gain access to the Sierra Azul area. This long term continuous and notorious use may classify the road as public according to the doctrine of prescriptive rights. In the late 1950s the Air Force improved the road in conjunction with its installation on Mt. Umunhum. I might add that their rights to the road are "non-exclusive. " The Air Force site, though no longer in use, has continued to be minimally maintained by the Federal government; however, this government stewardship is only temporary as the site has been designated as excess land. The road does not meet Santa Clara County standards and the County has expressed no interest in either improving or maintaining it. Ivor J. James, Jr. , Trustee January 29 , 1985 Page Three It would seem that the fate of that portion of Loma-Almaden Road where it branches off from Hicks Road is one of continuing deterioration and disrepair as the Government phases out its pres&.nce in the area. A special assessment district for the purposes of road maintenance formed by users of the road might be one method of ensuring the road ' s continued maintenance. Such a project would be costly both in terms of time and recurring costs. Another alternative might be to let the road degrade to a gravel-road condition. In Paragraph 5 you raised the issue of rating. The District uses a number of evaluation criteria to prioritize land areas in terms of their suitability as open space. The enclosed Master Plan shows how areas within the District have been rated and provides an explanation of the criteria mentioned above. The Master Plan is currently being revised both to update the rating system and to rate the areas of the District's sphere of influence. (There are few remaining copies of the Master Plan and should you plan to discard your copy, it would be appreciated if you would return it to the District.) Your inquiries in Paragraphs 6 and 7 of your letter provide an opportunity to briefly discuss the District's planning review proce�dure. Enclosed is a copy of the acquisition report for the Barlow property from the public meeting of December 12, 1984 . This report included interim use and management recommendations for the newly acquired property. As you can see from the report, the District has no current plans to construct trails on this parcel. The District periodically reviews all of its preserves to ensure appropriate use and management. The Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve is due for its planning review in the Spring of 1985. As with all such procedures , public comment is encouraged. Your name has been added to the District's mailing list and you will be in-formed of any future possible development and forthcoming planning considerations. Also, as promised at the public meeting, District staff is more than willing to conduct some informational meetings with the neighbors in the area. In addition to the mechanism for review mentioned above, the District initiates an annual review of the Relative Site Emphasis Plan. Enclosed is the report for this year which was adopted at the public meeting of January 9 , 1985. A main purpose of this plan is to determine budget priorities. Some preserves receive more publicity in the form of trail brochures, docent-led hikes, etc. , than others. Hence, the funds budgeted for these preserves is greater than others. As you can see from the enclosed report, that portion of the Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve containing the former Barlow property (the Mt. Umunhum Area) is number 24 in its emphasis, out of a total of 26 sites. I ` . Ivor J. James, Jr. , Trustee January 29 , 1985 Page Four Finally, I have attached the applicable portion of the Public Resources Code in partial response to your inquiry regarding dedication. Section 5540 of the Public Resources Code, Article 3 , Division 5, Chapter 3 addresses in part, the