HomeMy Public PortalAbout19850508 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 85-12 7
Meeting 8 5-12
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
May 8 , 1985 A G E N D A Los Altos, California
(7 : 30) ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES (April 17 , 1985)
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(7: 45) 1 . Final Adoption of the Interim Use and Management Plan for the
Nolte Addition to the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve -- D. Hansen
(7 : 50) 2. Request for Referral to Legislative Committee--Brown Act: Closed
Session/Personnel Exception -- N. Hanko
OLD BUSINESS WITH NO ACTION REQUESTED
(7 : 55) 3 . Discussion of Various Operating Procedures -- H. Grench
NEW BUSINESS WITH ACTION REQUESTED
(8 : 25) 4 . Appointment of Peace officer -- D. Hansen
(8 : 30) 5. Scheduling of May 21 Special Meeting -- H. Grench
(8 : 35) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS
CLAIMS
CLOSED SESSION (Land Negotiation & Litigation Matters)
ADJOURNMENT
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you're concerned with appears on the agenda,
please address the Board at that time. otherwise, you may address the Board under
OraZ Communications. When recognized, please begin by stating your name and address.
I
Conciseness greciated We request thatun qomp4ete .the forms provided so that
your name and"OAPPress can be accurate y incZ e in t e minutes.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF FUTURE COMMITTEE MEETINGS--OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
The Budget Committee Committee wiZZ meet at 4:30 P.M. at the District office
on the foZZowing dates: May 7, May 14, May 21, and May 28. The purpose of
the meetings is to discuss preparation of the budget for the 1985-1986 fiscaZ
year. The meetings are subject to cancellation or rescheduling. Contact the
District office to confirm date and time.
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
85-09
Ile
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
April 17 , 1985
WORKSHOP MINUTES
The following corrections were made to the Workshop Minutes of March 30 , 1985:
Page 1: H. Turner - Said he was repelled by the coercive aspects of eminent
domain and that alternate methods for land acquisition should be
explored. Said that he would be willing to consider foreswearing
use of eminent domain and that the District should not remove
people from the land on which they are living.
Page 2: Artemas Ginzton - Discussed her opposition to use of eminent domain.
Said Stevens Creek connection involved willing owners who were
willing to grant trail easements, not eminent domain.
Page 2: William Obermayer - Said he didn't think there should be any condem-
nation at all but if Board felt it was necessary to have specific
piece of land there should be a unanimous vote of Board of Directors i
and Board of Supervisors in area where property is located.
Page 4: David Leeson - Discussed the value of a person' s property, noting
value was not only measured in dollars. Said people in the Mt.
Umunhum area were concerned about the District' s actions. Dis-
cussed use and safety of District lands , said unsupervised use
of lands is dangerous to neighbors because of issues such as
fires. Said meetings were essential to building trust and that
eminent domain should not be used.
Policy Regarding Use of Power of Eminent Domain
Bob Brown - Commended MROSD on its use of eminent domain in the past.
Hopes that instead of saying "never" to use the power of eminent domain,
that MROSD would say "hardly ever use it again. " MROSD must be respon-
sible to all taxpayers in the District and therefore should pursue and
complete the task before them.
Janet Schwind - Representing the South Skyline Association, stated that
MROSD' s eminent domain policy should be "interest in land shall be pur-
chased exclusively from willing sellers. " She stated MROSD has developed
a coercive approach and that more cooperative methods of preserving
natural areas have not been explored simply because it is easier to use
the force of law. Need to develop working relationship with Counties,
other agencies and private property owners .
it
William Obermayer - Asked what MROSD' s task at hand was and whether there
was a limit in the District ' s land acquisition program.
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
Page Two 8 50�P -
Alan Hoskings - Asked if MROSD can acquire property outside District bound-
aries by use of eminent domain. He said that the County had created
inverse condemnation situations by downzonings and building moratoriums.
S. Norton - Said the District can acquire property outside District' s
boundaries by use of eminent domain.
Robert Fisse - Stated he personally felt that policy regarding condemnation
should be: "District shall buy only from willing seller's that are within
the District' s boundaries and that the threat of condemnation shall never
be used in negotiations. " lie said his position is based on fact that
voters believed , at the time of the District' s formation, that the
District had finite boundaries .
Charles Touchatt .- Said that establishing policy was good, but asked how
the public could be assured that new policy would be carried over and
remain in effect over future years.
H. Turner - Said that he, N. Hanko, and R. Bishop would be working on pre-
paring a policy regarding the use of eminent domain and that members of
the public should feel free to contact any members of the Committee to
submit ideas.
E. Shelley - In response to Mr. Touchatt' s question of how the public is to
be assured that any policy would remain in effect, E. Shelley said that
that is the most difficult item. He said that his own feeling was that
any Board would have to rely on policy and hopefully precedent and that,
if a Board establishes limits on use of condemnation and holds to them,
such action would be the best assurance available. He did not believe
there is any way that the current Board can legally bind future Boards
under the law.
N. Hanko - Indicated she had asked District Counsel to investigate legal
means of binding future Boards.
R. Bishop - Said he didn't believe that the current Board could adopt policy
to bind future Boards. He said he believed that the current Board had
been adhering to established policy, that policies are quite durable,
and that there would be a moral commitment on future Boards not to change
the policy.
K. Duffy - Said it is her belief that widespread distribution of the eminent
domain policy by Board, staff and landowners is the best way to assure
adherence to the policy.
David Leeson - Said that the binding element of the policy is admirable but
not reassuring. He suggested that the District grant an easement to
landowners saying eminent domain would never be used. He said such a
binding contract would assure property owners . He asked for clarifica-
tion of partial condemnation for a right-of-way over private property.
R. Bishop - Said he felt there are some cases where District would want to
retain its power of condemnation over a portion of a person' s property
and that he did not favor a policy that would prohibit all partial con-
demnations. He noted that every case is different and needed to be
judged on its own merit.
E. Shelley - Stated he felt that by retaining a policy that would allow par-
tial condemnations would give the Board more leeway in being more restric-
tive on use of overall condemnation. He said that at the moment he is
not in favor of adopting a policy of never using eminent domain for
partial condemnation.
85-09 Page Three
Richard Bullis - Said that the Board is beginning to show sensitivity by
holding workshops and referred to the letters from N. Hanko and H. Turner.
He said he has never received any straight forward decisions regarding
Quinta Ranch and that in his development of Russian Ridge Ranch he wants
to work toward and share his plan of dedicating 81% of the remaining
land for open space.
Hans Morawitz - Expressed his appreciation for actions by MROSD and said
he hopes MROSD will continue to use eminent domain when necessary to
protect the interests of "flat landers" since they wish to see lands
remain open space and available for public use.
Bill Sorich - Reported that he had received a map in the mail recently that
showed his land in green; he said he was not a speculator and wanted
to live and let live. C. Britton stated that map being discussed was
sent to William Obermayer and referred to a road maintenance agreement
only.
Paul Storaasli - As a Portola Heights resident, he said he is part of a com-
munity that feels threatened. He said he is in process of developing
his lands and believes his plans support District' s ideas of open space.
He asked for a specific definition of undeveloped property and said he
cannot support a policy of eminent domain, noting acquisitions should
be from willing sellers within District boundaries.
Allan Cox - A Skylonda resident for over 25 years, he indicated that the
quality of his life has been enhanced by the work of MROSD. He said
he hopes that eminent domain continues to be used for the greatest good
and believes that in 50 years , if population records are an indication,
that there will be very few green islands in the area.
Judy Storaasli - Said she felt further consideration needs to be given to
defining developed/undeveloped property and that her goals for their
property complement the District' s goals.
R. Bishop - In response to question regarding limits in the amount of land
to be acquired, R. Bishop said that as land prices go up there will be
less money to spend on acquisition and as more lands are acquired more
money will have to be spent on management of these lands. He said that
within the next 10 years MROSD will have to be very selective in
acquisition and that the District always prefers to deal with willing
sellers.
E. Shelley - Stated, responding to the question regarding private property
either held in open space or developed in a manner consistent with goals
of MROSD, that one problem is a change in the long-term use of that
property. He said one approach is an open space easement given in
perpetuity.
H. Turner - Said there is need for creative thinking to make eminent domain
policies binding on future Boards.
Lynn Penek-Holden - Asked if there was harm or a problem if a private owner
did not plan to develop their land and wished to leave it as private
open space. She asked if it is necessary for the District to have trails
over all open property.
Sandra Touchatt - Asked if MROSD has a master plan for hiking trails and if
any consideration had been given to communities that are already built.
Page Four 85-09
N. Hanko - Said she would take into consideration areas with established
communities.
R. Bishop - Said that the District 's Master Plan shows land as it relates
to open space.
E. Shelley - Said that the District' s Master Plan does not show trails.
Candace Stone - Stated that since there seemed to be so much protest and
since there were other agencies acquiring land in area (such as State
Parks and Save-the-Redwoods League) , trails should circumvent the
Portola Heights area.
Jeannette Bullis - Said she is very much in favor of what MROSD is doing,
adding that there is room for residential areas in the Skyline area too.
Ms. MacPhearson - Said she has worked hard to build home in the Portola
Heights area and is concerned with what she will be able to give to
her children.
Bob Piety - Said he didn't think anyone at meeting was against open space,
rather they were against the use of eminent domain since it might shatter
someone' s dream. He said that since MROSD has acquired most of its
18 , 000+ acres without the use of eminent domain, the District shouldn't
have to use it in the future.
Carol Norton - Said that she appreciates what MROSD is doing, that only
land she owns on Skyline is MROSD land, and that she wants MROSD to
continue to purchase land. She said eminent domain is a tool that needs
to be kept and used where and when necessary.
E. Shelley - Said that individuals in the Skyline area are aware that there
is no permanence in zoning restrictions , adding that zoning describes
only what is presently the highest and best use of land. He said he
felt it is no protection for long term use of open space and was an
unfair way to protect open space.
R. Bishop - Said that the District 's Master Plan does not have specific
parcels identified and that it rates land by desirability and quality
for open space.
E. Shelley - Said that MROSD relies on schematic plans from the two Counties
for trails and pathway plans .
H. Turner - Described the thrust of the District 's acquisition program and
said that further acquisitions will be limited by financial constraints.
He said it has been shown that approximately two-thirds of the land
that MROSD will ever acquire has already been acquired and that MROSD
is shifting from an aggressive land acquisition policy to more emphasis
on land management.
Tom Kavanaugh - Said that Board has no control over staff ' s use of eminent
domain to threaten landowners. He related his personal dealing with
staff regarding giving some land to the District . He said staff had
requested they contribute $50 , 000 . Said that the Board was not going
to do anything to work cooperatively with landowners , adding that if
they did, the District 's lobbyist in Sacramento would protect them.
8, 5-09 Page Five
C. Britton - Responded by saying that the balance of Mr. Kavanaugh' s prop-
erty was to be developed, the dedication area consisted of I to 5 acres
of wetlands that had accumulated a lot of trash and that staff felt if
MROSD was to take over the area that $50,000 would endow the additional
maintenance costs.
Bob McKim - Asked the Board about fair market value, noting it was when
a willing seller is paid the price the seller and buyer agree upon.
He asked how long fair market values could be maintained as truly fair
as the District acquires more land.
Jean Rusmore - Said how appreciative she is for thousands of acres pur-
chased by MROSD for open space and that she felt land values have been
enhanced for property near MROSD lands .
Charles Touchatt - Said he was very much in favor of open space, but ques-
tioned how much more open space is needed.
Robert Fisse - Responding to H. Turner' s statement that further acquisitions
will be limited, said that he felt the District had been expanding its
acquisition periods over the years.
Richard Bullis - Said that MROSD runs on a capitalistic system, and ques-
tioned if it is wrong to make a profit on one' s land.
Imraan Aziz Said he was from Canada, that everything in this area seems
to be becoming urbanized, and that open space is important so people
Ik have a place to go for enjoyment.
N. Hanko - Responding to Mr. Fisse' s comment regarding land acquisition
said that there is no adopted policy stating the District would only
acquire land during its first ten years of existence. She said that
when the District was formed there was aninformal agreement with the
Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County that only 5% of the
District' s fund would be used for development initially so that it
was clear to everyone that MROSD was in the open space acquisition
business.
K. Duffy - Said that she applauded private open space and that, in some ways,
it was a means whereby MROSD could save money. She said people could
work with POST or the Trust for Public Land as well. She said the
capitalistic system does not guarantee that the investments you make work
out, and that after MROSD purchases land, the fair market value of
surrounding lands probably does increase. She said the law of eminent
domain can resolve, through the use of a third party, situations where
there may be a willing seller asking an "unwilling" price.
