Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout19901024 - Agendas Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 90-25 Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 90-25 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS A G E N D A 7 : 30 P.M. 201 San Antonio Circle Wednesday Suite C-135 October 24 , 1990 Mountain View, CA (7 : 30) * ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES (September 26 , 1990 and October 10 , 1990) WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -- Public*** ADOPTION OF AGENDA BOARD BUSINESS (7 : 45) 1 . Procedure for Trail Policies and Guidelines - R. McKibbin (8 : 45) 2 . Appointment of a Replacement Trails Committee Member and Alternate - N. Hanko (8 : 50) 3 . Proposed Addition of Goldsmith Property to Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - C . Bretton Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement , Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District , and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Lands of Goldsmith) (9:05) 4 . Support for Proposition 149, the California Park, Recreation, and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1990 - H. Grench I Resolution Supporting Proposition 149 , the California Park, Recreation, and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1990 (9 : 10) 5. Support for Proposition 128 , the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 - H. Grench Resolution in Support of. Proposition 128 , the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 (9 : 15) 6 . Support for Proposition 130 , the Forest and Wildlife Protecion and Bond Act of 1990, and Opposition to Proposition 138 - H. Grench Resolution in Support of Proposition 130, the Forest and 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 ®Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 a FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley i Resolution in Support of Proposition 130, the Forest and Wildlife Protection and Bond Act of 1990, and in Opposition to Proposition 138 , the Global Warming and Clearcutting Reduction, Wildlife Protection, and Reforestation Act of 1990 (9:20) 7 . Special Districts Forum in 1991 - H. Grench (9:25) **8 . Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Cothran et al . Property Addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - N. Hanko (9: 30) **9. Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Harmon Property Addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve - N. Hanko (9:35) **10. Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Peninsula Open Space Trust Property Addition to Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve - N. Hanko (9:40) **11 . Establishment of Separate Payroll Checking Account N. Hanko Resolution Amending Rules of Procedure Resolution Authorizing Signing of Payroll Checks for Payroll Checking Account (First Interstate Bank - Los Altos) (9:45) INFORMATIONAL REPORTS -- Directors and Staff CLAIMS CLOSED SESSION (Litigation, Land Negotiations, Labor Negotiations, and Personnel Matters) ADJOURNMENT *NOTE: Times are estimated and items may appear earlier or later than listed. Agenda is subject to change of order. Denotes Express Item ***TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: When an item you're concerned with appears on the agenda, the Chair will invite you to address the Board at that time; on other matters you may address the Board under Oral Communications. An alternative is to comment to the Board by a Written Communication, which the Board appreciates. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to 3 minutes. When recognized, please begin by stating your name and address . We request that you fill out the form provided so that your name and address can be accurately included in the minutes. NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS Thereowill be a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors on Tuesday, October 23 , 1990 beginning at 7 : 30 p.m. at the District office for the purpose of conducting the first round of interviews of Ward 4 director applicants. The second round of interviews and selection of a new director for Ward 4 will be conducted at a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors on Monday, October 29 , 1990 beginning at 8 : 00 P .M. at the District Office. USE AND MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW There will be a Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of Wednesday, November 7 , 1990 at the Cupertino Room, Robert W. Quinlan Community Center, 10185 North Stelling Road, Cupertino, beginning at 7 : 30 P .M. The purpose of the meeting is to review the Comprehensive Use and Management Plan for Fremont Older Open Space Preserve. Please send your written comments , ideas and concerns to David Hansen, Land Manager, by Friday, October 26 , so that they can be considered in drafting the staff report . 'Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 90-22 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS September 26, 1990 MINUTES I . ROLL CALL President Nonette Hanko called the meeting to order at 7 : 37 P.M. Members Present : Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko, Richard Bishop, Robert McKibbin, Teena Henshaw, and Betsy Crowder . Personnel Present : Herbert Grench, Craig Britton, and Jean Fiddes . IT . WRITTEN COMMUNICATION J . Fiddes stated that there were no written communications . N . Hanko said she had received a letter regarding Mt . Umunhum addressed to Sheriff C . Gillingham of the Santa Clara County Sheriff ' s Department and herself . She referred the letter to staff for a draft response and inclusion in the written communications at the Board ' s next regular meeting. III . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Matt Gersham, 1077 Delno Street , San Jose expressed his concerns to the Board about District hiring practices and his not being selected as a successful candidate for the equipment mechanic- operator position. J . Fiddes stated that she and J. Escobar , operations supervisor , would get back to Mr. Gresham within a week. TV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA N. Hanko stated that the agenda was adopted by Board consensus . V. BOARD BUSINESS A. Procedure for Fillinq of Ward 4 Board Vacancy (Report R-90- 105 dated September 26 , 1990) J. Fiddes reviewed the procedure outlined in the Board report for filling the vacancy, noting that the Board could either call a special election to fill the vacancy or determine to fill the vacancy by appointment . Discussion 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 - Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 • FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Meeting 90-22 Page two focused on how the vacancy, created by Edward Shelley' s September 25, 1990 resignation from the Board, should be filled. N. Hanko, R. Bishop, and B. Crowder stated that they preferred the appointment process in light of the cost of -a special election and the length of time the position would be vacant if an election was held. Motion.: R. Bishop moved that, the Board fill the vacancy in Ward 4 resulting from E. Shelley' s resignation by means of an appointment process . B. Crowder seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . The Board then discussed the procedure for the appointment process and the timetable for filling the vacancy. Motion: R . Bishop moved that the deadline for filing applications for Ward 4 be 5: 00 P .M. Friday, October 19 , 1990 and that the Board schedule a Special Meeting for Tuesday , October 23 and for Tuesday, October 30 beginning at 7 : 30 P.M. at the District office for the purpose of interviewing Ward 4 candidates . R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board approve the application form to be used. N. Hanko seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Motion: R. McKibbin moved that the Board reaffirm the use of the General Criteria for Appointment to the Board of Directors . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Motion: R . McKibbin moved that the Board reaffirm the use of the Procedures for Tnterviews . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . B. Enrollment of Represented Employees in State Disability Insurance Plan _(Report R-90-104 dated September 17 , 1990) Motion: B. Crowder moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90-44 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Electing State Disability Insurance Plan Coverage for the District ' s Represented Employees Effective July 1 , 1990 . R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Meeting 90-22 Page three VI . INFORMATIONAL REPORTS N. Hanko informed the Board that she had F. Shelley' s address in Switzerland; reminded directors participating in the November election of pre-election financial candidate statements ; and stated that she would like staff to provide an informational clarification statement for use by Board members on the District ' s position on Mt . Umunhum. She recommended that the workshops and field trips put on by District staff at the International Open Space Conference be repeated for Board and staff members after the new Ward 4 director is appointed. The members of the Board and H. Grench discussed the International Open Space Conference that had concluded earlier in the day. H. Grench recommended that the Board watch a Channel 36 special on toxics and how business are dealing with them on Sunday, September 30 at 9: 00 P .M. VIZ . CLAIMS C . Britton stated that claim 4747 to Wells Fargo Bank ($367 , 080 . 00) should be changed to $367 , 136 . 99 due to a calculation error . Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board approve Revised Claims 90-18 , dated September 26 , 1990 as amended by C . Britton. T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . VIII . CLOSED SESSION There was no closed session. TX. ADJOURNMENT The Board adjourned at 8 : 25 P.M. Jean H. Fiddes District Clerk Claims No. 90-18 Meeting 90-22 Date: SeDt. 26, 1990 MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REVISED # Amount Name Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4742 52.20 Times Tribme Advertisement 4743 160.88 Trail Center Mans 4744 6,817.20 Trygg & Tr•Ygg Design, Production and Consulting Service 4745 397.29 Martha Ture 1990 Openspace Conference mense 4746 1,530.00 Valley Title Company Preliminary Title Reports 4747 Wills Fargo Bank Note Rer-ayment 4748 2128.97 Whitmore, Kay & Stevens. Legal Services 4749 134,29 Word Products Office S;applies 4750 1,020.00 ****Dr. Roderick Nash. 1990 Openspace Conference mense 4751 5,000.00 ****Dr. Wangari Maathai 1990 Opensrace Conference mense 4752 1,000.00 ****Milton Chen 1990 Openspace Conference &sense 4753 100.00 ****Bill Carisen 1990 Opensrace Conference Exsense 4754 2O0.00 *** Petty Cash 1990 Openspace Conference E)-mense 4755 316.20 Petty Cash Loral Meeting E�enses, Office, Field and Conference menses, Ewipment Rerair and Private Vehicle Ehnense * Emergency check isss_zed on September 14, 1990. ""Emergency, cheek issaied on September 26, 1990. 