acquisition, use and disposal of property. I have also included Resolution 79-54 which delineates the District's dedicated lands policy. Essentially, leaving a particular property temporarily undedicated allows for more flexibility in determining the ultimate boundaries of various preserves. Once dedicated as open space, public lands remain so in perpetuity thus ending the opportunity to exchange interests or transfer density rights, except as provided by law. Mr. James, I have attempted here to respond to the inquiries contained in your letter of January 7 , 1985 without engaging in excessive digression. There may be additional questions and, if so, the District encourages you to ask them. Thank you for expressing a sincere interest in the District and we look forward to your future participation. Sinc e , L. rai Britton-SR/I9A Land Ac uisition Manager LCB:cac Enclosures -\-o. 85-03 M,.f---- 85-03 KIDPENINNSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Feb. 13, 1985 RE7VISED C L A I M S Ate..I Name Descries Lion 7903 3--5. Ace Fire Equipment Service Fire 7904 T6 2--P 7 Ervin Alves Union Oil Jobber Fuel for D-:stric-t Vehicles 7905 30: Amerigas Tank P-enua 7906 1-3.35 Ameron Field SL:pp7 i es; 7907 '03.Yi' Assc. of Environmental Prof. Annual 2:5mbers�hi-) 7908 A T & T Telephone Service 7909 653.77 Big Creek Lumber Co. Field Supplies 7910 16.52 James Boland Reimbursement--Field Supplies 7911 263.71 L. Craig Britton Reiirb=-semEnt--SemL-=Expense 7912 900.1100 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative- ansultmt for January 7913 19.50 CA Native Plant Society MEnbershdp Dues 7914 355.771 Communications Research Co. Radio Ma�m-m-znce md Antennas 7915 6.08 Crest Copies Blueprints , 7916 30O.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Ser-rices 7917 52.19 The Dark Room Photo Processing 7918 250.00 Dennis Danielson Rei:mbi=semEnt---Rang-- for Purisin-a Msi:knce ' 7919 701.16 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies 7920 1-2 0.6 3 Dyna Industries, Inc. Medical Supplies—Field Office 7r"--1 5 8,-5 Or,,.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. Land P,=h-a-se—S=oi= Investments 7922 796.00 Flinn, Gray & Herterich District Insur—c—ce 7923 700.00 Foss & Associates January Consulting Fee and , A&dnistrative Study 7924 200.56 Foster Bros. Security Systems Security Locks 7925 39.30 The Frog Pond Meal Conferences 7926 606.70 Gnaphicstat Purisima Y,--p 1- ,rlar 7927 160.02 Nbry Gundert Reinbu-r---em:-nt--P:--iNr=t:e Vehicle and Drafting Supplies 7928 i00.00 David Hansen ReimbL--semEnt--T---aa-' Conference 7929 169.73 Harbinger Commmications Computer Services 7930 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Sere-ce 7931 174.00 Image Technology Overlay for Yaster '-:1an 7932 42.00 Lauren Langford Phototyping 7933 63.00 League of California Cities SubscriDtim 7934 442.00 Los Altos Garbage Co. Dunpster Rental 7935 8.00 Tom of Los Altos Hills Subscription 7936 20.01 Los Altos Stationers Office Supplies CLAIMS 85-0 Meetirig 85-t73 Feb ruE 13, 1985 # REVISED Name Description 7937 500.00 Mindego Road Account Mindego Road Repair 7938 350.24 Minton's Luber & Supply Co.. Field Supplies 7939 76.26 Mobil- Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7940 174.36 National Mailing Services Mailing Services for Newsletter 7941 228.76 Norneyls Office Supplies 7942 219.50 Stanley R. Norton September through December Expenses 7943 159.51 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 7944 666.48 Pacific Bell Telephone Services 7945 339.44 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities 7946 27.26 Pacific Hardware Field Supplies 7947 11.02 City of Palo Alto Utilities 7948 15.00 Park Law Enforcement Assc. Membership Dues 7949 12.87 Patton Bros. , Inc. Field Supplies 7950 395.88 Peninsula Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7951 63.37 Pine Cone Lumber Co. ,- Inc. Field Supplies 7952 6,754.37 Pinkerton's Inc. December Guard Service 7953 239.20 P.I.P. Trail Etiquette Brochure Printing 7954 165.00 Fred Pryor Seminars, Inc. Seminar 7955 13.38 Rancho Hardware & Garden Shop Field Supplies 7956 198.09 Redwood Trade Bindery Monte Bello Brochures 7957 39.72 Research Institute Subscription 7958 603.19 Rice Trucking & Materials Base Rock for Parking Lot .and TraiL, 7959 . 