E. Shelley - Said he believes that governmental agency purchases cannot
be used for establishment of fair market value. In response to Mr.
Fisse' s question of acquisition and development policy over the District's
first 10 years , he said that over the last 5 years the land management
budget has gone up more rapidly than the entire budget itself. He said
MROSD has been developing its lands and it will continue to do so.
Paul Storaasli - Said that certain landowners had gone through various
eminent domain issues with Castle Rock and Golden Gate National Recrea-
tion Area, and that now the MROSD was threatening them and that land-
owners are uncomfortable with this threat around them.
Page Six 85-09
N. Hanko - In response to a question from Sandra Touchatt, said she would
take into consideration established communities in policy relating to
planning areas. Directors Bishop and Turner also agreed on this con-
sideration.
Bob Piety - Said he appreciated open space, adding that private open space
should not be threatened with eminent domain.
Diana Piety - Said she enjoys open space land, but MROSD has an adverse
effect on people in Skyline area.
David Leeson - Said that he wants to determine future course of his land,
but threat of eminent domain from MROSD tells him he cannot have his
land. He said the objectives of MROSD are admirable and that he
believes they can be attained by patience and willingness to work with
people and without using power of eminent domain.
Richard Bullis - Discussed use of comparable sales between owners and MROSD
and how they are used in eminent domain process .
Betsy Crowder - Said that all governmental agencies have the power of
eminent domain and that MROSD is a much more responsive agency than
larger agencies in area.
Procedures in Implementing Amendments to Brown Act Regarding Closed Session
Discussions of Property Negotiations
S. Norton - Gave a summary of the 1984 legislation pertaining to the Brown
Act. (1) if public agency wishes to discuss acquisition in Closed
Session, has to announce in public session name of property owner and
location of property, (2) MROSD did map of sphere of influence and
indicated those properties it thought it might some time wish to dis-
cuss in Closed Session, (3) MROSD did not aspire to acquire all listed
properties (this is what has caused concern to land owners) .
K. Duffy - Said that small parcels indicated by asterisk, not named or
listed, would have to be announced in public session if to be dis-
cussed in Closed Session.
George Ducker - Said he had lived in vicinity of area of parcels 84 and 83
on Master Plan overlay for 31 years and since this is a developed
community of 18 homes, he was requesting that a property line be drawn
around these parcels and that they be excluded from MROSD list.
R. Bishop - Said he thought the suggestion was very good and that it would
be considered. List was not put together to threaten people and list
should be modified or done away with completely. Must address how
we can carry out function of meeting with staff for land acquisition.
We do control our staff by having meetings in Closed Session to give
them direction.
H. Turner - Said he also would give thought and consideration to Mr. Ducker ' s
request. He said he believes MROSD acts in good faith both in the
spirit and the letter of the law. We did not forsee fear that arose,
and we would have acted differently if we had forseen fear. The task
before Board now is to eliminate that fear.
85-09 Page Seven
E. Shelley - Said policy of excluding areas makes sense but first must
work out policy for use of eminent domain.
K. Duffy - Fear of eminent domain is basic fear, consideration of eminent
domain is an exemption to Brown Act. First task is to establish policy
on use of eminent domain to allay fears that have arisen.
Sandra Touchatt - Said Board was completely out of line in putting names
of Portola Heights land owners on list; the value of their land has
been devalued.
Beez Jones - Asked for clarification of how particular acquisition becomes
an eminent domain case.
S. Norton - Explained in detail the legalistic aspect of the eminent domain
process.
K. Duffy - Explained that without list and without Board having discussed
possible acquisition with staff, staff would be discussing possible
acquisition and if they found themselves at an impasse and considered
the property of great importance to the plan, they would come to the
Board in Closed Session and recommend that the Board consider using the
eminent domain process to obtain the property.
Janet Schwind - Representing South Skyline Association asked that list be
withdrawn, adding, however, that staff must not stop communicating with
Board about potential acquisitions. She said the Association asks that
the District: "l) honor the public' s right to know, 2) allow Directors '
input on potential acquisition, 3) protect the seller's right to privacy
when desired, 4) not jeopardize the property rights of the 'whole' to
protect the few. " She said that if MROSD firmly adopted the "willing
sellers only" policy, the list would be almost innocuous, recommended
the Open Meeting Laws pamphlet be read, and asked how many owners wish
their privacy in land negotiations be honored.
C. Britton - Said that approximately 50% of property owners who want to
sell property to MROSD do not want their name announced while negotia-
tions are being conducted.
Charles Touchatt - Said that there must be a reasonable list of property
owners with whom MROSD are negotiating or with whom they anticipate
negotiating and that it was absurd to put everyones name on list and
consider that as complying with the Brown Act. He said the Brown Act
states "timely" notice is required.
Tom Kavanaugh - Requested that at the next meeting a copy of the Brown Act
be available for everyone. He said that the listing of property owners
was poorly done, an insult to public, and that names were incorrect.
He said that names should be clarified and parcel numbers should be
included. He said agendas should list the names of property owners
to be discussed in Closed Session, as well as litigation cases and
lawsuits. He requested that MROSD help pass legislation that anyone
violating the Brown Act would be penalized.
S. Norton - Said the law currently states that if anyone knowingly violates
the Brown Act they are subject to a misdemeanor.
Page Eight 85-09
Candace Stone - Asked why there was a need to discuss acquisition of land
in private since it will eventually be presented at a public meeting.
E. Shelley - Said there are two ways to handle acquisition: one is for the
staff to act on its own and then bring proposed acquisitions to Board
at public meeting or a far better way is for Board to have discussions
with staff in Closed Session. He said many land owners do not wish
their intent to sell to MROSD to be made public until negotiations are
completed.
David Leeson - Stated that the District should do what the Brown Act says.
He said since the list exists, it can never be taken away or reversed.
He said that since MROSD is a public agency using public money, it must
announce a seller' s name publicly, that the District should endeavor to
find out what other public agencies do, and that MROSD should not
accommodate people who want to negotiate privately.
Hildegard Johnson - Said that since MROSD had become such a powerful agency
it was time for public to sit in on Closed Sessions. She said she did
not trust any of the Board members.
S. Norton - Said that State law does not allow members of the public to sit
in on a Closed Session of a public agency.
William Obermayer - Said that his name could never be removed from the
list since the list exists, that the only things that need be discussed
in Closed Session are price and terms; and that the public has the right
to know what is being discussed. He said MROSD should send an apology
to everyone on the list, and that since MROSD has no Master Plan, no
one knows what lands the District plans to acquire.
Richard Bullis - Recommended that MROSD send letters to everyone on list
in order to comply with the Brown Act and that Board seek an independent
body (e.g. , District Attorney of Santa Clara and/or San Mateo County)
to write how MROSD should implement the Brown Act.
H. Turner - Said it was in public interest to meet in Closed Session to
instruct negotiators on land acquisition matters. He presented two
possible solutions on instructing negotiators: 1) create a land acqui-
sition committee of 2 or 3 Board members , meet in private to discuss
and then present in public to full Board for final decision; and 2)
allow staff to negotiate, buy an option for minimal amount of money
and then present the matter to the full Board.
N. Hanko - Said that, as a member of Legislative Committee, she would like
this Committee to deal with the problem and effect changes in the
Brown Act. She said the listing of property owners should be withdrawn
and staff should work on other methods of implementing the Brown Act.
She said she likes H. Turner's idea of buying options.
C. Britton - Said he would contact other agencies to inquire how they are
complying with the Brown Act.
E. Shelley - Said that, at the moment, he proposes that the listing of
property owners should remain, but reasonable and workable ways to
reduce the size of the listing should be found. He said he felt a
clear policy on use of eminent domain is best way to reduce the impact
of the listing.
85-09 Page Nine
K. Duffy - Said she agreed to accept the current listing because she felt
that a limiting list would really be threatening. She said that she
believes some rural community areas could be removed from list, that
the Board is not using the list to hide behind; and that negotiations
are complex and the Board does give direction to staff in Closed Session.
Tom Williams - Said he felt that the listing used to comply with the Brown
Act has been a disaster.
David Leeson - Feels that list does not meet requirements of Brown Act
and said people on list should be notified and given the opportunity
to have their names removed. He said he would like his name removed
from listing unless MROSD intends to negotiate with him.
Paul Storaasli - Asked, if one's name is not currently on list, could a
person have the option of asking to have their name put on the list some
time in the future.
K. Duffy - Said that, as list exists now and if nothing were changed, there
would be an opportunity to update or add to listing or remove name from
listing as the Board felt appropriate. She said she believes that
things will change.
E. Shelley - Said he disagreed with the suggestion of announcing what land
negotiations are to be discussed at each public meeting because some
individuals do not want their discussions public knowledge until the
negotiations are completed.
H. Turner - Said that he had another option to add to his ideas regarding
the Brown Act: withdraw the listing and announce prior to each Closed
Session the names of those acquisitions going to be discussed. He
said this could be risky process (pay higher prices , some people would
not want to deal with MROSD under these conditions, and possible third
party competition) . He suggested this latter process be tried for a
year and then evaluated.
Written Comments Received During Meeting
Richard T. Mork - "The first time I heard the words 'green-belting' was
almost twenty years ago in Germany outside Hanover when I questioned how
it was possible to have so much open space in close proximity to a dense
urban area. I thought then how wonderful it would be if such a concept
were possible in the U.S.A.--especially in my home, the S.F. Bay area.
Since then, through MROSD, that concept has begun to become a reality.
I strongly support the work and policies of MROSD, and urge their continua-
tion. I hope the Board will continue an aggressive policy of land acquisi-
tion for the benefit of all the people of the greater Bay area and their
children, and their grandchildren; and, for the Board not to succumb to the
special interest pressures of individual land owners trying to block the
green-belting process for short term interest or gains. "
The Board scheduled a third public workshop for Saturday, May 4 beginning
at 9: 00 A. M. at a location as near as possible to the location of the
April 17 Workshop.
Jean H. Fiddes , District Clerk
Cecilia A. Cyrier, Secretary
CLAIMS No. 85-09
Meeting 85-12
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: May 8, 1985
REVISED
cLAlrzs
Amount Name Description
8249 240.00 A-1 Septic Tank Service, Inc. Septic Tank Maintenance
8250 413.36 A T & T Information Systems Telephone Equipment Rental
8251 160.00 Blanning & Baker Associates, Inc. Subscription
8252 35.79 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement--Meal Conference
:8253 900.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant Fee for April
8254 -13.11 California Native Plant Society Book on Endangered Plants
'8255 4a M.
100.00 California Park & Recreation Conference Registration for
Society Legialative Conference Herbert trench
8256 34.35 Clark's Auto Parts, Inc. Parts for District Vehicles
8257 130.47 Alice Cummings Reimbursement--1 lap Overlay and
Private Vehicle Expense
,8258 277.40 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies I
8259 300.00 John Escobar Reimbursement—Educational Assistance
8260 501.00 Pete Ellis Dodge District Vehicle Repair
8261 117.74 Harbinger Conmunications Computer Charges for March
8262 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Service
8263 555.90 The Hub Ranger Uniform Expense
8264 127.12 IBM Corporation Office Supplies
8265 12.50 Jobs Available Subscription
8266 260.00 Los Altos Garbage Company Dumpster Rental
8267 60.85 Nbbil Oil Corporation Fuel for District Vehicles
B263 94.24 National Mailing Services Fees for Spring Newsletter
8269 125.10 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities
B270 261.18 Pacific Hardware & Steel Co. Field Supplies
B271 1,011.09 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
B272 8.56 City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities
3273 800.00 Department of Parks & Recreation Training Class for Lisa Varney
3274 17.55 Rancho Hardware Field Supplies
3275 101.10 Recreational Equipment, Inc. Ranger Uniform Expense
3276 101.08 San Francisco Water Department Hassler Water Service
3277 45.45 Schuerman Home Service Water Heater Repairs
3278 246.15 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs for District Vehicles
3279 90.95 Transcontinental Sales Co. Ranger Uniform Expense
1.11AE"Ib 1140. OD-UV
Meeting 85-12
Date: May 8, 1985
REVISED
�r a�iount Name Description
8280 800.00 U. S. Postmaster Postage for Meter
8281 39.98 Lisa Varney Private Vehicle Expense
8282 94.71 Sandy Voorhees Private Vehicle Expense
8283 468.07 Xerox Corporation March Maintenance Agreement
8284 150.00 ZZZ Sanitation Equipment Rental
8285 42.68 James Boland Film Processing and Field Supplies
8286 9,047.09 State Co>rpensation Insurance Fund Quarterly Premium
8287 99,000.00'�,- Sordrager Trucking Company Site Restoration--Hassler Health Hoax:
$288 109.28 Petty Cash Meal Conferences, Office Supplies,
and Xeroxing Supplies
*Issued as an
emer enc check on P
6 1 g Y 985
Y ,
I
�II
If
I
GEORGE DUEKER, ARCHITECT
BOX 401 STAR RT. 2
LA HONDA. CALIFORNIA 94020
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION 851 - 2693
Meeting 85-12
May 8 , 1985
April 24, 1985
Board of Directors and Staff of
The Midpeninsula Regional Openspace District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Loos Altos, CA 94022
Be hereby informed and notified that the parcel shown on your
"Master Plan map overlay" dated February 13, 1985 and designated
"84" thereon and also included on the list entitled "Property
Owners on Master Plan Overlay" dated February 13, 1985, as "84 Dueker",
is in fact property owned by George R. and Sarah C. Dueker. Said
property is further identified as San Mateo County Assessor's Parcel
No. 080-120-1100, consisting of 14.825 acres with a permanent residence
and a guest house. The latter are owned and occupied by the owner as
family residence. We have owned and developed this property since
1954, a period of 31 years.