1) Amount corrected at September 26, 1990 meeting to $367,136.99 I, . s Claims No. 90-18 Meeting 90-22 Date: Sept. 26, 1990 MIDPENINSi.TLA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT REVISE) (As corrected at # Amount Name Description 9/26/90 Board ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 4697 1710.00 Acme Type Typesett-L 4698 158.00 Adventure Travel Society, Inc. 1990 01enspace Conference Expense 4699 3,609.70 ** All Horizons Tra e-1, Inc. 1990 Gpenspace Conference Expense 4700 19,293.49 ** All Horizons Travel, Inc. 1990 Openspace Conference Expense 4701 360.18 Armadillo Willys Catering Catering for Recognition Event 4702 1,340.63 AT,ScT Maintenance arxl Material 4703 29.69 Betts Spring Company, Inc.. Field S'�ppiies 4704 50.00 State of California, Note Issue Investigation Fees District Securities Division 1705 263.94 California Water Service Company Dater Service 4706 42.63 Central Stationers Office Suoolies 4707 4098.63 Contemporary Engraving 1990 0penspace Conference Expense and Prrmotions 4708 62.78 Betsy Crowder Reimbursement--Conference Expenses 4709 202.00 Alice Cummings Reimbursement--Conference Registration 4710 90.92 Clark's Auto Parts/Machine Shop Parts and Repairs 4711 75.00 Steve C.ovarrubias Reimbursement--nL aition 4712 2087.88 ** Design Concepts 1990 Openspace. Conference Expense 4713 70.99 DeLiz-ce P•usiness Forms & Supplies Office Supplies 4714 617.5E Dillingham Associates Consulting Services 4715 43.00 Federal Emress Corporation Express Mail 4 474.48 General Stsply Centers, Inc. Photocopier Supplies 4717 1600.00 r_,eo<-onsulta7lts, Inc. Hydrogeologic Si. vre-y 4718 3313.18 Greenbelt Alliance 1990 Openspace Conference Fz-,an ense 4719 66.30 Mary Duzdert Private Vehicle Emense 4720 100.00 David Hansen Reimbursenent--Membership -I'A_ies 4721 201000.00 * Hyatt Rickeys 1990 Dpenspace Conference F.pzense 4722 193.32 Langley Hill L.aarry Base Rock 4723 180.00 Lopez Gardening Distei Circle Office Building Cleanip 4724 816.00 Los Altos Garbage D►xmpster Rental 4725 2163.20 Meyers, Nave, Riback & West Legal Ser-vices 4726 916.61 Deborah G. Mills 1990 Openspace Conference Expense 4727 105.88 Minton's Lumber & Supply Field Supplies 4728 41.88 Northern EngergY Propane Fuel 4729 584.19 The Office ClUb Office S:-mplies 4730 969.18 Orchard Supply Hardware Field Supplies 4731 200.00 * City of Palo Alto Temporary Use Permit 4732 1,982.51 ** Pip Printing Printing 4733 97.72 The Printing Club Photocopying 4734 1,466.90 Ray's Repair Service Repairs 4735 345.00 San Jose Mercury News Advertisement 4736 63.00 San Mateo Times Newspaper Group Advertisement 4737 688.16 Santa Clara County Patrol Service Sheriff's Department 4738 267.15 Shell Oil Company Fuel 4739 627.41 * Signs of the Times 1990 Ops --- ce Conference Expense 4' ` 139.97 Sunrise Winery Ed Shelley Retirement Party 4. _1 362.25 Temporary Specialties Temporary Office Help Emergency checks issued on September 14, 1990. * Emergency chPck-s issya.ed on September 17, 1990. ***Emergenr_y checks issued on September 20, 1990. 'Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Meeting 90-23 REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS October 10 , 1990 MINUTES I . ROLL CALL President Nonette Hanko called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 P.M. Members Present: Katherine Duffy, Nonette Hanko, Richard Bishop, Robert McKibbin, Teena Henshaw, and Betsy Crowder. Personnel Present: Craig Britton, David Hansen, Gregory Grimm, Stanley Norton and Emma Johnson. II . WRITTEN COMMUNICATION E. Johnson stated that there were no written communications . III . ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were no oral communications . IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA N. Hanko stated that the agenda was adopted by Board consensus. V. BOARD BUSINESS A. Proposed Addition of Schmidt Property to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (Report R-90-109 dated October 3 , 1990) C . Britton reported that the 19-acre proposed acquisition is one-third mile from the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve and could provide a trail connection between the entrance to the Cathedral Oaks Area and the remaining portion of the preserve above Wrights Station. He said the purchase price of $150 , 000 is payable in cash at close of escrow. D. Hansen' s slide presentation showed the site and the location of Weaver Road on the property. He said the property would provide vital trail connections in the area. He said that staff recommends installation of private property and preserve boundary signs, and that the site be designated a conservation management unit . Sue Dammann, 4719 Borina Drive, San Jose said she and her husband plan to build on the property adjacent to the site. She told the Board that Weaver Road is one lane wide and too narrow for the public to use, and asked if it would be widened if the area were opened to the public. D. Hansen responded that parking at the site is not being considered and that use would be primarily for hikers . C . Britton 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 - Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 • FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert trench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Meeting 90-23 Page two added that the Board would consider any changes in the use at a public meeting, and Mrs . Dammann could learn of such considerations through subscribing to the meeting agendas . Mrs . Dammann asked if the District' s purchase of the property would impact the approval of their building plans. C . Britton responded that it would not impact their getting the county' s approval unless variances were required. Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90- 45, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Lands of Schmidt) . R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Motion: K. Duffy moved that the Board tentatively adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations, including naming the property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, and indicate its intention to withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . B. Proposed Addition of Mayr Property to Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (Report R-90-112 dated October 3 , 1990) C . Britton introduced the item and said a dirt road serving three other homes runs through the center of the 85-acre property but, the location of the road is unspecified in recorded documents . He said improvements consist of a house, swimming pool , stable, mobile home, and various outbuildings . He added that the purchase agreement provides for payment of $600 , 000 in cash at close of escrow. D. Hansen showed slides of the area showing boundaries , roads , and trails . He said the site is flat and would be an excellent staging area for trails leading to the Cathedral Oaks and Limekiln Areas of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. He said the main house could be utilized as a caretaker or ranger residence, and that staff recommends removal of the other structures . He added that the site has two wells and a running spring. D. Hansen said that staff recommends two changes to the report : 1) the addition of "Cathedral Oaks Area" of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve in the second recommended action, and 2) addition of "property closed" signs in the Preliminary Use and Management Recommendations . Meeting 90-23 Page three Motion: R. McKibbin moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90-46 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement, Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Lands of Mayr) . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Motion: R. McKibbin moved that the Board tentatively adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommendations as amended, including naming the property as an addition to Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, and that the Board indicate its intention to withhold the property from dedication at this time. T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . C. Proposed Transfer of Private Water Line Easement - Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve (Lands of Fisher) (Report R-90-114 dated October 4, 1990) C. Britton reported that Mr. and Mrs . Ken Fisher had requested a water line easement within the right of way of Purisimma Road and that , in exchange, he would provide all maintenance on Purisimma Road as long as the District uses the road for patrol and maintenance purposes only. C . Britton said this transfer could be an advantage to the District , but that the last 200 foot portion of Purisimma Road is on dedicated land and that a unanimous vote by the Board would be required to approve the easement over the dedicated land. He suggested that the Board approve a revokable permit at this time and that staff present the modified transfer agreement to the Board at a later date. S . Norton opined that based upon the pertinent section of the Public Resources Code, a "unanimous vote of the Board" would be the full six-member Board, as long as the Ward 4 director seat remains vacant. Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board authorize the granting of a Revokable Permit to Mr. and Mrs . Fisher to install the water line Mr. Fisher is proposing and that the Board consider the matter further when the agreement is modified. R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . Meeting 90-23 Page four D. Approval of Black Mountain Communication Site Lease With C & C Equipment Company, Inc. (Report R-90-113 dated October 4 , 1990) C . Britton said that the Board had previously authorized the negotiations for the lease for a telecommunications facility at the site. He said the lease is based on the standard lease with some additional features: a contingency for the Lessee to obtain the necessary permits , an initial term of 5 years after the commitment date and four 5-year options to renew thereafter, an escalating rental schedule in the first 5 years , indemnification of District for any frequency interference claims , and an agreement to allow the District to install a repeater at no rental cost. Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90-47 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Approving the Communications Site Lease With C & C Equipment Company, Inc. (Monte Bello Open Space Preserve, Black Mountain) . R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . E. Rescheduling of October 30 Special Meeting (Report R-90-107 dated October 1 1990) Motion: R. McKibbin moved that the Board reschedule its October 30 , 1990 Special Meeting to Monday, October 29 , 1990 at 8 : 00 P.M. for the purpose of conducting final interviews of selected applicants and selecting a new director for Ward 4 . B. Crowder seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . F. Support of Measure T (Report R-90-110 dated October 2, 1990) Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90-48 , a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Supporting the City of Cupertino Measure "T" , the Open Space Measure, on the November 1990 ballot . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0 . G. Appointment of Peace Officer (Report R-90-108 dated October 2, 1990) Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board adopt Resolution 90-49, a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Appointing Peace Officer - Phillip Hearin. R. McKibbin seconded the motion. The motion passed 6 to 0. VI . INFORMATIONAL REPORT C . Britton noted that the letter from Leon Pauser regarding Mt. Umunhum was included in the packet with three attachments concerning the District ' s position on Mt. Umunhum. N. Hanko Meeting 90-23 Page five indicated that the Board should review these letters and discuss the matter of another response letter at the meeting of October 24 , 1990 . D. Hansen reported that Board and staff has received an invitation to the South Skyline Association' s Chili Cook Off on October 21 from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.at the Fisse residence. He added that the Fishers are opening a general store next to the parking lot at Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. G. Grimm reported that two mountain bike accidents occurred on District property in the past three weeks , one on El Corte de Madera Preserve resulting in a broken collar bone and one on Fremont Older Open Space Preserve resulting in a dislocated shoulder. He said that both individuals indicated that they were not paying attention at the time of the accidents. T. Henshaw reported that she and R. McKibbin attended the recognition event for Deer Hollow Farm docents , noting that it was a very good event. C . Britton reported that escrow closed on the new office building on October 2 and staff is proceeding with improvements and putting out request for proposals for architectural drawings for District utilization of the property. He said the sprinkler system, although previously approved by the City of Los Altos , does not meet building codes and must be replaced and that the estimated cost to replace the system where tenants will be located will be $15, 000 . C Britton reported that Ken Fisher is giving a talk at Kings Mountain Community Center at 2 P.M. October 21 on historical j aspects of logging at Purisima Creek Redwoods and Corte de Madera Open Space Preserves. C. Britton reported that seven individuals have requested applications for filling the Ward 4 vacancy. C. Britton reported that the Town of Woodside will schedule an election in the spring for the purpose of acquiring development rights over the two parcels at Teague Hill Open Space Preserve. He said the District would continue to own and manage the propery and that its use would be limited to open space. If the election were successful , a formal agreement would be negotiated and returned for Board consideration. VII . CLAIMS Motion: R. Bishop moved that the Board approve Revised Claims 90-18 , dated October 10 , 1990 . T. Henshaw seconded the motion. N. Hanko said she would abstain from voting on claim 4783 to IBM Corporation. The motion passed 6 to 0. 'Meeting 90-23 Page six VIII . CLOSED SESSION S. Norton announced that potential litigation matters to be discussed in Closed Session fell under Government Code Section 54956 .9 (c) . ADJOURNMENT The Board adjourned at 9:35 P.M. Emma Johnson Recording Secretary Claims No. 90-18 Mee:-inr 90-22 Date: Oct. 10, i990 MIDPENINSUI,A REGIONAL OPEN `PACE DISTRICT REVISED # Amount Name Description ------------------------------------------- - 4756 1,236.71 Alves Petroleum, Inc. Fuel 4757 29.13 American Welding S:.Lrrly Weldim Tans Refilled 4758 30.03 Barron ParZ' Supply C;omrany Plumbing Supplies 4759 :3,378.38 Birnie Lumber Company Fence Posts 4760 212.66 Rb_tth Blanchard Reimbursement--Local Meeting E,2-Lzense and Private Vehicle Emense 4761 8,098.45 Bofors, Inc. Fall "Open Spice" Magazine 4762 28.76 Butler's �hiforms tihiform E mense 4763 150.00 Capitol W�--ehiv Cornoration Seninar Registration--D. Zurk-er 4764 142.76 Centra� Stationers Office Ss-Mnlies 4765 329.00 Cruimmications Research Canpany Radio Service 4763 111.36 Comrosite Arts Printing--Business Cards 4767 934.72 Conservatree Parer Company Office Supplies 4768 150,000.00 Con�inental Lawyers Title Company Property Purchase--Schmidt 4769 38.81 Crest Copies, Inc. Pnotocorying 4770 351.78 Discount t'..c_rnraiter Rental Inc. ComrRiter Rental .. J 4771 407.32 rryna-mer_'r Medical imnlies 4772 20.40 Federal Express Cortxsration dress Mail 4773 96.53 .lean Fiddes Relm-bursemer_t--1990 Onen Space Conference rer_se 4774 130.40 Firs; America Title Insurance Re-onve-y-ance Fees ��ii�lnv 4775 186.00 Flinn, Gray & Rertericn Insurance 4776 940,97 Goodco Press Inc. Printing 4777 981.23 Granb cstat, Inc. Artworri Renrod=.action 4778 471.54 David Hansen Rein-ursement--Sumlies and Conference Registration -+ 4779 300.30 Virg Harkins Signs Sign 4780 200.00 Carroll Farrington Coordination of Staff Recognition Event 4781 4,065.00 R`x? Prodactions, Inc. Tent Rental 4782 936.62 henrgehold Motor Comrsany, Inc. Vas Rental 4783 35,39 IDSR Corporation Office Sunnlies 4784 85.04 Immigration and Naturalization Employment Fees 4785 495.28 Konica Business Machines !N,ainten ce Agreement 4786 1,562.50 Cnaries R. Montange Leval Services 4787 127.85 Moore t*--dical Corrsoration Medical Suoniies 4788 267.30 National Seminars, Inc. Seminar Registration--J.Escooar, D.Sanguinetti and A.Coleman 4789 55.00 North American Title Company Title Services 4790 92.45 Northern Energy Propane Fuel 4791 2,098.27 Pacific Bell Telephone Service 47921 875.51 Pacific Gas & Electric Company Utilities 4793 78.51 Page & Turnbull, Inc.. Arcnitectj_Lral Services 4794 5.36 Peninsula Blueprint, Inc. A-rtw.)rk Reproduction 4795 419.43 Peninsula Ccram-inity Services,Inc. Miscellanea-is Repairs--Enterprise 4796 121.31 Pine Cone Lumber tnpany,Inc. Sign Materials 4797 165.17 PIP Printing Photoc.opyinr 4798 134.65 Pitney-Bowes Postatge Machine Rental 4799 285.29 Port-O-Let Sanitation Services 4800 7,812.50 Prudential Bacne 1988 Notes Agreement I I� II� Claims No. 90-18 Meeting 90-22 Date: Oct. 10, 199t), MIDPED7,I'NT.UEA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE' DISTRICT REVT S Z4 13 # Amount IN a-,I e Description --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4801 64.66 Rancho Hardware Field Sullies 4802' 8,408.00 Rd,-x-r4. V4 CeS C. Reese and Associates A-r;nraisal Ser -L 4803 L,500.00 Renfro Roof i ng Comp-Wily Roof Repair 4804 1,944.01 Roy's Renair Service Vehicle Repairs 4805 209.30 San Mateo Times New-oaner Grm- T) Advertisement 4806 250.00 Santa Clara Cuunty Health Permit Department 4807 1,616.86 Santa Clara Ccrunty Sheriff's Patrol Sen7ices Department L - Banl�- Note Payinng Agent 4808 13,852.25 Sea":irst 4809 193.87 Service MarrulEactaring Company Service Boav 4810 4,070.00 Eugene S;nee-han Cons-ii1ting and Machine Rental 4811 330.93 Signs of the Times Signs 4812 64.211 Skyline County "water District V3ater Service 4813 600,000.00 Stewart Title Guaranty CxmpRny Property Furcha.se--Mayr 4814 55.00 Sunnyvale T.rwing Ve.bic"'Le Tcw,;L-tig 4815 631.92 Telsysti--ms Telephone Fqiipment E. Ture Ip 481t5 734.50 Ma-rt-ha a ia Cons-ulting Fees 481-7 879.00 Martha E. 74ure Media Con-malting FF-P-s 4818 695.78 th- ocal Fi.ie 1 4819 2520.00 Tinton Caterer Service Alcratraz Tcrar Caterers 4820 510.00 Valley Title Crmrany Preliminary Title Reports 482,11 393.24 *—,ne Nbrkinr,-in r,;r,I s m-r I ui, k h. i f orm E sense 4822 427.5,5 Dbrd Prrx'huc ts Office Stnnlies 4823 677.82 Yerr� Buena Nursery, PI"evirs 4824 "66.67 Petty Cash Local Meeting E-pense, Office Su-p-plies, Film and Developing, Signs, and Private vehicle Fr�cense *&nzergency check issup-a on Octolt'jer 1, 11990. Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-121 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 4 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Trail Use Policy Subcommittee (N. Hanko, R. McKi.bbi.n, E. Shelley) RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; D. Woods , Principal Open Space Planner; M. Gundert, Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Recommendations on Trail Use Policies Recommended Actions: 1. Consider the following draft trail use policies (and alternates) and formally adopt the appropriate trail use policies. 2. Charge the committee with continuing to review the guidelines, returning to the Board at a future date with recommendations for their adoption. Discussion: The subcommittee previously reported to the Board on "issues and problems associated with trail use and draft trail use policies" . Subsequently the committee was charged with returning to the Board with recommendations on trail use policies which address the issues and problems previously reported. The committee has held seven public meetings on the issue of policy recommendations. The staff has provided excellent support and advice throughout the process. In contrast with the earlier Board and committee meetings on this subject where large numbers of the public attended, representing various trail user groups as well as many individuals , this sequence of meetings was supported by a smaller group (10-20) of dedicated and well-informed individuals. In spite of their smaller numbers they ably represented the full range of trail users. Their preparation, regular attendance and constructive approach made it possible to converge on this set of recommendations. We believe that what we are recommending comes as close to a consensus as is possible, given the wide range of interests and desires on the part of the public, the District Board, and staff . Where we offer options, there was either a strongly held difference of opinion on the part of the public, or there was not a clear consensus on the part of the committee. 