8.25 San Francisco Examiner Subscription 7960 101.08 San Francisco Water Dept. Water Service 7961 208.74 San Jose Forest Products Field Supplies 7962 403.90 Scribner Graphic Press Monte Bello Brochures 7963 16.98 Sears, Roebuck & Co. Field Supplies 7964 502.09 Shell Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7965 266.44 Signs of the Times Trail Signs 7966 57.00 Skyline Ranch Reimbursement--Utilities 7967 14.56 Skyline County Water District Water Service 7968 395.00 Special Districts Mgmt. Seminars Seminar for Teena Henshaw -Stmidard nrds;-%int- ea Fiqald=sapplles,- 7970 311.38 Ticor Title Insurance Title Insurance for Westbay Caammity Associates Property 7971 116.97 Tools 'W' Us Tools and Repair Supplies 7972 34.19 David Topley Reimbursement--Training Classes CL 85-03 Meeting 85-03 February 13, 1985 Arcot Name REVISED Description 7973 48.95 Union Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7974 171.99 Uno Graphics Rancho and Windy Hill Brochures 7975 220.00 University of California,SC Enrollment Fees 7976 71.96 Sandy Voorhees Reimbursement--Private Vehicle 7977 45.00 W. Governmental Research Assc. Subscription I! 7978 15.00 Ellis Wallace Reimbursement--Training Classes 7979 150.00 Robert Watson Security Deposit Refund 7980 831.80 Xerox Monthly Maintenance, Supplies and Service 7981 175.00 Alice Cummings Reimbursement--Editing Tbrkshop 7982 81.48 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Meal Conferences 7983 215.92 Petty Cash Photo Processing, Meal Conferences Private Vehicle, Field Supplies Books and Office Supplies CiADis No. 85-03 Meeting 85-03 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: Feb. 13, 1985 C L A I M S # A_-oun't Name Description 7903 345.06 Ace .Fire Equipment Service Fire Extinguishers 7904 762.97 Ervin Alves Union Oil Jobber Fuel for District Vehicles � 7905 12.00 Amerigas Tank Rental 7906 iL18.85 Ameron Field Supplies 7907 60.00 Assc. of Environmental Prof. Annual IMA--,hership 7908 411.48 A T & T Telephone Service 7909 659.77 Big Creek Lumber Co. Field Supplies 7910 16.52 James Boland Reimbi:rsement--Field Supplies 7911 263.71 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement--Seminar Expense 7912 900.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant for January 7913 19.50 CA Native Plant Society Membership Dues 7914 355.71 Com�ranications Research Co. Radio Maintenance and Antennas 791-5 6.08 Crest Copies Blueprints . 7916 300.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Services 7917 52.19 The Dark Room Photo Processing 7918 250.00 Dennis Danielson Reimbi_-senent--Range for Purisima Residence �7919 101.18 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies 7920 120.63 Dyna Industries, Inc. Medical Supplies--Field Office 58,500.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. Land Purchase--Stour Investments 7922 790.00 Flim, Gray & Herterich District Insurance 7923 700.00 Foss & Associates January Consulting Fee and A:±dnistrative Study 7924 200.56 Foster Bros. Security Systems Security Locks 7925 39.80 The Frog Pond Meal Conferences 7926 606.70 Graphicstat Purisima Map I.,,Iyla-r 7927 160.02 1,,hry Gundert Reinbursement--Private Vehicle and Drafting Supplies 7928 100.00 David Hansen Reimbursement--Trail Conference 7929 169.73 Harbinger ComTunications Computer Services 7930 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Service 7931 174.00 Image Technology Overlav for Master Plan 7932 42.00 Lauren Langford Phototyping 