Neither the entire parcel, nor any part of it is for sale now, nor will
it be in the foreseeable future at any price. Any long or short range
plans which may include the use of the Dueker property by MPOSD should
be revised, altered or abandoned as unfeasable and the property excluded
in whole from any such consideration by the staff and the board of
Directors. We do not want nor have any intentions to provide public
easements or public access to any part or across any portion of our
property for any reason. Therefore please remove our name and property
from your list, and route any trails around our property in your initial
planning stages.
The MFOSD currently abuts two sides of our property and while we welcome
the District as neighbors we originally purchased the property as our
own open space and wildlife estate. We intend to protect it from
intrusion, confiscation or forced sale.
Sincerely,
t—" - '&- 1z,
George7w. Dueker
Sarah C. Dueker
MRASD
46
I �
►5G Isa 164
1
t(*4 t�
r 57 t541 18Z
10
d
58 16a
t
r
57 t 69 lei
taI
G4 ,a 69 ?4 k z7 l80
13 1 t I
0
bl 68 �04 l( -12 Z4
93
0 145
8f bl Ia2 ►a3 MRoSD
M
i7i�D M A.P
jg r=Ea�H
MaF,T tZ Pip•► N»F'a�.c¢uir 57
e4 q 4 to2 zoo
TO q7
5OW-D C7,f-- D i 2MC.TC ee iS�,J D S PP t`
of 206
O -�)SPACE DisTo4c�T
toy
I N T Ft t gES7 t tyTME5 T5 OF Wof-pb 4t4 D "i rt e
PR0F1eRT`( Otvly �/a> :TEp I PPC�Rr ritA[
tgc.EL-S 84 �►-�� �E i-i'1�1�Eb 'ux =T+-t�t2
W IT H PW-ce4..-S DMS iG Ki4 TED S 7 At,4 AS Fe Z i�X, 5 12Q
A-1,ATD tDe�.rrrFtCp AS "SM�L� Pc %�i ";11ND Trtr�T ,
Tray 5tf►e�.� cc�,r�� �T� c t�= t-to�►eI,
rsE,TC- ��► -M�iF' �i�r~r +dam PITT i3�t K f ig 139
1 g OF -W t+j C { �c .Ta1►� i-►v�G� ��N� ��Fi+ ��� 14(� 144
17^Pe 85
tK485 j
G�-iwc iZ. �Z�� ��.►�a Sn.e,c�+-t �=. �'G kE>r. �
GEORGE DUEKER
BOX 401 STAR HT 2
` 4 LA HOhDA,CAL.
c� T �%�t T 94020
No late March letter as refe -aced was attached to Mr. Bulli:
letter of April 28. This u, :ed letter was received at the
District office on March 12, 1985 but was not publicly dis-
tributed at Mr. Bullis ' request per a telephone conversation
with C. Britton.
Quinta Ranch
Star Route 2, Box 310
La Honda, Calif. 94020
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle
Los Altos, Calif. 94022
Attention: Craig Britton
Dear Board Members: j
I would like to acknowledge that Quinta Ranch is for sale to the M.R.O.S.D.
Quinta would be a fabulous addition to the Skyline Preserve with its
strategic position, beauty, forests and trails.
I would accept $400,000 cash and $400,000 in a note secured by a deed of
trust at 8% tax free interest with $50,000 principal paid at the end of the
first through eighth years. As a further condition I would reserve an
assignable lease back of six acres covering my improvements plus water
system as a "family compound" for the balance of my life or 30 years, which-
ever is longer at one hundred dollars per year.
A second proposal would be the sale of 50 acres for $350,000 cash and
$350,000 deferred per the above terms.
These terms and offer will expire May 1st, 1985 and the offer is non-
exclusive. I would consider giving an exclusive option for one of the
above "deals" for $5,000 per month up to 12 months, or $60,000 to be
applied to purchase.
I would expect my selling price to increase progressively until the expiration
of the Williamson Act contract on Quinta Ranch. At that time I would sub-
divide my land into four or more parcels and would vigorously defend my right
to do so. Quinta is not in the boundaries of M.R.O.S.D. and condemnation would be
difficult. This paragraph is included not as a threat but to make clear our
future options.
I would appreciate on early clear reply Gtating M.R.O.S.D. 's position re
the acquisition of Quinta Ranch at this time or in the future. Such an
answer would clear the air and greatly relieve any uncertainties in my mind
regarding my land and my future.
Very truly yours,
Richard-S. Bullis
RSB:jb
WRITTEN COMMUNICA# ON A
Meeting 85-12
May 8 , 1985
Quinta Ranch
Star Route 2, Box 310
La Honda, Calif. 94020
April 28, 1985
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos, Calif. 94022
Dear Board Members:
I wish all negotiations with M.R.O.S.D. re Quinta Ranch henceforth be
"public." It seems that someone who is willing to negotiate in good
faith, i.e. , a "willing seller," is put on the "back burner" as a low
priority acquisition. It is this type of negotiation that you publicly
espouse. Please acknowledge my letter of late March (copy attached).
On another subject, I will be unavailable until May 22 to accompany j
Clevenger on reappraisal of Russian Ridge Ranch. He has made no effort
j to contact me at any time.
Thank you for the cooperation received from your staff by Arthur Bliss
in determining the access to Peters ' lower parcel.
Very truly yours,
Richard S. Bullis
RSB:jb
cc: Colin Peters, Esq.
cc: David Byers, Esq.
i
IJ
_ _ r
gar: CrrIC FS.
PETERS,PETERS & EL1. INGSON
s PROFESSIONAL CORPORA-ON
525 UNIVERSITY AVENUE
COLIN PETERS SUITE I5015
STEPHEN M. PETERS PALO ALTO, CALI/pMMIA 0430I
PATRICIA E ELLINGSON 1I151 3&8-6'"0
April 10, 1985
L. Craig Britton
Land Acquisition Manager
p
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite D-1
Los Altos , California 94022
Dear Mr . Britton :
Re your letter of April 8, I very definitely want Mr . Bullis to
t accompany Mr . Clevenger on his reappraisal .
On the grazing lease, I am sorry I forgot to comment on that
earlier . I have no objection to Mr . Mason grazing the upper
parcel and Mr . True the lower piece if we pin down the terms and
include an accounting of rent due, past and present . I have
received no rent from anyone for a considerable period of time,
and I would like to clear that up before making any new
arrangement .
Very truly yours,
Colin Peters
CP : Jj
cc : Richard Bullis w/enclosure
David Byers w/enclosure
r
r`f1e1
r
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D•1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)%54717
April 8 , 1985
Colin Peters, Attorney at Law
Peters, Peters & Ellingson
525 University Avenue, Suite 1505 D
Palo Alto , California 94301 p
li
Re: Russian Ridge, Lands of Peters
Dear Mr. Peters :
In reference to your letter of April 4 , 1985 , I was not aware
of your request to Mr. Clevenger instructing him to have Mr. Bullis
II attend the inspection of your property until Mr. Bullis announced
that fact at the District Public Workshop on Saturday , March 30 ,
1985. I discussed this matter with Mr. Clevenger and he didn 't
realize that there was any obligation on his part to extend the
inspection invitation to any one other than the owner. Please
excuse the mix-up. By copy of this letter, I am requesting that
Mr. Clevenger update g r to his appraisal of January 1985 to include
the residential density reflected in the approved conceptual plan
on file with the County of San Mateo Planning Department. I am
also asking that Mr. Clevenger tour the property with you or
Mr. Bullis or anyone else i
y you choose to represent you in this
matter. It is my understanding (and I have not been able to obtain
a copy of the plan) that the County has conceptually approved a
total of 22 residential sites clustered on the westerly side of
Russian Ridge so that the "integrity" of the ridge is not compromised.
As to the section of your letter dealing with condemnation, I was
very clear at our meeting that only the Board of Directo
rs make
that decision. I personally feel that the Russian Ridge property
is one of the most important open space parcels in the District
and I also made that clear at our meeting.
One area of discussion to which you did not respond was your desire
as to the current grazing operation on the lands owned by yourself
and the District. You were planning to get back to me if it was
acceptable for Mr. Mason to continue grazing the upper parcel and
for Mr. True to continue to graze the lower areas ; you would be
compensated for a pro-rata share of the grazing income.
Hobert A Grench General Manager Board of Directors Katherine Duffy,Nonette G Hanko,Teens Henshaw,Richard S Bishop,Edward G Shelley,Harry A Turner.Danrei G Wendrn
LAW OFFICES OF
McCRACKEN, ANTONE Bc BYERs
THE BELMONT SHORES BUILDING
1301 SHOREWAY ROAD, SUITE 201
MICHAEL D. MCCRACKEN* BELMONT,CALIFORNIA 94002-4106 AREA CODE 415
GREGORY J. ANTONE" 591-5525
DAVID J. BYERS
•A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
January 17 , 1985
Mr. Floyd D. Clevenger
Clevenger Realty Appraisal Company
2363 Pruneridge Avenue
Santa Clara, California 95050
Re: San Mateo County APN 080-330-140 and
080-330-040
Dear Floyd:
I have received a letter sent by you to Mr.
Colin Peters dated January 7 , 1985 regarding an ap-
praisal of the above described parcels . This office
represents Mr. Richard Bullis who possesses an option on
the property.
/ / Please deal with Mr. Bullis in your efforts to
`/ ti/ obtain the appraisal.
Very truly yours ,
McCRACKEN, ANTONE & BYERS
J
DAVID J. BYERS
DJB:gsb
CC: Mr. Richard Bullis
Colin Peters , Esq.
I -
REALTY APPRAISAL COMPANY
FLOYD D CLEVENGER. M.A 1 . S R PA.. A.S A 2363 PRUNERIDGE AVENUE
RICHARD B WITTMAN SANTA CLARA. CALIFORNIA 95050
LAWRENCE E WILLS. A.S.A., S.R.PA.
DAVID L SNIVELY TELEPHONE (408) 241-2787
MARSHA L DENIS
January 14, 1985
Mr, and Mrs. Colin Peters
1505 Palo Alto Office Center
525 University Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Ref: San Mateo County Assessor No. 080-330-140 & 080-330-040
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Peters :
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has retained this office to complete
an appraisal of the above referenced property off of Skyline Boulevard in
San Mateo County.
We have been told that there is an option to purchase this property. This
letter is for the purpose of requesting a copy of the option agreement. We
would appreciate a full and complete copy of the option aqreement.
Res fully,
C V NG R, R Y APPRAISAL COMPANY
loy D. Cleve n er
.V 7'
awrence E. Wills
LW:ng
cc: Richard Bullis
L. Craig Britton
I
i
I
PI Elm,PETER`; cY: U.1.1
L FwpICSSGNr.. CUF<<..t
CC.. N [ETE PE SUITE 150`
E7EPHtE , M PETERS PALO ALTO,CALIFORNIA 04301
o01 ntC IA C E L—NGSON Illil MG-0770
January 10, 1965
Floyd D. Clevenger
O 0
Clevenger Realty Appraisal Company
2363 Pruneridge Avenue
Santa Clara , California 95050
Re : San Mateo County Assessor No. 080-330-140, 080-330-040 and
080-340-030
Dear Floyd :
Thank you for your letter of January 7 in the subject file .
I an, sure Craig Britton has told you to appraise only the Skylinc
Marcel and to defer appraising the lower niece next to Nglte tr,
await the outcome of the first appraisal .
This property is under option to Richard Bullis, so I an sure yc't.
will be in touch with him. This letter can constitute my writter,
authority that he can stand in by place so far as inspectin(, rl.(
prol-c-i-ty is concerned .