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 ° Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 ® FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:lierbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley R-90-121 Page 2 The approach was to take the staff ' s original Draft Policy and address it point-by-point in reference to the issues and problems documented in our earlier report (March 22, 1990) . In some cases relatively "minor" changes are recommended. In other cases the draft was significantly modified. We will try to point out the recommended changes and the rationale behind them. We recommend, however, that each Board member carefully review the entire revised draft (attached) , relative to the earlier staff draft to ensure that no subtle points are missed. The following will address the revised draft, paragraph by paragraph. DRAFT PREAMBLE One of the District's basic policy statements is that it will "follow a land management policy that provides proper care of open space land, allowing access appropriate to the nature of the land and consistent with ecological values". As a result of the rapidly increasing level of trail use and the increased types of trail use, it is necessary to adopt more specific policies on trail use in order to effectively implement this basic policy statement. The District is concerned both with the safety of all trail users and the enjoyment of their open space experience. The purpose for which people use open space trails varies depending on individual or group needs. Visitors may come to observe nature in a protected environment, experience tranquility, exercise in a non-urban setting,or any combination of these. The means by which visitors use trails also varies - be it hiking, running, on bicycle, on horseback, or in a wheelchair. The combination of trail conditions, level of use, and the mix of uses lead to conflicts. Such conflicts result in negative environmental impacts, unpleasant user experiences or even unsafe situations. Conflicts are related to several factors, including: ■ The relative speeds of different users. ■ Existing trail conditions, such as poor line-of-sight, narrowness, steep slopes and wide-open stretches of trail that might encourage excessive speed. ■ A lack of knowledge of, or disregard for, trail use etiquette and regulations by all types of users. ■ A high concentration of use in certain areas. This set of policies is intended as a guide in establishing trail use designations throughout the District which will promote safe and enjoyable experiences for all who use the District lands. These policies are not intended to restrict who may use the District trails, but they may restrict how or under what conditions the trails are to be used. The preamble was completely rewritten and shortened. The preamble to the staff's previous draft of the policies served more as an introduction to the subject of developing trail use policies than as an integral part of those policies. The revised preamble is intended as an introduction to the policies. DRAFT TRAIL USE POLICIES (as amended 5/22/90, 6/6/90, 7/12/90, 8/2/90, 8/9/90, 8/17/90 and 9/193/90) 1.0 The District will endeavor to provide a variety of satisfying trail use opportunities on open space preserves throughout the District. More specifically, the District will endeavor to: "...throughout the District" was added to the first sentence and "...provide in each preserve" was dropped from the second sentence. There was broad support for the idea that what is important to most users is that opportunities be made available in all regions of the District, while providing these uses on each preserve may be impractical or undesirable. 1.1 Provide multiple use on individual trails where such use is consistent with the balance of these policies. "...where such use is consistent with the balance of these policies" was added to qualify the first part of this statement. It could be argued that such a qualification is implicit, but it was felt that without such an explicit statement here, unreasonable expectations could be raised. 1.2 Protect the opportunity for undisturbed (tranquil) nature study and observation, especially in those areas identified as providing a unique wilderness experience. This statement was completely rewritten with the intent to strengthen and clarify the commitment to protect the opportunity for 'Wilderness experience". It was argued by some members of the public that it was not possible to provide a truly "undisturbed wilderness experience" on the fringes of the urban area; however, the members of the committee and most members of the public felt that this was one of the important goals in the formation of the District. The terms "optimum" was dropped because it was not clear what the criteria for optimization would be. The word "(tranquil)" in parentheses is offered as an alternative to "undisturbed". As stated above, perhaps any level of use or development leads to some disturbance. 2.0 The District will designate appropriate use(s) for each trail. Uses will be allowed that are consistent with District's objectives for sound resource management and safe and compatible use. More specifically, the District will: No substantive changes are recommended in this paragraph. 2.1 Allow trail use appropriate to the nature of the land and consistent with the protection of the natural, scenic and aesthetic values of open space. The rewording is intended to be more positive in terms of allowing use of trails. The basic content of the statement, i.e. the protection of open space, remains unchanged, but is more directly consistent with the District's basic policy statement. 2.2 Within budgetary and staffing constraints, make reasonable efforts to provide safe conditions for all trail users. This statement has been reorganized, but the intent remains unaltered except for two points. 'Within budgetary and staffing constraints,'" was added in order to explicitly recognize these constraints. It was felt that "make every effort" to provide safe conditions was too strong. Accepting that there are some inherent risks in outdoor activities and that any effort to alleviate all of them could severely detract from the open space experience, it is felt that "make reasonable efforts" is still a strong commitment to safety, but more consistent with the goals of the District. 2.3 Evaluate trail user needs, concerns, quality of experience, impacts, and the compatibility of various uses. Those uses creating the least conflict among trail users and the least environmental impact will be given greatest preference in trail use planning. This statement received a great deal of discussion. However, even though it was rewritten to better clarify its intent, the basic concept remains unchanged. The parameter, "quality of experience", was added as one of the evaluation criteria. This had strong public support. There was significant concern that this statement establishes absolute priorities for the use of all District trails. The intent is not that in every case only the lowest impact use will be permitted, but simply to give greater consideration to those uses. 2.4a Ensure that all District trails will be accessible to hiking (foot traffic), OR 2.4b Ensure that all District trail routes (corridors) will be accessible to hiking (foot traffic). 2.5a Where another use adversely impacts hiker (foot traffic) or other user safety, the use creating the impact may be restricted or redirected (to adjacent trails). The intention is not to restrict access by any individual, but rather to limit incompatible uses and means of travel, OR 2.5b Other uses will be permitted, where consistent with the above policies. Where such uses create conflicts, they may be restricted or, where practical, redirected to adjacent trails). The intention is not to restrict access by any individual, but rather to limit incompatible uses and means of travel. 2.4 and 2.5 replace the original 2.4 statement. The new 2.4 addresses only the subject of the preeminence of hiking (or foot traffic). This was one of the most controversial of the proposed policy statements. The critics generally felt that it was too specific. If it is a conclusion to be drawn from policy statement 2.3, it need not be stated explicitly. While hiking may have the least impact, is it an a pdori conclusion under all circumstances? It was generally agreed that if in fact it was the policy of the Board that hiking should be permitted on all trails or trail routes it should be so stated. The committee was unanimous in its support of the inclusion of such a statement Statements 2.4a and 2.4b differ in that 2.4a applies specifically to all trails while 2.4b provides for the possibility of parallel or essentially parallel trails where hiking-(or foot traffic) might be discouraged or even prohibited from one or more of the adjacent treads. In order to provide for this possibility in 2.4(b) the committee, staff and public considered various forms, including "routes" and "corridors" to characterize a condition where two trails follow essentially the same route, but don't share the same tread. It is not intended to characterize alternate routes between the same end points. There was considerable discussion about the futility and possible undesirability of distinguishing between "hiking" and other possible forms of "foot traffic", including jogging and running or just fast walking. The two terms, "hiking" and "foot traffic" are therefore offered as options. There is not a consensus on the part of the committee on this item, thus no recommendation is made. 2.5a and 2.5b are essentially restatements of the last half of the original 2.4 statement. 2.5a is phrased in a more positive form. We have also included the optional phrase "to adjacent trails" in both 2.5a and 2.5b. This option would be appropriate if the Board were to select statement 2.4b rather than 2.4a. Again, "foot traffic"is offered as an option to "hiker" to be consistent with the similar option in 2.4. There is not a committee consensus on which of the two options, 2.5a or 2.5b to recommend. 3.0 The Board of Directors will adopt trail use guidelines as an aid to the implementation of these policies. Trail use guidelines will establish a qualitative and quantitative approach to determining trail use designations. This is a new policy statement and it arises because the committee recommends that the "trail use guidelines" not be incorporated into the trail use policies, but rather that the guidelines be a Board adopted document that aids the staff and Board in the implementation of the policies. The statement as proposed makes it clear that the guidelines will not be limited to the quantitative elements such as width, line-of-sight and slopes, but will also include qualitative elements such as historical uses, levels of overall use and history of trail use conflicts. Given the decision of the committee to recommend the separation of the guidelines from the trail use policies, the committee chose to return with its recommendations on the policies before completing its review of the guidelines. The recommendation to separate the guidelines from the policies was unanimous on the part of the committee and had strong public support. The recommendation that the quantitative guidelines be adopted by the Board was not unanimous. 4.0 Specific trail use designations will be established and reviewed periodically through the Use and Management Planning Process, and will be subject to adopted Public Notification Procedures. Trail use designations may change if use patterns develop that are in conflict with these policies. This statement is intended as a replacement for the old statement 3. Among other things it makes the explicit statement that the Board will make the final decision on the use designation of each trail through its review and approval of the Use and Management Plans. It also drops explicit reference to the trail use designation guidelines to be consistent with the committee's recommendation to separate these guidelines from the policies (see discussion of Statement 3, above). While other District policies make it clear that all preserve uses will be governed by the Use and Management planning process and that the Board must publicly adopt these plans, members of the public were strongly in favor of making an explicit statement to that effect in these policies. The inclusion of the phrase "subject to adopted Public Notification Procedures" was at the urging of the public, since they wanted to be assured that they would have the opportunity to comment on any proposed changes in trail use. Much of the remainder of what was in the original draft statement 3 was dropped since these details might better be included in the guidelines. 