7933 60.00 League of California Cities Subscription 7934 442.00 Los Altos Garbage Co. Dumpster Rental 7935 8.00 Town of Los Altos Hills Subscription 7936 20.01 Los Altos Stationers Office Supplies CIA.IP+tS 85-03 Meeting 85-03 Feb,-jary 13, 1985 # oT = Name Description 7937 500.00 Mindego Road Account Mindego Road Repair 7938 350.24 Minton,s Lumber & Supply Co. Field Supplies 7939 76.26 Mobil Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7940 174.36 National Mailing Services Mailing Services for Newsletter 7941 228.76 Norney's Office Supplies 7942 219.50 Stanley R. Norton September through December Expenses 7943 159.51 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 7944 666.48 Pacific Bell Telephone Services 7945 339.44 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities 7946 27.26 Pacific Hardware Field Supplies 7947 11.02 City of Palo Alto Utilities 7948 15.00 Park Law Enforcement Assc. Membership Dues 7949 12.87 Patton Bros. , Inc. Field Supplies 7950 395.88 Peninsula Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7951 63.37 Pine Cone Lumber Co. , Inc. Field Supplies 7952 6,754.37 Pinkerton's Inc. December Guard Service 7953 239.20 P.I.P. Trail Etiquette Brochure Printing, 7954 165.00 Fred Pryor Seminars, Inc. Seminar 7955 13.38 Rancho Hardware & Garden Shop Field Supplies 7956 198.09 Redwood Trade Bindery Monte Bello Brochures m719-)7 39.72 Research Institute Subscription 7958 603.19 Rice Trucking & Materials Base Rock for Parking Lot .and Tr&`1 7959 . 8.25 San Francisco Examiner Subscription 7960 101.08 San Francisco Water Dept. Water Service 7961 208.74 San Jose Forest Products Field Supplies 7962 403.90 Scribner Graphic Press Monte Bello Brochures 7963 16.98 Sears, Roebuck & Co. Field Supplies 7964 502.09 Shell Oil Co. . Fuel for District Vehicles 7965 266.44 Signs of the Times Trail Signs 7966 57.00 Skyline Ranch Reimbursement--Utilities 7967 14.56 Skyline County Water District Water Service 7968 395.00 Special Districts Ygmt. Seminars Seminar for Teena Henshaw 7969 35.05 Standard Brands Paint Co. Field Supplies 7970 311.38 Ticor Title Insurance Title Insurance for kTestbay Comn ni..ty Associates Property 7971 116.97 Tools "R" Us Tools and Repair Supplies 7972 34.19 David Topley Reimbursement_-Training Classes ` CZAL`S 85-03 Meeting 85-03 February 13, 1985 # A::: Name Description i 7973 48.95 Union Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7974 171.99 Uno Graphics Rancho and Windy Hill Brochures 7975 "0.00 University of California,SC Enrollment Fees 7976 71.96 Sandy Voorhees Reimbursement--Private Vehicle 7977 45.00 W. Governmental Research Assc. Subscription 7978 15.00 Ellis Wallace Reimbursement--Training Classes 7979 150.00 Robert Watson Security Deposit Refund 7980 331.80 Xerox Monthly Maintenance, Supplies and Service 7981 175.00 Alice Cummings Reinbursement--Editing workshop 7982 81.48 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Meal Conferences CLAi�s No. 85-03 ' Meeting 85-03 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: Feb. 13, 1985 REVISED C L A I M S A--"oAt Name Description 7903 345.06 Ace Fire Equipment Service Fire Extinguishers ' 7904 762.97 Ervin Alves Union Oil Jobber Fuel for District Vehicles 7905 12.00 Amerigas Tank Rental 7906 148.85 Ameron Field Supplies , 7907 60.00 Assc. of Environmental Prof. Annual Membership 7908 411.48 A T & T Telephone Service 7909 659.77 Big Creek Lumber Co. Field Supplies 7910 16.52 James Boland Reimbursement--Field Supplies 7911 263.71 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement--Seminar Expense 7912 900.