Very truly yours,
Cclin Peters
C1' : jj
cc: Richard Bullis /
WRITTEN COMMUNIC� V
Meeting 85-12 MARIQUITA WEST, M.D.
May 8, 1985 P.O. Box 634
Los Gatos, California 95031
(408) 354-4234
lc) $S
S
Am. c � JL�
C)p.a,,,,
i
WRIr-rTEN COMMUNI=CN
Meeting 85-12
May 8, 1985
I urge you to acquire the property
being threatened by development in
Russian Ridge
J. L. BRENNER
13 PHILLIPS RD. APR 2 4 IJ85
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
;0NE 415 326 2970 ZIP 9430
Meeting 85-06
DRAFT ##1.
DRAFT AGENDA ITEMS
Meeting Date: March 27
Category Time Title Name on Lead Report Status
(min.) Agenda Responsibility
PUBLIC Draft Master Plan for
HEARING 120 Skyline Ridge O.S.P . David David
t
w�
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Meeting 85-12
May 8, 1985 RICHARD BLUM
P.0. BOX 4M 620066
WOODSIDE,CALIFORNIA 94062
Board of Directors
Mid Peninsula Regional Open Space District
375 Distel Circle, Suite Dl
Los Altos, 94022
Ladies and Gentlemen :
I write in the hopes that this letter will join many others
written to oersuade the District to purchase the Russian Ridge
property now being threatened with subdivision development.
I need not tell you that such development would mar the Skyline
permanently with suburban-like housing, would set a precedent
for further destructive profit-greedy projects, and would
constitute an aesthetic and environmental insult of the first
order.
I know that the District has been under attack for its occasional
use of eminent domain proceedings . My own view is that you have
been unduly harassed, and that such criticism should not lead
to any failure now on your part to acquire the Russian Ridge
property which is so surely and severly threatened, and where
protective response is so assuredly part of your mandate and function .
I would like to eppress my confidence in your policy and performance,
and to encourage you most strongly to act on Russian Ridge. Do
note that InHmxmyB my wife and I are Skyline residents. From the
top of our Langley Hill we see the Ridge, and would hate to see it
ruined
Sincerely
« ►+ tii +
M�' ����
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-i,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965.4717
May 2 , 1985
Ms. Cathy Lazarus
Local Agency Formation Commission
County of Santa Clara
70 West Hedding
San Jose, California 95110
Subject: Annexation Proposal -- Midpeninsula Preserve 1985
Dear Ms. Lazarus:
In reference to our letter of April 25 , 1985 and your tele-
phone discussion with Craig Britton, of the District staff,
please find enclosed the amended legal description and map
for the subject annexation. Although the District has
requested an indefinite continuance of this matter, I under-
stand it is your opinion that LAFCO may still choose to
proceed. Since this is a possibility, I wanted to make sure
that you had the amended legal description and map in your
possession so that the areas of private ownership can be
excluded from any such annexation.
Sincerely,
Herbert Grench
General Manager
HG: cac
Enclosures
cc: MROSD Board of Directors
W. Davis, San Mateo County LAFCO
Herbert A.Grench,General Manager Board of Directors Katherine Duffy,Nonette G.Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Richard S.Bishop,Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G.Wendin
r
"EXHIBIT A-2"
Annexation to Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Name of Annexation Midpeninsula Preserves 1985 - Skyline Ridge (South)
Date: January 24, 1985
Revised: 5/85
DESCRIPTION
All that certain real property situated in the State of California, County of
San Mateo described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of Section 27, Township 7 South, Range 3 West,
M.D.B. and M. which corner is the common corner to Sections 21, 22, 27 and 28;
thence proceeding from said common corner along the Northerly line of said
Section 27 S 88' 14' 07" E 2521.23 feet, more or less, to the Northeast corner
of the Northwest 14 of said Section 27 as said corner is shown on that certain
Parcel Map entitled "Parcel Map, being a resubdivision of Parcel "B" shown on
the Map recorded in Volume 18 of Parcel Maps, at Page 3, San Mateo County, State
of California," filed for record October 1, 1974, in Book 26 of Maps at Page 14,
Records of San Mateo County;
thence proceeding along the Easterly line of said Northwest 14 of Section 27
S 40 18' 00" E 2557.13 feet more or less to the center point of said Section 27
as said center point is shown on said Parcel Map recorded on October 1, 1974;
thence from said center point S 88' 31' 24" W 2452.77 feet more or less to
the Northeast corner of the Southeast ;4 of said Section 27;
thence S 10 32' 47" W 2723.96 feet more or less along the Easterly boundary
of said Section 27 to the center line of the living running stream of Afton Water;
thence West by Northerly following the meanderings of the low water channel
of said Afton Water descending the center of ripples, pools, rapids, cascades and
waterfalls constituting said stream to the Westerly boundary of Parcel "C" as said
parcel is shown on that certain Parcel `lap filed for record on April 13, 1973, in
Book 20 of Parcel Maps, at Page 26, Records of San Mateo County;
thence proceeding along the Easterly boundary of said Parcel "C", N 4* 18' 00"
E 684 feet more or less to the Southeasterly corner of Parcel Two (2) as shown on
that certain Parcel Map filed October 1, 1974 in Book 26, Parcel Maps of San Mateo
County, Page 14; thence along the Southwesterly line of that parcel described in
Recorder's Serial Number 84059149, Official Records of San Mateo County N 51* 311
07" W 3064.87 feet to a point in the Westerly boundary of said Section 27;
thence along said Westerly boundary of Section 27 N 4' 59 ' 23" E 1385.77 feet
more or less to the Point of Beginning.
i
Skyline Ridge
Open Space Preserve
P.O.B.
V
21122 S 88014 ' 07" E
•mom••rmr�s •vwwwr� • • �� • �� •��� • 22 23
`� 27 27 26
2521`w . 23 '
C\' r N 080-390-060
74 . 34 acres °
CC)Ln ~
rn N Ico M.R.O.S.D.
o 080-390-110 10 Boundary as
d 5 . 83 acres _ (Not Included) established
November 2, 1976
100
S1 080-390-120 n •
53 . 57 acres
O
� Iw
S 88031 ' 24" W
080-390-130 06g•8 2452 . 77 '
cn
J+1 °080-400-020 w • N
�
95 . 75 acres
(20PM26) \ 7A
Afton Water •
N
Skyline Page Psill Road
Blvci
I1-s r'/r_-ancos
Skyline� Ponte Plel'_o
Ridc,e O.S.P. Exhibit B-2
O.S.P.
PROPOSED ANNEXATION
/ Santa Clara
Pnnexation f 0=11nty To: Midpeninsula Regional Open
Parcels Space District
Loma Ridge Sar-atcxta-Gap
Entitled: Midpeninsula Preserves
O.S.P. 1985 - Skyline Ridge (South)
O.S.P.
' Date: 01/18/85 San P�E.teo Co. B M. Gundert Scale: 1"=500'
Revised: 3/85 ; 5/85
' Santa Cruz
Co.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-11,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415)965-4717
N 0 T I C E
Members of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District will be meeting informally in less than quorum groups
with representatives of the Portola Heights Homeowners Association
and the South Skyline Association to discuss topics of mutual interest.
The first informal meeting will be on Sunday, May 5, 1985 beginning
at 10: 00 A.M. The group will meet at the gated entrance to the Long
Ridge Open Space Preserve on Skyline Boulevard,
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
M-85-80
(Meeting 85-12
ITEM FOR EMERGENCY CONSIDERATIO k May 8, 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
May 8, 1985
TO: Board of Di
rectors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Follow-Up for May 4 Workshop
Discussion: At your May 4 workshop, President Henshaw stated that
this item should be added to your agenda in order to make appropriate
follow-up assignments based on input received at Saturday ' s workshop.
Since this item does not appear on your printed agenda, you need to
add it to your agenda as an emergency item prior to considering the
matter.
Recommendation: According to your discussion so far, you would
charge the current Board Committee, composed of Directors Hanko,
Bishop, and Turner, with whatever follow-up you would like them to
undertake on the topics of acquisition of land outside the District
boundaries and annexation. The Committee has already received assign-
ments concerning the use of eminent domain and a tentative assignment
on implementation of the Brown Act.
i
n
M-85-79
(Meeting 85-12
May 8, 1985)
Nit
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
375 DISTEL CIRCLE,SUITE D-1,LOS ALTOS,CALIFORNIA 94022
(415) 965-4717
May 2 , 1985
To : Board of Directors
From : Nonette Hanko
Subject : Brown Act; closed session/ personnel exception
Dear Colleagues :
Upon studying the new ( Dec. 1984 ) State of California
Publication Open Meeting Laws regarding the Brown Act requirements
for local agencies; I wish to raise a serious question as to the Board's
current procedure for determining the amount of salary increases for
Board appointed officers in closed session. I have attached what I
believe to be the relevant pages from Open Meeting Laws for your
attention.
It appears to me that prior to 1983 , the best advise on this
subject was the attorney general's opinion 283 ( 1978 ) ," that it was
proper under personnel exception to discuss in private the salary of
the manager of a special district and the discussion could include his
work history and his suitability for his position , ( page 17 attached
to this report ) . However, in 1983 , in San Diegosv.` City Council ( 146
Cal. App. 3d 947 ) " the court concluded that a closed session was
appropriate for the purpose of reviewing an appointee's job performance
and making the threshold decision of whether any salary increase should
be granted. However all discussions concerning the amount of any
salary increase should be held in public session"( page 16) The court
specifically rejected the argument that the terms employmene or 'performance
as used in section 54957 should be interpreted to include salary level
determinations. The court stated, Salaries and other terms of compen-
sation constitute municipal budgetary matters of substantial public
interest warranting open discussion and eventual electoral public rati-
fication " . The decision goes on to a variety of other factors for open
meeting discussion including " relative compensation of similar positions
elsewhere , both inside and outside of the jurisdiction' "
Herbert A.Grench.General Manager
Board of Directors:Katherine Duffy,Barbara Green,Nonette G Hanko,Richard S Bishop.Edward G.Shelley,Harry A.Turner,Daniel G Wendin
J
(Brown Act; c' -ed-session/ personnel ""4,
exception ) page 2
In the introduction of Open Meetinq Laws ( page 1 ) , it is noted
that " Attorney General opinions , unlike appellate court decisions, are
advisory only and do not constitute thr law of the state"; so I would
personally conclude that the 1983 San Diego Union v. City Council
decision would take precedence. I believe such salary increase dis-
cussions would affect each of the Board appointed officers, ( general
manager, legal counsel, and controller ) .
As a member of the legislative committee, I wish to request
that the Board refer this matter to the Legislative Committee for full
review with our legal counsel, and with instructions to return with
whatever procedural policies the committee believes appropriate for
Board consideration.
Nonette
F . Permissible closed sessions
Authority for closed sessions must be found in the explicit
terms of the Act or inferred from some other n co fiden ti alit
Y
provision in the law. (61 Ops . Cal . Atty. Gen . 220 ( 1978 ) . )
The Act itself contains several purposes for which a
legislative body may meet in private or in closed session.
Additionally , the courts and this office have held several
other situations to fall within the closed session exception
to the open meeting requirements of the Act.
Prior to or after holding any closed session, the
legislative body of the local agency shall state the general
reason or reasons for the session. The legislative body may
also cite the legal authority under which the closed session
is held. The scope of the closed session shall be limited
to matters covered by the legislative body ' s statement of
reasons . The legislative body is neither authorized nor
required to include in its statement of reasons information
which could constitute an invasion of privacy or otherwise
unnecessarily divulge particular facts concerning the closed
session. ( Section 54957 . 7 . )
1 . Expressly authorized closed sessions
a . Personnel exception
The Act provides in Section 54957 for closed
sessions to consider the appointment, employment,
performance, or dismissal of a "public employee" as
defined by the Act or to hear complaints and
charges against such "public employee . " This
exception is commonly known as the "personnel
exception. " An employee may request and require a
public hearing where the purpose of the closed
session is to discuss specific charges or
complaints against him or her. A general
discussion of an employee ' s job performance may,
however, be held in closed session irrespective of
the employee ' s desires . (61 Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen . 283
( 1978 ) . )
We have held that "public employee" as defined
by the Act does not include anyone elected or
appointed to an elective office ; that the
definition contemplates only "nonelective officers"
insofar as it may include officers . ( 59
Ops . Cal . Atty. Gen. 266 ( 1976 ) . ) Moreover, mayors ,
chairpersons of boards of supervisors , and other
presiding officers , although receiving separate
appointments to their presiding offices, are not
employees within the meaning of Section 54957 .