4.1 In extreme cases where there is not sufficient time to comply with the Use and Management Planning Process, the Board of Directors or General Manager may make an interim decision to limit use while providing an evaluation process and timeline for final determination of the designated use. This is a revised version of the last paragraph of the old statement 3. It addresses extreme cases where it is impractical to follow the normal procedures. In general the public respected the need for such an emergency clause. It will be the responsibility of the Board and staff to maintain the confidence of the public by not abusing the use of this clause. 5.0 The District will endeavor, within budgetary constraints, to provide trail access for a variety of physical capabilities and user needs (including persons with physical limitations) in a manner consistent with resource protection goals and with state and federal regulations. This is a slight variation on the old statement 4.0. Specifically it adds the phrases ", within budgetary constraints,"and "consistent with resource protection goals" since these two parameters might prove to be particularly relevant constraints on the ability of the District to provide specialized trails. 6.0 The District will carry out management programs necessary for the implementation of these trail use policies. The designation of appropriate trail use as a method of minimizing trail use conflicts and environmental impacts will require a significant increase in trail use measures such as education, physical improvements to trails and enforcement of trail use regulations. More specifically the District will: This is a restatement of the old statement 5.0 with the elimination of reference to the trail designation guidelines. 6.1 Support trail use actions with a strong educational program. The District recognizes that education in proper trail etiquette and low impact use is a key measure towards the reduction of negative trail use impacts. No change from old statement 5.1. 6.2 Monitor trail use conditions on a regular basis. The purpose of a monitoring program will be to evaluate current conditions and to determine whether or not trail management programs, including maintenance, reconstruction, education and use regulations are effective in addressing user conflicts and environmental impacts, and to recommend changes if necessary. Essentially the same as old statement 5.2 but with the addition of explicit reference to "education" and substituting the word "changes" for "improvements" since the latter word may not be appropriate to all of the elements to be evaluated. 6.3 Evaluate the feasibility of trail use designations and regulations in terms of implementation costs. No change from the old statement 5.3. 7.0 The District will work with other agencies, interest groups and private landowners in an effort to promote an interconnecting trail system throughout the region. The District recognizes that connections should be compatible with other jurisdiction designations and land owner objectives as well as District trail policies and guidelines. The only recommended change from the old statement 6.0 is the substitution of "...should be compatible..." for ""...must be compatible...". There was a consensus that "must" was too strong a word since the condition of "compatibility" could not be unilaterally established by the District. 8.0 The District recognizes that existing trail use characteristics such as the types of use, conflicts, and impacts may change over time so that certain policies may no longer be appropriate or a new policy may be required. Hence, these policies will be subject to review and revision as deemed necessary by the Board of Directors and to following adopted Public Notification Procedures. Essentially a restatement of the old statement 7.0 with the elimination of reference to "guidelines"and the addition of specific reference to the District's "adopted Public Notification Procedures". It is understandable that the members of the public who have so unselfishly given of their time in helping the District develop these policies want to be assured that the policies will not be substantially altered without proper public participation. i 11-90-18 (Meeting, 90-25 October 24, 1990) September 12, 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Ed Shelley SUBJECT: Trail Use Designation Guidelines I am offering this short individual report and recommendation on trail use designation guidelines since it is anticipated that I will no longer be serving on the Board when this topic is taken up. I offer my comments, not as an expert on the subject, but to reflect some of the impressions and facts that I have gathered while serving as Chair of the Trail Use Policy Subcommittee for most the past two years. The inclusion of quantitative trail designation guidelines as an element of the draft "Trail Use Policies" was clearly the most controversiaF public issue. There was great fear that simple equations would be applied to each trail segment and a bureaucratic system would implement the results. I believe that the extensive public meetings held by the committee have gone a long way toward alleviating these fears. Specifically, the separation of the guidelines from the policies would be a major step in that direction. I feel strongly that the Board should adopt the guidelines and that quantitative, as well as qualitative guidelines should be included. Board adoption is essential to giving the guidelines authority and to assuring the public that they will have the opportunity to have an input to the process. I support Director McKibbin's suggestion that the qualitative, section C of the original draft guidelines, be addressed first in the document to reassure the public that they will be given possibly equal weight in any trail use designation. Nevertheless it is important that the quantitative guidelines also be given the authority of being adopted by the Board. In adopting the quantitative guidelines I would urge the Board to resist the temptation to fine tune the numeric values of the parameters. These are clearly technical issues and we should rely on staff to perform any adjustments based on more general guidance from the Board as to the level of conservatism and/or risk that is acceptable to the Board. It has been a challenge and a pleasure to work with the other committee members, staff members and the public in attempting to come to grips with these important issues. I am sorry that I will not be available to witness its conclusion, but I have full confidence that the process will*ultimately work, as it has on all previous controversial issues, and that a functional and long lasting policy will evolve. f M-90-19 (Meeting 90-25 October 24, 1990) MEMORANDUM October 9, 1990 To: Board of Directors From: H. Grench, General Manager Responsibility and Preparation: D. Hansen, Land Manager; J. Escobar, Operations Supervisor; D. Woods, Principal Open Space Planner; M. Gundert, Open Space Planner Subject: Draft Trail Use Policies The public workshop process for refining the Draft Trail Use Policies has been an effective method to formulate policies which consider the views of all trail users. The relatively small group of interested individuals that attended the series of workshops represented the interests of the variety of trail users allowed on District trails (hikers, equestrians, runners, bicyclists). Staff support the policies as amended, but would like to make several comments on the materials being considered. Regarding policy item 2.4a and 2.4b, the difference between the two is in the hiker access to all trails. Policy 2.4a allows hikers access to all trails, while 2.4b provides the potential for restricted hiker access on some trails, but ensuring hikers access on alternate trails. Staff prefers alternate 2.4a. Hiking use of a trail allows access to the majority of preserve visitors, including those avid bicyclists and equestrians opting to leave their preferred means of travel at home for the day. Staff prefers the term `hiker' in alternate 2.4a. Using the term `foot traffic' would create difficulty in implementing policy 1.2 where running may negatively impact a tranquil experience. Staff strongly supports draft policy 3.0. This is the `teeth' of the document and will enable staff to implement the policies and your intentions accurately. While staff recognizes that this is the most controversial part of the document, staff also feels that by continuing on with the workshop process, a set of guidelines representing the best interests of all trail users can be achieved. M-90-20 (Meeting 90-25 October 24, 1990) MEMORANDUM October 17 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: Nonette Hanko SUBJECT: Recommendations on Trail Use Policies This memo is in reference to policy #3 of the committee recommendations. As you will note, the comment here is recommending a set of policies, separate from what may still be controversial guidelines. Although the committee is unanimous in its belief as to the need for guidelines of some kind, I believe that it would be wise not to refer to the terms "qualitative" or "quantitative"" until such time as the committee has developed the recommendations based on public discussion not received. I recommend the following alternative wording to policy #3: The Board of Directors will adopt trail use guidelines as an aide to the implementation of these policies. Trail use guidelines will establish an approach to determining trail use designations. Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-127 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 18 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Appointment of a Replacement Trails Committee Member and Alternate I Recommended Actions: Approve the President ' s appointment of Director Crowder to replace Mr. Shelley on the Trails Committee and Director Bishop as an alternate. Discussion: President Hanko has asked that this item be placed on the agenda for action, assuming that the Trails Committee will continue its work. Director Crowder would be changing from an alternate to a regular member, and Director Bishop would become an alternate as he was earlier. Directors Hanko and McKibbin would continue to serve on the committee. I I i 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 <Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 a FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley ( Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-119 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 15 , 1990 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 Addition of Goldsmith Property to Mt . Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve Recommended Actions: 1 . Adopt the accompanying Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Acceptance of Purchase Agreement , Authorizing Officer to Execute Certificate of Acceptance of Grant to District, and Authorizing General Manager to Execute Any and All Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to Closing of the Transaction (Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve - Lands of Goldsmith) 2. Tentatively adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan recommen- dations contained in this report , including naming the property as an addition to Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. 3. Indicate your intention to withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. Introduction The proposed 163--acre acquisition is located about one and one-half miles north of Mount Loma Prieta . The property straddles the prominent ridge separating the Herbert. Creek and Barret Canyon Creek watersheds . The property has no buildings, but has been extensively graded, with several leveled pads and clearing of chaparral vegetation on the steep slopes of the upper Herbert Creek watershed. Construction materials and miscellaneous debris , including barrels of unknown liquids , are stored on the pads . An existing fire road, following the ridge through the property, could provide a trail connection between Almaden Quicksilver County Park to the north and Loma Prieta Road to the south. 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 - FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Report 90-119 Page 2 1 . Property Identification Property owners : Dorman E. Goldsmith and Mary Ann Goldsmith Size: 163 . 10 2. Location and Boundaries (see attached map) Regional setting: Unincorporated Santa Clara County, north of Mt. Loma Prieta and southeast of Mt . Umunhum Road access: Claimed prescriptive access on existing private road via Loma Prieta Road (no current public access) Boundaries: Bounded by District land on the north and south; private property on the east and west Nearby public lands: Portions of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve adjoin the property to the north and south; Almaden Quicksilver County Park lies approximately two miles to the north. Nearby landmarks : Bald Mountain, located approximately two miles northwest of property; Almaden Reservoir, located approximately two miles northeast 3. Topography and Hydrology Prominent topographic features: Ridge runs north-south through property separating the Herbert Creek and Barret Canyon Creek drainages . Elevation range: 1 , 600 feet near northeast corner to 3, 000 feet near southeast corner Slope steepness : Steep slopes averaging 50%; level areas along ridge Slope exposure: Northwest facing slopes Watershed: Most of property drains into the Herbert Creek watershed; an intermittent tributary of Herbert Creek flows from east to west through the center of the property; eastern quarter of property drains into Barret Canyon Creek. 4 . Geology and Soils Seismology: The San Andreas Fault zone and the Sargeant Fault are located in Los Gatos Creek Canyon about two miles to the west. Soil classification: Los Gatos-Maymen, considered highly erodible Report 90-119 Page 3 Soil stability: Moderate potential for earthquake-induced landslides 5. Flora and Fauna Plant communities: Chaparral; riparian in drainages Dominant flora: Manzanita, toyon, ceanothus, chamise, yerba santa, coffeeberry, knobcone pine, madrone, and scrub oak Common fauna: Blacktailed deer, feral pig, coyote, bobcat, and a variety of reptiles, rodents and birds associated with chaparral plant communities 6. Visual Qualities Viewshed: Part of upper hillsides of the Herbert Creek watershed; highly visible from Mt. Umunhum Road Vistas: Views of Mt. Umunhum and Bald Mountain to the northwest , Almaden Reservoir and valley to the north, and the Santa Teresa Hills to the northeast 7 . Existing Improvements A poorly maintained fire road located on the ridge passes through the eastern portion of the property. The road continues steeply down the ridge through District land and private properties to Twin Creeks. The property owner has done extensive grading on the property. Three level pads adjoin the fire road and at least three more pads have been recently graded on the steep slopes in the upper Herbert Creek watershed. Chaparral has also been removed from large areas, increasing greatly the potential for erosion. Materials stored on the property include numerous rolls of cyclone fencing, ten barrels of unknown liquids, a propane tank, a variety of culverts, and miscellaneous building equipment . 8 . Existing Use The access road serves as a fire break and appears to be used by Pacific Telephone and Telegraph to access their buried cables . 9. Planning Considerations Political boundaries: Outside District boundaries but within the District ' s sphere of influence; unincorporated Santa Clara County Zoning: Hillside (requiring a 20 to 160 acre minimum lot size, depending on slope) Report 90-119 Page 4 Master Plan rating: Not rated; similar areas nearby rated medium to low for suitability as open space Use and Management Plan review: The Use and Management Plan for the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve was reviewed on June 28 , 1989 . The next review will occur in approximately three years. Regional plans: The Santa Clara County Trails and Pathways plan identifies a proposed trail corridor along Hicks Road and Alamitos Road on the southern side of Almaden Quicksilver County Park and along the Loma Prieta ridge to the south. In addition, a trail is shown up Herbert Creek connecting to county lands on the same ridge straddled by the Goldsmith property. The proposed Bay Area Ridge Trail will follow the Mt. Umunhum Loma Prieta Ridge. 10. Potential Use and Management The property could provide a portion of a future trail connecting Almaden Quicksilver County Park with the proposed Bay Area Ridge Trail. The trail could follow the existing fire road on the ridge that extends from Loma Prieta to Herbert Creek. The road could also be used for patrol if access rights are perfected in the future. 11 . Public Safety Review A detailed inspection will be performed on the site prior to your final adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan. The purpose of the inspection is to identify existing and potential safety hazards. The site will remain closed until the inspection has occurred and any identified safety hazards have been eliminated. 12. Preliminary Use and Management Recommendations Signs: Install private property, property closed, and preserve boundary signs where appropriate. Site Emphasis Designation: Conservation Management Unit (CMU) Roads: Maintain for patrol Site clean up: All debris, including the barrels , and building equipment will be removed from the site by the owner. The cleared areas will be reseeded with appropriate native plants to prevent erosion. 13. Name The property should be named as an addition to the Mt. Umunhum Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. Report 90-119 Page 5 14 . Dedication I recommend that you withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. This would allow for a trade of development rights or sale of a portion or all of the property if the District is not successful in acquiring other necessary land in the area. 15. Terms This 163-acre parcel comprises one building site, and at the price of $195,000, represents an average price of $1 , 200 per acre, which is considered fair and reasonable based upon other District purchases in the vicinity. The full purchase price would be payable in cash at tI close of escrow. There are many items of personal property stored on the site and the seller would have 90 days after close of escrow to complete the clean-up. As stipulated in the purchase agreement , $20, 000 will be withheld in escrow until the clean-up is completed. 16. Funding The full explanation of this funding summary is contained in report R-90-33 dated March 5, 1990. The District ' s 1990-1991 fiscal year budget includes $15. 4 million for new open space acquisitions; $15. 2 million in cash outlay and $0 . 2 million in notes . The following is a current summary of cash expenditures for open space acquisition for the 1990-1991 fiscal year: Land Acquisition Funds for this Fiscal Year (Cash) $15, 200, 000 Purchase escrows closed ($ 5, 944 , 000) Previously Approved Acquisitions (not closed) ($ 1 , 480,000) The Goldsmith Property Acquisition Recommended for Approval on this Agenda ($ 195, 000) Remaining Cash Balance for Future Acquisitions this Fiscal Year $ 7 , 581 , 000 < :: •� � -�`:_--moo ,��'� � � %, H I CK ROA ;A - k',' ,,..•.. .,, �� _5 D`.. ;� ;.,'" �/ :;;tea. -- � ii l LAM ITO S ROAD A I G i. 0 B I r � o CONSERVATION . - EASEMENT r, _ _ PROPOSED _ C ADDITTION LOMA PR I ETA :.: ;. .. .•..-.: ROAD 'v...:4.R�:T:">:�":"'�:::':.:..�..... � _. \`.:.`:..r...:. � ,...1.t.s:=�...a:r�•s_.y`[4,1rf•:.'.r. ............._........Z::::::.^•:::::j:•• _ .:��' ;.:.. '.. (,`;:^'":'air:�;, .. .::: •:�2_.....„;••--,s.�.,�:�,r�:;;;:_...._-__::::::.•:L'i:.:. ::;�;'�;:; . �.-"-�'•,, �qt �srr say}i•Ali:.: .:r1•;r...:=::::::r.='�'��iS�;E�ryii:��ii=�i�-�:: \ ', '.. .i.�iar rEi::=irf:::• Y•ri�iF•,:. � =ti?.INiiiiz�i°i-'r=i'^' ,�� / ro a.�., �- � �: :. ...... ..;.. r.;r•_..i:�::�-"iiii=ter•.:(-�=..tt :•::::-:� .'::.'.� � `.. �. - :::' .:.£::(:.. I ..: _�n'N"�,�•ii'i'''°�i"�`"'it�y t: r`.-"..,,;. �.i_ t 'f ..3..:.•...: '•t'�>tei?!iL5'zs k»!i:ii'•ticn:'i.; {:fi: .:..• t�h.••::�3:i�iiixi.�W�•`: MROSD :3....----.; INFLUENCE ..,,, „ ':" .,.r.�,., x /��� 1� i� SPHERE OF INF .� ,tySt.S..;;..' �.vvc �"'th.: :'� ��o•: � 1 4f_ ��\ mt -OMA PR I ETA ��- — `- - g C.M.U. . ree (,J 'S •3791 1: SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE cj—� % way C.M.U.- CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT UNIT (CURRENTLY NO PUBLIC ACCESS) =''� 1,r � • �- 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF PURCHASE AGREEMENT, AUTHORIZING OFFICER TO EXECUTE CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT TO DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (SIERRA AZUL OPEN SPACE PRESERVE - LANDS OF GOLDSMITH) The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as follows : Section One. The Beard of Directors of the Midpenin- sula Regional Open Space District does hereby accept the offer contained in that certain Purchase Agreement between Darman E. Goldsmith et ux. and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, a copy of which is attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof, and authorizes the President or appropriate Officers to execute the Agreement on behalf of the District. Section Two. The President of the Board of Directors or other appropriate officer is authorized to execute a Certifi- cate of Acceptance on behalf of the District. Section Three. The General Manager of the District shall cause to be given appropriate notice of acceptance to the seller. The General Manager further is authorized to execute any and all other documents in escrow necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction. Section Four. The General Manager of the District is authorized to expend up to $2, 000 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees , survey, and other miscellaneous costs related to this transaction. Section Five. It is intended and hereby authorized that the District ' s General Fund will be reimbursed in the amount of $195,000 from the proceeds of the next long term District note issue. I ' i PURCHASE AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into by and between Dorman E . Goldsmith and Mary Ann Goldsmith, husband and wife, hereinafter called "Seller" and the MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, a Public District formed pursuant to Article 3 of Chapter 3 of Division 5 of the California Public Resources Code, hereinafter called "District . " WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of certain real property which has open space and recreational value, located within an unincorporated area of the County of Santa Clara, and being more particularly described within the body of this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Seller entered into that certain "Exclusive Authorization and Right to Sell" agreement with Joe Beatty Real Estate on September 6, 1990, thereby offering said real property for sale to the general public; and WHEREAS, District was formed by voter initiative to solicit and receive conveyances of real property by purchase, exchange, gift, or bargain purchase for public park, recreation, scenic and open space purposes; and WHEREAS, District desires to purchase said property for open space preservation and as part of the ecological and aesthetic resources of the midpeninsula area; and WHEREAS, Seller wishes to sell and convey the entirety of said property to District, and District wishes to purchase said property upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED as follows : 1 . Purchase and Sale.. Seller agrees to sell to District and District agrees to purchase from Seller, Seller's real property located within an unincorporated area of the County of Santa Clara, State of California, containing approximately one hundred sixty three and ten one hundredths (163 . 10) acres, more or less, and commonly referred to as Santa Clara County -Assessor's s Parcel No. 562-21 005 . Said property being further described in the Legal Description attached to Preliminary -e ary Title Report number AL 173191 dated September 4, 1990 from Continental Lawyers Title Company, a co of said P Y. PY preliminary title report attached hereto as Exhibit "A, " and incorporated herein by this reference . Said property to be conveyed together with any easements, rights of way, or rights of use which may be appurtenant or attributable to the aforesaid lands, and any Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith page 2 and all improvements attached or affixed thereto. All of said real property and appurtenances hereinafter called the "Subject Property" or the "Property. " 2 . Purchase Price . The total purchase price ("Purchase Price") for the Property shall be One Hundred Ninety Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($195, 000 .00) , payable in cash at the Closing (as further defined herein. ) 3 . Escrow. Promptly upon execution of this Agreement, in accordance with Section 12 herein, an escrow shall be opened at Continental Lawyers Title Company, 4991 Cherry Avenue, Suite A, San Jose, CA 95118, phone number (408) 448-2500, or other title company acceptable to District and Seller (hereinafter "Escrow Holder") through which the purchase and sale of the Property shall be consummated. A fully executed copy of this Agreement shall be deposited with Escrow Holder to serve as escrow instructions to Escrow Holder; provided that the parties shall execute such additional supplementary or customary escrow instructions as Escrow Holder may reasonably require . This Agreement may be amended or supplemented by explicit additional escrow instructions signed by the parties, but the printed portion of such escrow instructions shall not supersede any inconsistent provisions contained herein. Escrow Holder is hereby appointed and instructed to deliver, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, the documents and monies to be deposited into the escrow as herein provided, with the following terms and conditions to apply to said escrow: (a) The time provided for in the escrow for the close thereof shall be on or before November 16, 1990, provided, however, that the parties may, by written agreement, extend the time for Closing. The term "Closing" as used herein shall be deemed to be the date when Escrow Holder causes the Grant Deed (as defined below) to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Santa Clara County. (b) Seller and District shall, during the escrow period, execute any and all documents and perform any and all acts reasonably necessary or appropriate to consummate the purchase and sale pursuant to the terms of this Agreement . (c) Seller shall deposit into the escrow on or before the Closing an executed and recordable Grant Deed covering the Property. (d) District shall deposit into the escrow, on or before the Closing: Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 3 (i) The required Certificate of Acceptance for the Grant Deed, duly executed by District and to be dated as of the Closing. (ii) District 's check payable to Escrow Holder in the amount of One Hundred Ninety Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($195, 000 . 00) (e) Seller shall pay for the escrow fees, the CLTA Standard Policy of Title Insurance, if required by District, and all recording costs and fees . All other costs or expenses not otherwise provided for in this Agreement shall be apportioned or allocated between District and Seller in the manner customary in Santa Clara County. All current property taxes on the Property shall be handled in accordance with Section 4986 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California . (f) Seller shall cause Continental Lawyers Title Company, or other title company acceptable to District and Seller, to be prepared and committed to deliver to District a CLTA standard coverage Policy of Title Insurance, dated as of the Closing, insuring District in the amount of ($195, 000 . 00) for the Property showing title to the Property vested in fee simple in District, subject only to: (i) current real property taxes, and (ii) such additional title exceptions as may be acceptable to District . In the event District disapproves of any additional title exceptions and Seller is unable to remove any District disapproved exceptions before the time set forth for the Closing, District shall have the right either: (i) to terminate the escrow provided for herein (after giving written notice to Seller of such disapproved exceptions and affording Seller at least twenty (20) days to remove such exceptions) and then Escrow Holder and Seller shall, upon District 's direction, return to the parties depositing the same, all monies and documents theretofore delivered to Escrow Holder or; (ii) to close the escrow and consummate the purchase of the Property. (g) Escrow Holder shall, when all required funds and instruments have been deposited into the escrow by the appropriate parties and when all other conditions to Closing have been fulfilled, cause the Grant Deed and attendant Certificate of Acceptance to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of Santa Clara County. Upon the Closing, Escrow Holder shall cause to be delivered to District the original of the policy of the title insurance if required herein, and to Seller Escrow Holder 's check for the full purchase price of the Subject Property (less Seller's portion of the expenses described in Section 3 (e) ) , and to District or Seller, as the case may be, all other documents or instruments which are to be delivered to them. In the event the escrow terminates as provided Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 4 herein, Escrow Holder shall return all monies, documents or other things of value deposited in the escrow to the party depositing the same . 4 . Ricrhts and Liabilitie of the Parties in the Event of Termination. In the event this Agreement is terminated and escrow is cancelled for any reason, all parties shall be excused from any further obligations hereunder, except as otherwise provided herein . Upon any such termination of escrow, all parties hereto shall be jointly and severally liable to Escrow Holder for payment of its title and escrow cancellation charges (subject to rights of subrogation against any party whose fault may have caused such termination of escrow) , and each party expressly reserves any other rights and remedies which it may have against any other party by reason of a wrongful termination or failure to close escrow. 5 . Leases or Occupancy of Premises . Seller warrants that there exist no oral or written leases or rental agreements affecting all or any portion of the Subject Property. Seller further warrants and agrees to hold District free and harmless and to reimburse District for any and all costs, liability, loss, damage or expense, including costs for legal services, occasioned by reason of any such lease or rental agreement of the Property being acquired by District, including, but not limited to, claims for relocation benefits and/or payments pursuant to California Government Code Section 7260 21--ae-q. Seller understands and agrees that the provisions of this paragraph shall survive the close of escrow and recordation of any Grant Deed (s) . 6 . Seller' s Representations and Warranties . For the purpose of consummating the sale and purchase of the Property in accordance herewith, Seller represents and warrants to District that as of the date this Agreement is fully executed and as of the date of Closing: 6 . 01 Authority. Seller has the full right, power and authority to enter into this Agreement and to perform the transactions contemplated hereunder. 6 . 02 Valid and Binding Agreement. This Agreement and all other documents delivered by Seller to District now or at the Closing have been or will be duly authorized and executed and delivered by Seller and are legal, valid and binding obligations of Seller sufficient to convey to District the Subject Property described therein, and are enforceable in accordance with their respective terms and do not violate any provisions of any agreement to which Seller is a party or Purchase Agreement Goldsmith Page 5 by which Seller may be bound or any articles, bylaws or corporate resolutions of Seller . 