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant for January 7913 19.50 CA Native Plant Society Membership Dues 7914 355.71 Communications Research Co. Radio Maintenance and Antennas 7915 6.08 Crest Copies Blueprints 7916 300.00 Susan Cretekos Patrol Services 7917 52.19 The Dark Room Photo Processing 7918 250.00 Dennis Danielson Reimbursement--Range for Purisima Residence "7919 101.18 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies 7920 120.63 Dyna Industries, Inc. Medical Supplies--Field Office °77_21 58,500.00 First American Title Guaranty Co. Land Purchase--Stour Investments 7922 790.00 Flinn, Gay & Herterich District Insurance 7923 700.00 Foss & Associates January Consulting Fee and . Administrative Study 7924 200.56 Foster Bros. Security Systems Security Locks 7925 39.80 The Fro Pond g Mead Conferences 7926 66.70 Gaphicstat Purisima Map Mylar 7927 160.02 Mary Gundert Reimbursement--Private Vehicle and Drafting Supplies 7928 100.00 David Hansen Reimbursement--Trail Conference 7929 169.73 Harbinger Comm nications Computer Services i 7930 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Service '7931 174.00 Image Technology Overlay for IMas ter Plan 7932 42.00 Lauren Langford Phototyping 7933 60.00 League of California Cities Subscription 7934 442.00 Los Altos Garbage Co. Dumpster Rental 7935 8.00 Town of Los Altos Hills Subscription i 17936 20.01 Los Altos Stationers Office Supplies I 2•5 85-03 85#-03 1-3, 1985 REVISED # Name Descriz)ticn 7937 5D0.DD Ydndego Road Account Mindego Road Re--air 7938 Ifinton's' Lumber & Supply Co. Field Supplies 7939 7 6.---3 Mobil Oil Co. Fuel for D.i.stri ct 7ehicles 7940 '7 7 National Mailing Services Mailing Services for NL-,;sletter 7941 7,15.76 Nbrneyls Office Supplies 7942 119.5D Stanley R. Norton September thrcugh December Expenses 7943 17)9.51 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 7944 E66.-13 Pacific Bell Teleplxxi-e Services 7945 ---39.L4 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities 7946 27.L'O' Pacific Hardware Field SL?pUes 7947 11 .C2 City of Palo Alto Utilities 7948 15.00 Park Law Enforcement Assc. Membership Dues 7949 12. 7 Patton Bros. , Inc. Field St:pplies 7950 395.E;3 Peninsula Oil Co. Fuel for District 7ehicles 7951 63.37 Pine Cone Lumber Co. , Inc. Field Supplies 7952 6,754.37 Pinkerton's Inc. December Guard Se=.*ce 7953 239.2:0 P.I.P. Trail Etiquette Brochure Printing 7954 165.CID Fred Pryor Seminars, Inc. Seminar 7955 13.13 3 Rancho Hardware & Garden Shop Field Supplies 7956 i9B.C19 Redwood Trade Bindery Monte Bello Broch---es 7957 39.72 Research Institute Subscription 7958 603.19 Rice Trucking & Materials Base RwA for Parking Lot .and TraiL 7959 8.2-5 San Francisco Examiner Subscription 7960 1101.03 San Francisco Water Dept. Water Service 7961 2'08.74 San Jose Forest Products Field Supplies 7962 403.90 Scribner Graphic Press Monte Bello Brocir--nes 7963 16.93 Sears, Roebuck & Co. Field Supplies 7964 5,02. 19 Shell Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7965 256.L4 Signs of the Times Trail Signs 7966 5 7.i--13 Skyline Ranch Reimbixsement—Utilizies 7967 Skyline County Water District Water Service 7968 D Special Districts Mgmt. Seminars Sendnar for- Tee- a Fensj�aw, 7970 Ticor Title Insurance Title Insurance for Westbay Camimity Associates Property 7971 !1'.97 Tools I W I us Tools azl-d R-epa±r- S,.=Dl:Les 7972 David Topley Reimburse mEnt—TraLiing Classes CIAII-S 85-03 Meeting 85-03 February 13, 1985 .c REVISED # Name Descriotion 7973 8.95 Union Oil Co. Fuel for District Vehicles 7974 171.99 Uno Graphics Rancho and Windy Nall BroE-m--es 7975 2'�0.0 3 University of California,SC Enrollmnt Fees 7976 71.CR6 Sandy Voorhees Reimbursement--Private Vehicle 7977 45.00 W. Govenmmtal Research Assc. Subscription 7978 15.00 Ellis Wallace Reirbursement--Train ng Classes 7979 i5c.00 Robert Watson Security Deposit Refund 7980 831.8:0 Xerox Monthly Maintenance, Supplies and Service 7981 175.00 Alice Oamiings- Reimbursement--Editing Ube.,<shop 7982 31.43 Herbert Grench Reimbursement--Meal Conferences 7983 215.92 Petty Cash Photo Processing, -teal Conferences Private Vehicle, Field Supplies Books and Office Supplies