Therefore , complaints against such presiding
-14-
_I
officers may not be discussed in a closed session .
( 61 Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen . 10 ( 1978 ) . )
In Rowen v. Santa Clara Unified School District
( 1981 ) 1 Ca1 . App . 3d 231 , the court held that
discussions regarding the qualifications of an
independent contractor to sell surplus land for the
district should have been conducted in public. The
personnel exception set forth in Section 54957 is
specifically applicable to the hiring of employees ,
but the court refused to apply it to independent
contractors in this case. Since special services
contracts are not subject to the bid process , the
court commented that the need for public
consideration of the independent contractor' s
qualifications was especially important.
The legislative body must report at the public
meeting during which the closed session is held or
at its next subsequent public meeting any action
taken during its closed session , and the roll call
vote thereon , to appoint, employ , or dismiss an
employee . ( Section 54957 . 1 . ) This reporting
requirement applies to all legislative bodies
irrespective of whether they are otherwise required
to act by roll call vote . ( 59 Ops . Cal . Atty. Gen .
619 ( 1976 ) . ) However, the requirement has been
construed to apply only to actions to "appoint, "
"employ , " or "dismiss . " Accordingly, an action to
establish the compensation of a hospital
administrator need not be reported at the next
subsequent public meeting of the legislative body .
( 63 Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen . 215 ( 1980) . )
The personnel exception is probably the most
widely used permitted closed session device . This
office has opined that the primary purpose of the
exception is to avoid undue publicity and
embarrassment to the affected employee and that an
ancillary purpose of the exception is to encourage
the free discussion of personnel matters by the
legislative body . ( 63 Ops .Cal . Atty . Gen . 215
( 1980) ; 61 Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen. 283 ( 1978 ) ; 59
Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen . 532 ( 1976 ) . ) Examples of its
application may be helpful to demonstrate that in
addition to actual hiring and firing , it has a
legitimate
int
ermediate
e scope .
co e .
i . In Cozzolino v . City of Fontana ( 1955)
136 Cal . App . 2d �606-, the court upheld a closed
hearing to consider the propriety of a past
firing by the chief of police , and to ratify
such action .
- 15-
In Letsch v. Northern San Diego Count
Hosp. Dist. (-1966 ? 246 Ca I . App . 2d 673 , t e
court held that a hospital board could meet in
closed session to discuss the qualifications
of a radiologist, who was apparently an
independent contractor, prior to terminating
the radiologist' s contract.
iii . In Lucas v. Board of Trustees ( 1970) 18
Cal . App . 3d 990, a decision not to rehire the
di tri c s t superintendent of a high school
district was held to be properly made in
closed session . Also, in 59 Ops . Cal . Atty.Gen .
532 ( 1976) , this office upheld the use of a
closed session by a school district governing
board to discuss and evaluate the performance
of its superintendent.
iv. In San Diego Union v. City Council
( 1983) 146 Cal . App. 3d 947 , the court
considered whether the city council could meet
in closed session to consider the job
performances and salary levels of certain
appointed officials. The court concluded that
a closed session was appropriate for the
purpose of reviewing an appointee ' s job
performance and making the threshold decision
of whether any salary increase should be
granted. However, all discussions concerning
the amount of any salary increase should be
held in public session .
The court specifically rejected the
argument that the terms "employment" or
"performance" as used in Section 54957 should
be interpreted to include salary level
determinations . The court stated, "Salaries
and other terms of compensation constitute
municipal budgetary matters of substantial
public interest warranting open discussion and
eventual electoral public ratification . "
( San Diego Union v. City Council , supra , at
page 955 . ) The court stated that although an
individual ' s job performance could be
considered in closed session , there were a
variety of other factors that must be
considered in determining the appropriate
salary level , e. g. , availability of funds ;
other funding priorities ; relative
compensation of similar positions elsewhere ,
both inside and outside of the jurisdiction .
-16-
This opinion calls into question the
opinions discussed below , which appear to have
taken a broader construction
of the
employment" and "performance" exceptions .
In 61 Ops . Cal . Atty . Gen . 283 ( 1978 ) and
in several letter opinions of this office , it
was held that the personnel exception could be
used to discuss the salaries of individual
employees as opposed to discussing salary
scales in general . Thus , in I . L . 66-184, we
took the view that it was proper under the
personnel exception to discuss in private the
salary of the manager of a special district,
and the discussions could include his work
history and his suitability for his position.
In I . L . 68-117 , we held , however, that it was
not permissible for a school board to hold a
closed session to consider the salaries of all
the teachers of the school district, since
there were no individual qualifications to be
discussed. Similarly , in Santa Clara
Federation of Teachers V. Gove`rnijnjg Board
( 1981 ) 116 Cal -T-pp . 3d 831 , the court held that
the board ' s consideration of a hearing
officer' s decision on teacher layoffs must be
held in public. The holding of a closed
session by a county board of supervisors for
the purpose of discussing salaries of specific
employees , although permissible under the Act,
may , however, be prohibited by Section
25307 , which provides , inter al i a , that all
meetings of the board pertaining to salaries
of county employees shall be open and public.
( 61 Ops .Cal . Atty .Gen . 282 ( 1978) . )
V . In 63 Ops. Cal . Atty . Gen . 153 ( 1980) , this
office . held that abstract discussions
concerning the creation of a new
administrative position and the workload of
existing positions are inappropriate for a
closed session . However, if the workload
discussions involve the performance of
specific employees , a closed session may be
proper.
vi . In 65 Ops . Cal .Atty . Gen . 412 ( 1982) , we
concluded that a county retirement board could
review in closed session the medical records
of a county employee seeking a disability
retirement.
- 17-
perfor umance, or dismissal of a
public employee or to hear
ch eP
complaints or charges brought a g ainst su
employee
0Y
ee b
another person or employee unless such employee requests a
public hearing . The legislative body also may exclude from
any such public or closed meeting , duringthe
ami
ex
exa
mination
n of
a witness , any or all other witnesses in the matter being
investigated by the legislative body .
For the purpose of this section, the term "employee" shall
not include any person elected to office , or appointed to an
office by the legislative body of a local agency ; provided , i
however, that nonelective positions of city manager , county
administrator, city attorney , county counsel , or a
department head or other similar administrative officer of a
local agency shall be considered employee positions ; and
provided, further that nonelective positions of general
manager, chief engineer, legal counsel , ° district secretary,
auditor, assessor , treasurer, or tax collector of any
governmental district supplying services within limited
boundaries shall be deemed employee positions .
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent any
board , commission , committee, or other body organized and
operated by any private organization as defined in Section
54952 from holding closed sessions to consider (a ) matters
affecting the national security, or (b ) the appointment,
employment, evaluation of performance , or dismissal of an
employee or to hear complaints or charges brought against
such employee by another person or employee unless such
employee requests a public hearing . Such body also may
exclude from any such public or closed meeting , during the
examination of a witness , any or all other witnesses in the
matter being investigated by the legislative body.
54957 . 1 . Report of employment determinations
The legislative body of any local agency shall publicly
report at the public meeting during which the closed session
is held or at its next public meeting any action taken , and
any roll call vote thereon , to appoint, employ, or dismiss a
public employee arising out of any closed session of the
legislative body .
§ 54957 .2 . Minutes of closed session
( a ) The legislative body of a local agency may, by
ordinance or resolution , designate a clerk or other officer
or employee of the local agency who shall then attend each
closed session of the legislative body and keep and enter in
a minute book a record of topics discussed and decisions
made at the meeting . The minute book made pursuant to this
section is not a public record subject to inspection
pursuant to the California Public Records Act ( Chapter 3 . 5
-40-
its legal counsel , based on existing facts and
circumstances , there is a significant exposure to litigation
against the local agency ; or
( 2 ) Based on existing facts and circumstances , the
legislative body of the local agency is meeting only to
decide whether a closed session is authorized pursuant to
paragraph ( 1 ) of this subdivision .
( c) Based on existing facts and circumstances , the
legislative body of the local agency has decided to initiate
or is deciding whether to initiate litigation .
Prior to holding a closed session pursuant to this section ,
the legislative body of the local agency shall state
publicly to which subdivision it is pursuant. If the
session is closed pursuant to subdivision (a ) , the body
shall state the title of or otherwise specifically identify
the litigation to be discussed , unless, the body states that
to do so would jeopardize the agency ' s ability to effectuate
service of process upon one or more unserved parties , or
that to do so would jeopardize its ability to conclude
existing settlement negotiations to its advantage .
The legal counsel of the legislative body of the local
agency shall prepare and submit to the body a memorandum
stating the specific reasons and legal authority for the
closed session . If the closed session is pursuant to
subdivision (a ) , the memorandum shall include the title of
the litigation . If the closed session is pursuant to
subdivision ( b ) or ( c ) , the memorandum shall include the
existing facts and circumstances on which it is based. The
legal counsel shall submit the memorandum to the body prior
to the closed session if feasible , and in any case no later
than one week after the closed session . The memorandum
shall be exempt from disclosure pursuant to Section 6254 . 1 .
For purposes of this section , "litigation" includes any
adjudicatory proceeding , including eminent domain , before a
court, administrative body exercising its adjudicatory
authority , hearing officer, or arbitrator.
§ 54957 . Closed sessions
Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to
prevent the legislative body of a local agency from holding
closed sessions with the Attorney General , district
attorney , sheriff, or chief of police , or their respective
deputies , on matters posing a threat to the security of
public buildings or a threat to the public ' s right to access
to public services or public facilties , or from holding
closed sessions during a regular or special meeting to
consider the appointment, employment, evaluation of
-39-
M-85-74
(Meeting 85-12
May 8 , 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
May 2 , 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; M. Gundert,
Associate Open Space Planner
SUBJECT: Final Adoption of the Interim Use and Management Plan for
the Nolte Addition to the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve
Introduction: At your March 13 , 1985 meeting you approved the acquisition
of the Nolte property addition to the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve
(see attached report R-85-20 , dated March 5 , 1985) . You also tentatively
adopted the use and management recommendations outlined in the report
and indicated your intention to dedicate the property as public open
space.
In accordance with the adopted Land Acquisition Public Notification Pro-
cedures (see memorandum M-83-106 , dated August 31 , 1983) , final adoption
of the interim use and management plan was deferred until after close of
escrow to allow for public comment. Escrow on the 160 acre Nolte property
closed April 9 , 1985 . Since the initial hearing, staff has received no
further public comment on the acquisition.
Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the Interim Use and Manage-
ment Plan for the Nolte property addition , including the naming, as
contained in report R-85-20 and dedicate the property as public open
space.
I
R-85-20
(Meeting 85-05
March 13 , 1985)
fvIlDPENIN'SULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
March 5, 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 Nolte Property Addition to Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve
Introduction: The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has been
offered the opportunity to purchase 160 acres of land adjacent to the
western boundary of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve, within unincor-
porated San Mateo County. The property, an expansive grassy ridge, is
contiguous to the existing lands of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve,
connects by trail with Skyline Boulevard, and offers visitors a scenic
destination point and picnic spot.
A. Description of the Site
1. Size, Location and Boundaries
This 160 acre property, a full quarter section, lies between
Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve and Mindego Hill in unincorpor-
ated San Mateo County (see map attached) . It is bordered by
Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve to the north and east and by
private property to the south, west, and northwest. Mindego Hill,
a prominent summit, lies directly to the west.
2. Topography, Geology and Natural Landscape
The property with its wide grassy ridge forms a level saddle
between two knolls, offering easy hiking with extensive views in
all directions.
The grassland along the ridgecrest is being grazed by cattle
from the neighboring Mindego ranch. Dominant plants are short
annual grasses and forbs . The upper section of the north side
of the ridge was recently cleared to open up a larger area to
grazing. Piles of dead brush and bare soil still remain, and
reseeding remains to be completed.
The north side of the ridge is steep and heavily vegetated with
foothill woodland near the top, grading to mixed evergreen forest
lower down. Oaks , madrone, and California bay are common foot-
hill woodland species, with Douglas fir becoming more frequent
in the mixed evergreen forest below. The south side of the ridge
R8 5--20
Page two
is also steep, having mixed evergreen forest in the canyons and
chaparral on the open slopes . Elevations range from 1280 feet
to 1800 feet, a 520 foot difference.
A tributary flows from the south side of the ridge into Alpine
Creek, while the north slope drains into Mindego Creek. Both
Alpine and Mindego Creeks are tributaries in the San Gregorio
Creek drainage system, which drains to the Pacific Ocean.
The ridge is underlain with shale and volcanic rock. Both
Mindego and Langley Hills are remnants of ancient volcanoes,
formed below the sea. The volcanic rock erupted in pieces
rather than as a continuous lava flow. The pieces were weathered
and eroded into heavy clay soils which are very susceptible to
landsliding.
The steep side slopes are rated as having the highest suscepti-
bility to landsliding and consist of landslide and possible
landslide deposits (Land Slide Susceptibility in San Mateo
CountCA1978) . Althouy, gh the crest is given a moderate rating,
it could be undermined by the failure of the side slopes.
B. Planning Considerations
The property is located within unincorporated San Mateo County, and
is proposed for annexation to the District (see the agenda item under
memorandum M-85-37 , dated March 4 , 1985) . It is within San Mateo
County' s Resource Management District, and acquisition for public
open space purposes is in accordance with the San Mateo County General
Plan.
A density analysis indicated that the maximum allowable residential
density on the property as six units, although it is County policy to
discourage structures on a ridgeline, which is the only suitable
building area on this site.
C. Current Use and._Development
A dirt road follows the ridgeline through the property, providing
access from Alpine Road to the ranch to the west. Since this road
crosses private property it could be used as a patrol road, but may
not be possible as a public access at this time. A branch of the
road leads down to ruins of an old barn at the southeast corner of
the property.
The property is subject to a grazing lease which encompasses other
adjacent property. Currently the site is being grazed by a herd of
20 Brahman cattle, including bulls, cows, and calves, owned by the
adjacent rancher. He intends to breed the bulls with ordinary heifers
to produce half Brahman hybrids . The property has been heavily grazed
the last 4 or 5 years , yet the rancher feels the grass cover is
improving. He cleared the brush from the north side of the ridge as
part of his lease agreement and intends to finish clearing, discing
and seeding the cleared area, but has not yet completed the job. The
only structure on the property is a small holding pen midway across
the ridge. A fence and a cattle crossing across the road mark the
western boundary.
Page three
D. Potential Use and Management
The property will be a valuable addition to the existing Russian Ridge
Open Space Preserve trail system. An old Jeep trail beginning oppo-
site the Vista Point parking area on Skyline Boulevard winds around
the southwest side of Borel Hill, and traverses the head of a heavily
wooded canyon and several meadows, joining the ridgeline road near
the southeast corner of the Preserve. Visitors could follow this
road a short distance west through the Preserve to enter the property.
Its open grassy character and panoramic views would make it a fine
visitor destination and picnic spot.
Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve is a key part of the planned Skyline
Scenic and Recreational Trail Corridor, destined to become a major
recreational route linking public lands in three counties. This
parcel , positioned along a ridge leading west from the Preserve, could
play an important role in any future trail link to Pescadero Creek
County Park.
Other potential trail connections include:
1. A Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve loop trail descending the
north side of the ridge into the headwaters of Mindego Creek,
rejoining the Jeep road near the northern boundary of the Preserve.
2. A connection to Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve via the patrol
road and a short portion of Alpine Road. (This may require
, obtaining further rights on the entry road. )
E. Interim Use and Management Recommendations
1. The site will be managed as part of Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve and will be open to hikers and equestrians.
2. Preserve boundary signs will be installed at the western boundary
of the property . Cost is estimated at $50 .
3. The brush piles will be burned this winter if possible, and the
cleared area disced and seeded with grass. Cost is estimated at
$200 .
4 . Grazing should be continued on the property at the present time.
The old grazing lease has expired, and a short-term agreement
will be negotiated if possible. Staff is working with the San
Mateo County Soil Conservation District to prepare a grazing plan
for Russian Ridge. This property will now be incorporated into
the plan. Upon completion of the plan, the recommended changes
will be incorporated into a long-term grazing lease decision.
5. Any hazardous remnants of the old barn in the southeast corner
of the property will be removed and the site restored to a natural
area.
F. Dedication
The property should be dedicated as public open space.
R-3 5-220 Page four
G. Naming
The property should become an addition to the Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve.
H. Terms
The total Purchase price stipulated in the attached Purchase Agreement
will be $450 ,000 ($2800 per acre) payable in cash at the close of
escrow. This amount is in accordance with the appraised value of
the property. Funds for this Purchase would come from the New Land
Commitments budget category and would be the first expenditure from
the proceeds of the District' s 1985 note issue.
Reco,=_endation: I recommend you adopt the accompanying Resolution of the
Board of Directo
rs of the Midpeninsula. Regional Open Space District
Authorizing Acceptance of Agreement to Purchase Real Property, Authorizing
Offmi- cer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and
Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents
Necessary to Closing of the Transaction (Russian Ridge Open Space Pre-
serve - Nolte Property) .
I further recommend you tentatively adopt the interim use and management
plan recommendations contained in this report, including the naming, and
that you indicate your intention to dedicate the property as public open
space.
1 � . . . s l 1 � ' •• •.• � - ••�� "• II h,.,i,slrrn�1S41r11.•iJ\i1yr711�.I'/':]
.'� •�.!� V .-1 rim: � @\. ,1 `� a 9po.i
..,AL CREEK OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
1� Lr, - - ��'' //./ !�':-.'� �' ��'oo �.,, , ••.`��.'.,..� RUSSIAIA RIDGE OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
S I r •,'', ;';; ( ./ _raq�N' ;' ' /� '` ~ •�+�'.`\';, z y SCALE 1" = 2000' WRTH
I q `5 �� `i`'. �. \ -.. !.ter•.�O .-jr\'��
.:'��.1 �1�" s" ���� '� �_ J �, �,�� ---�••.1 •// }�.. C��r, ,. •it � �R1=---
rid
. S \ "f-�'� A�; -� _N I + %•v Z'�,C• \1 V�� `r' -"' ��'+Y�., ~ �_ ��\1 � 4��\ "\ 11{�+
Mc MetvlUei. r\ ZZ
1J// 1) (=L.. •'� �•� "'` �%r� `{�.,� _��` 1S` �.,�, , ..4 y.`` r"'n�-�,rev;\•.` I t�l � V ( � ,
!. / \ '•.8 _1 :*j� � '� _ Coal Creek Open S pace Preserve
l if`• `�� _ram` �1m o1 o�t ) 7
,'oil rt `a ,`I frj �r,o t \•?:� - -Alpine Fcad - _ Los Tiancos
r f7a�) ` `1aCltlt,y / max'! /sue"\I� l�:r� \t~ re» ;:ol`, o 1 ����_ , . i Open Space Preserve
gip` r !✓��� � ! t° `loll ^, �\ \4\\ \} J-`�.�. _ _ -� -`-; _ --`-` (•� _-- _.k
/� .-n v '" �1. � f Sil 1 �f ; � •` � ��\1 \.�� -��`�`�, y� �`i``.�" �ffa t r ,f �V `=i�JS �_
CalTrans 7 .,
—Vista Point; �� �� `•;•�--;' t;/'r--� , ?•t ; �i- �\o \„ ''�I
•�1L 1r L � ri I� ','�/ ;ter_ l/ _ �}� i S/`�\ \` \•��•• -�'F f/��/.�j �J--f \�(q��_ �•�� �O \.
'_-��li��''/\ -/% ,:�1 l .^•'f�f! :�-• �(J 4 ��r '>C17�� �23�!\� •`�,t t f .'.`' v ,Y,' ' ` ' '''`? p.� (',
i `�` ` �, •`L% } ^`\ _� 11 i! ���`�.- ! `;\ orel HiTM\\.1Ad ram\ -J-�. �=--: .L •- '\ n/_� ./! n` ,
\ v � !�it o. 71. -s .i ./ Bello
.._�ol�-= �� \`.','=..' r�� ) 7�`.i-�' -, : !� �' '��� Open Space Preserve
}_
t t R3issian .` �
I`i l f i , ,^ +-\ S ce Preserve
AV
i
is
o
i1,_ ..:ii•w:v: 1 "tf f.`�J r. r��s a,. 1: I��'
14.1 r
-
t
s
I,O e
1 (ice _
t /
::•: r •o nii �,.
� r
t
L o
N
a�- i
a-
4
., It
� f
, a
t N
1 s �
r• IN 1
PROPOSED ADDITION~ ;��`t;•l - '` i `-,')�/`� <<< V
ZZ
Skyline R•f�� i
'��, - •• ((� ` o,l Space PreSeYVe
';'��� �), � %-- �^��I/--- `a• !�`,- ,%�►�l l' _lam. "-!'\�_�� 1 �,'t"'I'
�• \ \ 1 '� I /� I ���-/'J/�//�,✓-�'- i lip I I�T �i'�K0 \r�_•�
Open Space •�r�..
: o l Q� , r, �_� �.,i r /'J, r /r~- J' ✓\�� J� `�; ''a \��l t` 1Y;.i/ ���i� r`-
r;`-t�2 -- _, > !"• :)) '\����� i' OL%• ,`1�'�---� � 1��� )�� '•=�� _�'JJf:(mot-'3 i•'�\.�l
�_ `) <� Y. ,�_'\,_ 4 ,, !\il.` `�\a�1 rr�lb` 'i li-�J�`� ���f 'l,� ��C .� ,200/(IyyIC�O�~•�`�f����`� `,
it
\. ) - �_- I.\� �/�J'�-'� o�`'` �\� I r-.`,�.`'��\V //'/ .J'r/I } ••.� 11 N'�1l �1 ����,�`) f:i ��1����' l' , I HIM
�--- �
R-85-1 1
(Meeting 85-03
oeFeb. 13 , 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT
February 7 , 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARATION AND RESPONSIBILITY: C. Britton, Land Acquisition Manager
SUBJECT: Transfer of Development Rights for a Portion of Long Ridge
Open Space Preserve to Jikoji
Introduction: At your meeting of August 11 , 1982 , you adopted Resolution
82-34 approving and accepting a land exchange with Bodhi (see report
R-82-33 , dated August 4 , 1982) . At your following meeting of August 25 ,
1982 , you approved specific wording for a Restriction Agreement which
governed the future use of the Bodhi site , including the acceptable level
of development (see memorandum M-82-86 , dated August 16 , 1982) . The entire
process anticipated further involvement by the District in guiding and
assisting with the improvement of the Bodhi property.
Discussion: As anticipated, Bodhi formed a new non-profit entity,
Jikoji to develop and operate the site in accordance with the District
J P P
criteria. The Jikoji group has done an excellent job in adhering to not
only the letter of the agreement, but also the spirit of the level of
cooperation required. The site is now cleaned up and ready for the
implementation of the retreat facility plans. During the use permit
d
process, the County of Santa Cruz required that the development e nsit y
of all the former lands of Bodhi (approximately 35 acres , of which 22
acres were considered developable by the County) be dedicated to the
Jikoji facility. The use of these density rights by Jikoji is consistent
with the original agreements and recorded restrictions , as it would
implement the exact project contemplated by the parties.
The original transaction involved a payment by the District of $75, 000
plus the transfer of the lake to Bodhi. The District was able to eliminate
the potential liability problem of the lake while requiring strict use
guidelines with a reversionary right. Additionally, Bodhi assisted with
the purchase of the adjacent Mazenko property by trading other lands that
Bodhi owned on a pass-through transaction. The net result was a very
favorable outcome for the District, which easily compensates the District
for the belated release of these development density rights.
Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the accompanying Resolution
of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Approving and Authorizing Officer to Execute a Deed Conveying Development
f Density Rights to Jikoji and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any
and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Trans-
action (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve)
i
i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE
A DEED CONVEYING DEVELOPMENT DENSITY 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)
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 Deed
conveying certain development density rights to Jikoji , a California
non-profit corporation, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof
by this reference, and authorizes the President or other appropriate
officer to execute said Deed on behalf of the District.
Section Two. The General Manager of the District shall
cause to be given appropriate notice of approval to Jikoji . 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 miscellaneous costs related
to this transaction, if required.
Section Four. The Board of Directors finds that the granting
and releasing of these development density rights is consistent with
that certain Agreement to Exchange Interests in Real Property dated
August 11 , 1984 (Board Resolution 82-34 and 82-37) and is in accordance
with the Basic Policy of the District and is not detrimental to the
open space character of Long Ridge Open Space Preserve.
I
"YaY
.......•..—. - , - -:' ;-. �� -.: !�7 --:--�: -..
Ito la
I's
Hall
��� v e"
RIDGE
SKYLI,
I PRESERVE
4 "tog
-;PARKING
SKYLINE COUNTY PARK
few_,
RI
tl�13
I I KO%
K.
LVIIU RIDGE 11
PRESERVE
+
\V
�SARATOGA GAP
7
PRESERVE
SEMPERVIRENS
OSD EAS T)!
PORT LA STATE
P�RK -0
Site Map
IC W,
LONG RIDGE
OPEN SPACE PRESERVE
Scale 1" 2000' North
2�
11111111111111111111 LANDS ACQU t RED FROM BODH I (35 AC.)
LANDS OF J I KOJ I (13.5 ACC
u
i � A
SKYLINE BLVD.
_
r \
r _ \
_
� O �
a•
� LJ
I
_ s
�n
I _
_
IV _
o —
_
l—
L_
_
Site 14ap
Scale 1 " = 250 ' North
r■nrrrr����r�� nr rrrrr�t■r■rrnrrrrrrrrrriirrr■�■iin■■■■rr��r■r���-�1_E,�_��,�_��_�.,�.-
r]-?���9�rJT�'
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
JIKOJI , A Non-Profit Corporation
12100 Skyline Boulevard
Los Gatos, CA 95030
GRANT OF DENSITY RIGHTS
WHEREAS , the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District,
a public district (hereinafter District) entered into that cer-
tain "Agreement to Exchange Interests in Real Property" dated
August 11, 1982 (hereinafter Agreement) with Bodhi , a California
non-profit corporation (hereinafter Bodhi) , and
WHEREAS, in accordance said Agreement, Bodhi perfected
title with restrictions to the real property described in
Exhibit "A" as attached and incorporated herein by this refer-
ence (hereinafter Subject Property) , and
WHEREAS , Bodhi subsequently transferred all its right,
title and interest in and to the Subject Property to Jikoji , a
California non-profit corporation (hereinafter Jikoji) by deed
dated October 22, 1982 , and
WHEREAS , on August 8 , 1984 , Jikoji obtained Development
Permit Number 79-1111-PD from the County of Santa Cruz to operate
a conference and retreat center on the Subject Property in accord-
ance with the Agreement, and
WHEREAS , said Development Permit requires that District
transfer development density rights to a minimum of twenty-two
acres of developable land of the property acquired under the
Agreement from Bodhi as described in Exhibit "B" as attached
hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and
WHEREAS, the development density rights transfer is con-
sistent with said Agreement; and District finds that such transfer
is in accordance with the Basic Policy of the District and is not
detrimental to the open space character of the Long Ridge Open
Space Preserve.
NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration which is hereby
acknowledged, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a
public district, does hereby transfer and convey to Jikoji, a
California non-profit corporation, development density rights to
twenty-two developable acres as the same exist within the approxi-
mately thirty-five acres of land as described in Exhibit "B"
herein. Said development density rights are and shall be appur-
tenant to the Lands of Jikoji as described in Exhibit "A" herein,
pursuant to Santa Cruz County Development Permit Number 79-1111-PD,
dated August 8 , 1984.
Excepting and reserving onto District, the unilateral
right to substitute other of its lands within Santa Cruz County,
subject to County approval , for the development density rights
granted herein, in the event District, or its successors or
assigns, desires to develop the lands described in said Exhibit "B"
wherein an application for development to the County of Santa Cruz
may be required.
JIKOJI, a California MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
Non-Profit Corporation: SPACE DISTRICT, a Public
District:
By: By:
President, Board of Directors
By:
Date: ATTEST:
By:
District Clerk
Date:
EXHIBIT "A"
Description
SITUATE in the County of Santa Cruz, State of California, and described
as follows:
PARCEL 1
Being a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, Township 7 South,
Range 3 West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, said portion being described
as follows:
COMMENCING at a concrete monument with a bronze disc marked "T. 7 S. ,
35/36, 2/1 T. 8 S. County of Santa Cruz, County Surveyor", said monument
denotes the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence along the west
line of said Section North 0' 24' 44" East 724.94 feet; thence leaving
last said line North 550 55' 00" East 291.23 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe
monument tagged "LS 4840" and being the True Point of Beginning of the
herein described parcel; thence from said true point of beginning, South
50 25' 57" East 249.24 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence South 39* 32' 46" East 111.59 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument
tagged "LS 4840" marking a point on the northerly line of a 60 foot wide
easement described in the Deed from Long Ridge Ranch, a Corporation to
Pacific Education Foundation, a California Corporation recorded December
31, 1964 in Book 1667 of Official Records at Page 128, Records of Santa
Cruz County, California; thence easterly along last said line, along the
arc of a curve to the right tangent to a line bearing North 760 13, 08"
East having a radius of 150.00 feet, a central angle of 33' 41' 56", an
arc length of 88.22 feet; thence South 700 041 56" East 218.00 feet to
a point at the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; thence easterly
along the arc of last said curve, having a radius of 110.00 feet; a central
angle of 30' 15' 00", an arc length of 58.08 feet; thence North 790 40' 04"
East 13.00 feet to a point at the beginning of a tangent curve to the
right; thence southeasterly along last said curve, having a radius of
130.00 feet, a central angle of 83' 18' 00", an arc length of 189.00 feet;
thence South 170 01' 56" East 45.00 feet to a point at the beginning of
a tangent curve to the left; thence southeasterly along last said curve,
having a radius of 30.00 feet, a central angle of 590 38' 00", an arc
length of 31.22 feet; thence South 76* 39' 56" East 5.00 feet to a point
at the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; thence southeasterly
along last said curve, having a radius of 170.00 feet, a central angle of
30' 28' 00", an arc length of 90.40 feet; thence South 46" 11' 56" East
75.32 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence continuing
along the westerly line of said easement as it now runs northerly North
17' 27' 56" West 297.56 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence leaving the westerly line of said 60 foot wide easement North 17'
35' 49" East 227.99 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence North 10' 09' 47" West 171.98 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument
tagged "LS 4840"; thence North 62' 03' 03" West 256.28 feet to a 3/4" iron
pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence North 53' 03' 26" West 185.91 feet
to a point on the northwesterly line of the lands described in the Corpor-
ation Grant Deed from Pacific High School, a California Non-Profit Corpor-
ation to BODHI, a California Non-Profit Corporation recorded June 15, 1979
in Book 3070 of Official Records at Page 53, Records of Santa Cruz County,
California; thence along last said line South 55' 55' 00" West 423.77 feet
to the point of beginning.
EXHIBIT "A"
Page Two
PARCEL 2
Being a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, Township 7 South,
Range 3 West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, said portion being described
as follows:
COMMENCING at a concrete monument with a bronze disc marked "T. 7 S. , 35/36,
2/1, T. 8 S. County of Santa Cruz, County Surveyor"; said monument denotes
the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence along the West line of
said Section North 0' 24' 44" East 724.94 feet; thence leaving last said
line North 55' 55' 00" East 291.23 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument
tagged "LS 4840" and being the True Point of Beginning of the herein
described parcel; thence from said true point of beginning, North 15' 48' 47"
West 615.92 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence
North 36' 02' 56" East 127.69 feet to a 3/4' iron pipe monument tagged
"LS 4840"; thence South 72' 34' 51" East 216.35 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe
monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence South 38' 25' 39" East 221.34 feet to
a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence South 12' 03' 45"
East 176.96 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence
South 53* 03' 26" East 78.45 feet to a point on the northwesterly line of
the lands described in the Corporation Grant Deed from Pacific High School,
a California Non-Profit Corporation to BODHI, a California Non-Profit
Corporation recorded June 15, 1979 in Book 3070 of Official Records at
Page 53, Records of Santa Cruz County, California; thence along last said
line South 55' 55' 00" West 423.77 feet to the point of beginning.
EXHIBIT "B"
Description
SITUATE in the County of Santa Cruz, State of California, and described
as follows:
Being a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, Township 7 South,
Range 3 West, and a portion of Section 1, Township 8 South, Range 3
West, Mount Diablo Meridian, said portion being described as follows:
BEGINNING at a concrete monument with a bronze disc marked "T. 7 S. ,
35/36, 2/1, T. 8 S. County of Santa Cruz, County Surveyor", said monument
denotes the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence along the West
line of said Section North 0' 24" 44" East 724.94 feet; thence leaving
last said line North 550 551 00" East 817.69 feet to a point on the
westerly line of Skyline Boulevard (known as State Highway No. 55) ; thence
southerly along last said line, along the arc of a curve to the left tan-
gent to a line bearing South 370 07' 41" East having a radius of 450.00
feet, a central angle of 55' 32' 19", an arc length of 436.20 feet; thence
North 870 20' 00" East 99.26 feet to a point at the beginning of a tangent
curve to the right; thence southeasterly along the arc of last said curve,
having a radius of 350.00 feet, a central angle of 29' 04' 42", an arc
length of 177.63 feet to a point on the easterly line of the West 1/2 of
the Southwest 1/4 of the above mentioned Section 36; thence southerly
along last said line South 0' 16' 48" West 979.66 feet to the southeast
corner of last said parcel, said point being also a point on the southerly
line of said Section 36; thence continuing along the last mentioned
course South 0' 16' 48" West 633.78 feet to a point on the southerly line
of Township 7 according to Lightfoot survey in 1918 as delineated upon
the Record of Survey recorded February 14, 1957 in Book 32, Page 50 of
Maps, Santa Cruz County Records; thence along last mentioned line North
64' 14' 10" West 1471.71 feet to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM an undivided 1/2 interest in and to all mineral, oil,
petroleum, gas and other hydrocarbon substances and rights into, in, on,
under, and about said real property; 1/4 being reserved in the Deed from
Marcella Jane Tucker, Guardian of the person and estate of Jessie M. Fatjo,
an incompetent person, recorded December 31, 1964 in Volume 1667, Page 117,
Official Records of Santa Cruz County and 1/4 being reserved in the Deed
from Marcella J. Tucker, also known as Marcella Jane Tucker recorded
December 31, 1964 in Volume 1667, Page 122, Official Records of Santa Cruz
County.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM any portion that may lie outside of the exterior
boundaries of Santa Cruz County.
EXHIBIT "B"
Page Two
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following described parcel of land:
Being a portion of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 36, Township 7 South.
Range 3 West, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, said portion being described
as follows:
COMMENCING at a concrete monument with a bronze disc marked "T. 7 S. ,
35/36, 2/1 T. 8 S. County of Santa Cruz, County Surveyor", said monument
denotes the Southwest corner of said Section 36; thence along the west
line of said Section North 0' 24' 44" East 724.94 feet; thence leaving
last said line North 550 551 0011 East 291.23 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe
monument tagged "LS 4840" and being the True Point of Beginning of the
herein described parcel; thence from said true point of beginning, South
5' 25' 57" East 249.24 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence South 39' 32' 46" East 111.59 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument
tagged "LS 4840" marking a point on the northerly line of a 60 foot wide
easement described in the Deed from Long Ridge Ranch, a Corporation to
Pacific Education Foundation, a California Corporation recorded December
31, 1964 in Book 1667 of Official Records at Page 128, Records of Santa
Cruz County, California, thence easterly along last said line, along the
arc of a curve to the right tangent to a line bearing North 760 131 08"
East having a radius of 150.00 feet, a central angle of 33* 41' 56", an
arc length of 88.22 feet; thence South 700 04' 56" East 218.00 feet to
a point at the beginning of a tangent curve to the left; thence easterly
along the arc of last said curve, having a radius of 110.00 feet; a central.
angle of 300 15' 00", an arc length of 58.08 feet; thence North 79' 40' 04"
East 13.00 feet to a point at the beginning of a tangent curve to the
right; thence southeasterly along last said curve, having a radius of
130.00 feet, a central angle of 83* 18' 00", an arc length of 189.00 feet;
thence South 17' 01' 56" East 45.00 feet to a point at the beginning of
a tangent curve to the left; thence southeasterly along last said curve,
having a radius of 30.00 feet, a central angle of 59* 38' 00", an arc
length of 31.22 feet; thence South 76' 39' 56" East 5.00 feet to a point
at the beginning of a tangent curve to the right; thence southeasterly
along last said curve, having a radius of 170.00 feet, a central angle of
30' 28' 00", an arc length of 90.40 feet; thence South 46* 11' 56" East
75.32 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence continuing
along the westerly line of said easement as it now runs northerly North
17* 27' 56" West 297.56 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence leaving the westerly line of said 60 foot wide easement North 17'
35' 49" East 227.99 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument tagged "LS 4840";
thence North 10' 09' 47" West 171.98 feet to a 3/4" iron pipe monument
tagged "LS 4840"; thence North 62' 03' 03" West 256.28 feet to a 3/4" iron
pipe monument tagged "LS 4840"; thence North 53' 03' 26" West 185.91 feet
to a point on the northwesterly line of the lands described in the Corpor-
ation Grant Deed from Pacific High School, a California Non-Profit Corpor-
ation to BODHI, a California Non-Profit Corporation recorded June 15, 1979
in Book 3070 of Official Records at Page 53, Records of Santa Cruz County,
California; thence along last said line South 55' 55' 00" West 423.77 feet
to the point of beginning.
M-85-72
(Meeting 85-11 ,
May 8 , 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
May 2, 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
PREPARED BY: J. Fiddes , Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Discussion of various Operating Procedures
Discussion: During Informational Reports at your April 24 Regular
Meeting, Director Wendin requested an item be placed on the May 8
agenda concerning the distribution of written communications address-
ed to the Board and the use of District stationery by members of the
Board to express personal opinions . President Henshaw requested that
the Board also address whether there should be a certain hour after
which the Board would not discuss Closed Session items .
Director Wendin also quoted Section 1 . 43 from the Rules of Procedure
that states in part "Any member of the Board may place such written
communication on the agenda for consideration by the Board" . A ques-
tion was raised as to whether the Board could, at the same meeting,
receive a written communication and then place it on the agenda for
action.
Section 1 . 43 also addresses the distribution of written communications
addressed to the Board of Directors from members of the public. It
does not address the distribution of a written communication from an
individual member of the Board.
Recommendation: I recommend that you discuss , but take no final action,
on the various items noted above . Based on your discussion, staff
could return at a future meeting with proposed amendments to your
Rules of Procedure for your consideration.
M-85-78
AA� (Meeting 85-12
May 8 , 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
May 1 , 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: C. Britton, Assistant General Manager
RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager;
J. Boland, Operations Supervisor
SUBJECT: Appointment of Peace Officer
Introduction: 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. This
section was forwarded to you in February of this year when
Ranger Ellis Wallace received his appointment (see memorandum
M-85-20 , dated February 7 , 1985) .
Kerry Carlson, the District's newest Ranger, has completed the
necessary courses required under the Penal Code. This course
completion and the passage of the attached resolution will qual-
ify him as a peace officer.
Recommendation: I recommend that you adopt the attached Resolution
of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Appointing Peace Officer, which will appoint Kerry Carlson
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 :
Kerry Carlson
M-85-73
'4%1AA (Meeting 85-11
law
0F May 8 , 1985)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MEMORANDUM
May 2, 1985
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: Scheduling2 Special Meeting o a S
f May 1 P g
Discussion: As previously discussed (see Memorandum M-85-57 of
April 4 , 1985) , you are scheduled to tour District lands with
members of the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday,
May 21.
Recommendation: I recommend that you schedule a Special Meeting
at 2 : 00 P.M. on Tuesday, May 21 , 1985 to convene at the CalTrans
parking lo
t at the 'unction of St i 8
III p g � ate Highway 4 (Woodside Road)
and Interstate 280 for the purpose of a field trip to tour Dis-
trict land with the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors .
I
i
{
s1
V
V
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: F.Y.I.
DATE: May 8, 1985
Prog;aM -
Subprogram 84-85 84-85 85-86 85-86
Pro 5 ec t G 9 ? 84-85 Projected Actual Proposed Propo. ea
Bud et Expenses Expenses Budget Contin. Notes & Cost Basis of Budgeted bunts
451 TRAINING & SEMINARS
..
452 MAINTENANCE & REPAIR,/ -
EQUIPMEN'I'
01 Field
02 Office - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - --
3 Shop/Yard - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - --
04 Fire - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - --
05 Radio
99 Miscellaneous - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -- - - -
!iA am pw M4 aw w" W— i.11 M Vi► i..q —
w. w. pr w. wv. ... w► w w ..� wY►w ww � i..,. w .
22400 Skyline Blvd Box 21
La Honda. Calif . 94020
April 29th 1985
Executive Officer
Local Agency Formation Comission
70 West Hedding Street, East Wing
San Jose, Ca. 95110
Dear Cathy Lasarus,
At the MROSD board meeting of April 24th, their
annexation, which is agendized for Santa Clara Co. LAFCO' s May
8th meeting, was added to the evenings agenda as an emergency
item. This was due to their recieving the attached letter
signed by residents and land owners in the area to be annexed.
The board voted to ammend the annexation to exclude these
parcels. They also voted to continue the matter of annexing
until a more favorable time.
Has MROSO requested you to take any action regarding this
annexation? Can the item be removed from the agenda? Is it
going to be on your May 8th agenda, in light of the turn of
events? Is it possible for the commission- to go ahead and annex
these lands? Will MROSD' s request be honored? Will it be
necessary for a represenative to be present for the request to
? necessary for the residents to personally
be honored . Is it Y
protest at the meeting for their wishes to be respected?
Please advise me as to what your proceedure will be.
Sincerely,
Carol Doose
cc: Commissioners Santa Clara LAFCO
San Mateo LAFCO
Board of Directors MROSD
Jim Warren, PCA
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TO: Board of Directors
FROM: H. Grench, General Manager
SUBJECT: F.Y.I.
DATE: May 3, 1985
EDMUND G. BROWN JR. �"i •` - -✓ �;`r vL
RY OF STA T[
4�ffi=tP''f;`tite
gecretar '-"of State
SACRAMENTO
CERTIFICATE OF FILING
I, EDMUND G. BRO117N JR., Secretary of State of the State of
California hereby certify:
That on the 30th day of it ove.'sber, 1972
in accordance with Section 56452 of the Government Code, there was
filed in tl-iis office a Certificate of Completion on behalf of
MID-P II!4SU.LA REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
(Satta Ciara County)
0
That said Certificate of Completion was executed by Chaz?es A. Quinn,
Chai—man, DJard of Supervisors
That said Certificate of Completion referred to
FORMATION of
�v U District dated November 21, 1972.
m
A O
4J
� < i
wo
s ^1 IN WITNESS jFHEREOF, I execute
w t*,�''' � �` this certificate and affix the Great
0 Seal of the State of California this
4
0 Ln 30th day of November, 1972.
EMNIUN-D G. BROWIq JR.
ri k
u�i c0A Secretary of State
C O s
'� � � �.:—ter.-c�C�s y'`---•��-=-r✓
r By
UDeDuty secretary of state
U
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
James P. FOX, District Attorney ANNA G. ESHOO
TOM NOLAN
WILLIAM J. SCHUMACHER
K.JACQUELINE SPEIER
JOHN M.WARD
ROBERT BISHOP
CHIEF CRIMINAL DEPUTY
F.
'�►• COUNTY OF SAN M.,&-,,i E0 cHIEF CIVIL OMAS DEPUTYSEY III
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER • REDWOOD CITY CALIFORNIA 94063 (415)363-4666
April 16, 1985
Stanley R. Norton, Esq.
Attorney at Law
407 Sherman Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Re: Hassler Health Home Demolition Permit
Dear Stan:
This is to confirm that the demolition permit which was
issued to the Mid-Peninsula Open Space District on December 7,
1983, remains in full force and effect. The County takes the
position that the permit period was tolled during the time that
the Court Order staying demolition of the Hassler Health Home was
in effect. Be advised that the permit is normally in effect for
one year from the date of issuance.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
JAMES P. FOX, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
BY:
MICHAEL P. MURPHY, Deputy
MPM: jmm
cc : Michael D. McCracken, Esq.
CLAIMS No. 85-09
Meeting 85-12
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: May 8, 1985
REVISED
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Description
8249 240.00 A-1 Septic Tank Service, Inc. Septic Tank Maintenance
8250 413.36 A T & T Information Systems Telephone Equipment Rental
8251 160.00 Blanning & Baker Associates, Inc. Subscription
8252 35.79 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement--Meal Conference
8253 900.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant 'Fee for April
18254 13.11 California Native Plant Society Book on Endangered Plants
8255 California Park & Recreation Conference Registration for
Society Legislative Conference Herbert Grench
8256 34.35 Clark's Auto Parts, Inc. Parts for District Vehicles
8257 130.47 Alice Cuanings Reimbursement--11ap Overlay and
Private Vehicle Expense
8258 277.40 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies .
8259 300.00 John Escobar Reimbursement--Educational Assistance
8260 501.00 Pete Ellis Dodge District Vehicle Repair
8261 117.74 Harbinger Comnmications Computer Charges for March
8262 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm, Service
263 555.90 The Hub Ranger Uniform Expense
8264 127.12 IBM Corporation Office Supplies
8265 12.50 Jobs Available Subscription
266 260.00 Los Altos Garbage Company Duapster Rental
267 60.85
Mobil Oil Corporation Fuel for District Vehicles
263 94.24 National Mailing Services Fees for Spring Newsletter
269 125.10 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities
8270 261.18 Pacific Hardware & Steel Co. Field Supplies
8271 1,011.09 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
B272 8.56 City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities
B273 800.00 Department of Parks & Recreation Training Class for Lisa Varney
B274 17.55 Rancho Hardware Field Supplies
5275 101.10 Recreational Equipment, Inc. Ranger Uniform Expense
3276 101.08 San Francisco Water Department Hassler Water Service
'277 45.45 Schuerman Home Service Water Heater Repairs
3278 246.15 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs for District Vehicles
3279 90.95 Transcontinental Sales Co. Ranger Uniform Expense
Lvcf —
Meeting 85-12
Date: May 8, 1985
REVISED
�r Amount Name Description
8280 800.00 U. S. Postmaster Postage for Meter
8281 39.98 Lisa Varney Private Vehicle Expense
8282 94.71 Sandy Voorhees Private Vehicle Expense
8283 468.07 Xerox Corporation March Maintenance Agreement
8284 150.00 ZZZ Sanitation Equipment Rental
8285 42.68 James Boland Film Processing and Field Supplies
8286 9,047.09 State Compensation Insurance Fund Quarterly Premium
8287 99,000.00'' Sordrager Trucking Company Site Restoration--Hassler Health
Hom
8288 109.28 Petty Cash Meal Conferences, Office Supplies,
and Xeroxing Supplies
*Issued as an emergency check on May 6, 1985
CLAIMS No. 85-09
Meeting 85-12
MIDPENINSULA R1GI0NAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Date: May 8, 1985
C L A I M S
# Amount Name Description
8249 240.00 A-1 Septic Tank Service, Inc. Septic Tank Maintenance
8250 413.36 A T & T Information Systems Telephone Equipment Rental
8251 160.00 Blanning & Baker Associates, Inc. Subscription
8252 35.79 L. Craig Britton Reimbursement—Meal Conference
8253 900.00 California Advocates, Inc. Legislative Consultant Fee for April
�8254 13.11 California Native Plant Society Book on Endangered Plants
l�8255 100.00 California Park & Recreation Conference Registration for
Society Legislative Conference Nonette Hanko and Herbert Grench
8256 34.35 Clark's Auto Parts, Inc. Parts for District Vehicles
,8257 130.47 Alice Cummings Reimbursement—lia-p Overlay and
Private Vehicle Expense
258 277.40 Discount Office Supply Office Supplies -
b259 300.00 John Escobar Reimbursement—Educational Assistance
8260 501.00 Pete Ellis Dodge District Vehicle Repair
B261 117.74 Harbinger Communications Computer Charges for March
�262 235.20 Honeywell Protection Services Alarm Service
263 555.90 The Hub Ranger Uniform Expense
264 127.12 IBM Corporation Office Supplies
! 265 12.50 Jobs Available Subscription
5266 260.00 Los Altos Garbage Company DLmpster Rental
3267 60.85 Mobil Oil Corporation Fuel for District Vehicles
�268 94.24 National Mailing Services Fees for Spring Newsletter
M9 125.10 Pacific Gas & Electric Utilities
5270 261.18 Pacific Hardware & Steel Co. Field Supplies
Q71 1,011.09 Pacific Bell Telephone Service
3272 8.56 City of Palo Alto Utilities Utilities
�273 800.00 Department of Parks & Recreation Training Class for Lisa Varney
1274 17.55 Rancho Hardware Field Supplies
1275 101.10 Recreational Equipment, Inc. Ranger Uniform Expense
1276 101.08 San Francisco Water Department Hassler Water Service
1277 45.45 Schuern-an Home Service Water Heater Repairs
�W8 246.15 Shell Oil Company Fuel and Repairs for District Vehicles
1279 90.95 Transcontinental Sales Co. Ranger Uniform Expense
Meeting —12
Date: 1985
Ariount Name btb s cr
8280 800.00 U. S. Postmaster Postage for Ivhter
8281 39.98 Lisa Varney Private Vehicle Exi >e
8282 94.71 Sandy Voorhees Private Vehicle Expe
8283 468.07 Xerox Corporation March Maintenance Agro(,, e
8284 150.00 ZZZ Sanitation EquipgTrent Rental
8285 42.68 James Boland Film Processing and Fier'
8286 90047.09 State Compensation Insurance Rmd Quarterly Premium