6 .03 Good Title . Seller has and at the Closing date shall have good, marketable and indefeasible fee simple title to the Subject Property and the interests therein to be conveyed to District hereunder, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances of any type whatsoever and free and clear of any recorded or unrecorded option rights or purchase rights or any other right, title or interest held by any third party except for the exceptions permitted under the express terms hereof, and Seller shall forever indemnify and defend District from and against any claims made by any third party which are based upon any inaccuracy in the foregoing representations . 7 . Intearity of Property. Except as otherwise provided herein or by express written permission granted by District, Seller shall not, between the time of Seller ' s execution hereof and the close of escrow, cause or allow any physical changes on the Property, except any bulldozing as may be reasonably necessary to clear the landslide from the existing road to clean the site in accordance with Section 10 herein . Such changes shall include but not be limited to grading, excavating or other earthmoving activities, cutting or removing trees, shrubs, brush or other vegetation, and damaging or demolition of improvements or structures on the Property. 8 . Hazardous Substances . "Hazardous substance" as used herein means and includes polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB ' s) , benzene, asbestos or any other substance the placement, storage or removal of which is prohibited or regulated by federal, state or local law. (a) Seller warrants and represents that : (i) During Seller' s ownership of the Property Seller has not placed or stored or allowed to be placed or stored any hazardous substance on the Property. (ii) Seller has no knowledge of the presence on the Property of any hazardous substance, whenever or however placed or stored. (b) If hazardous substances are subsequently found to exist on the Property, District may exercise its right to bring an action if necessary to recover cleanup costs from Seller or any other person or persons who are ultimately determined to have responsibility for the hazardous substances on the Property. However, under no circumstances shall Seller be held liable for costs other than those incurred in the cleanup of the hazardous substances resulting from Seller ' s ownership and operation of the property. Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 6 9 . Waiver of Statutory Comnensation. Seller and District understand and agree that Seller may be entitled to receive the fair market value of the Property described in Exhibit "A", as provided for by the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646) the Uniform Relocation Act Amendments of 1987 (Public Law 100-17) , Title IV of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (101 Statutes, 246-256) , and California Government Code Section 7267, and following. Seller hereby waives any and all existing and/or future rights Seller may have to the fair market value of said Property, appraisals, etc . , as provided for by said Federal Law and any corresponding California Government Code Sections . 10 . Removal of Personal Property and Debris . It is understood and agreed that located on the Property being acquired by District are many items of real and personal property of Seller including: one water truck, two flatbed trailers, one utility body trailer, one 310 Case loader, six barrels of roofing emulsion, lumber, water culverts, cyclone fencing, concrete blocks, concrete catch basins and miscellaneous building materials, which are not being acquired by District . It is agreed that Seller shall remove any and all of these items from the Property on or before ninety (90) days following the Closing, and leave the Property in a neat and clean condition . It is further agreed that from the amount payable under Section 2 of this agreement, Escrow Holder is authorized to withhold the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20, 000 . 00) , to cover District 's costs of removing said items in the event Seller fails to perform or to leave the premises in a clean and respectable condition. Escrow Holder shall release said $20, 000 . 00 to Seller at any time Seller completes the clean-up and removal to District ' s satisfaction, which satisfaction shall be expressed in writing, If Seller does not complete such clean-up and removal, District shall give Seller notice of any deficiency (to be corrected within ten (10) days) . If Seller does not complete the removals and clean-up within the said ten (10) days, District shall have the same completed and deduct such expenses from the $20, 000 . 00 so withheld. The remaining balance, if any, shall be released by Escrow Holder to Seller upon written notice from District . 11 . Miscellaneous Provisions . 11 .01 Choice of Law. The internal laws of the State of California, regardless of any choice of law principles, shall govern Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith page 7 the validity of this Agreement, the construction of its terms and the interpretation p etation of the rights and duties of the parties . 11 . 02 Attorneys'Fes. If either party hereto incurs any expense, including reasonable attorneys ' fees, in connection with any action or proceeding instituted by reason of any default or alleged default of the other party hereunder, the party prevailing in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable expenses and attorneys ' fees in the amount determined by the Court, whether or not such action or proceeding goes to final judgment . In the event of a settlement or final judgment in which neither party is awarded all of the relief prayed for, the prevailing party as determined by the Court shall be entitled to recover from the other party reasonable expenses and attorneys ' fees . 11 . 03 Amendment and Waiver. The parties hereto may by mutual written agreement amend this Agreement in any respect . Any party hereto may: (i) extend the time for the performance of any of the obligations of the other party; (ii) waive any inaccuracies in representations and warranties made by the other party contained in this Agreement or in any documents delivered pursuant hereto; (iii) waive compliance by the other party with any of the covenants contained in this Agreement or the performance of any obligations of the other party; or (iv) waive the fulfillment of any condition that is precedent to the performance by such party of any of its obligations under this Agreement . Any agreement on the part of any party for any such amendment, extension or waiver must be in writing. 11 . 04 Rights Cumulative . Each and all of the various rights, powers and remedies of the parties shall be considered to be cumulative with and in addition to any other rights, powers and remedies which the parties may have at law or in equity in the event of the breach of any of the terms of this Agreement . The exercise or partial exercise of any right, power or remedy shall neither constitute the exclusive election thereof nor the waiver of any other right, power or remedy available to such party. 11 . 05 Notices . All notices, consents, waivers or demands of any kind which either party to this Agreement may be required or may desire to serve on the other party in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing and may be delivered by personal service or sent by telegraph, telefax communication or cable or sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage thereon fully prepaid. All such communications shall be addressed as follows : i �I Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 8 Seller : Dorman E. Goldsmith and Mary Ann Goldsmith C/o Joe Beatty Real Estate 7172 Anjou Creek Circle San Jose, CA 95120 (408) 2 68-40 62 FAX: (408) 927-0225 District : Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Old Mill Office Center Building C, Suite 135 201 San Antonio Circle Mountain View, CA 94040 Attn: Herbert Grench, General Manager (415) 949-5500 Fax: (415-949-5679) Copy To: Stanley R. Norton, Esq. 407 Sherman Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94306 (415) 324-1366 Fax: (415-327-9151) If sent by telegraph, telefax communication or cable, a conformed copy of such telegraphic/telefaxed communication or cabled notice shall promptly be sent by mail (in the manner provided above) to the addressee . Service of any such communication made only by mail shall be deemed complete on the date of actual delivery as shown by the addressee 's registry or certification receipt or at the expiration of the third Ord) business day after the date of mailing, whichever is earlier in time . Either party hereto may from time to time, by notice in writing served upon the other as aforesaid, designate a different mailing address or a different person to which such notices or demands are thereafter to be addressed or delivered. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall excuse either party from giving oral notice to the other when e prompt notification is appropriate, but any oral notice given shall not satisfy the requirement of written no tice i ce as i r v p o ded in this Section . 11 . 06 Severabili y. If any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be void or unenforceable by or as a result of a determina tion of any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of which is binding upon the parties, the parties agree that such determination shall not result in the nullity or unenforceability of the remaining portions of this Agreement . The parties further agree to replace such void or unenforceable provisions which will achieve, to the extent possible, the economic, business and other purposes of the void or unenforceable provisions . Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 9 11 . 07 Counterparts . This Agreement may be executed in separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed as an original, and when executed, separately or together, shall constitute a single original instrument, effective in the same manner as if the parties had executed one and the same instrument . 11 .08 NL-i—v=. No waiver of any term, provision or condition of this Agreement, whether by conduct or otherwise, in any one or more instances, shall be deemed to be, or be construed as, a further or continuing waiver of any such term, provision or condition or as a waiver of any other term, provision or condition of this Agreement . 11 - 09 Entjre Agreement . This Agreement is intended by the parties to be the final expression of their agreement; it embodies the entire agreement and understanding between the parties hereto; it constitutes a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions thereof, and it supersedes any and all prior correspondence, conversations, negotiations, agreements or understandings relating to the same subject matter. 11 - 10 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of each provision of this Agreement in which time is an element . 11 - 11 Survival of Covenants . All covenants of District or Seller which are expressly intended hereunder to be performed in whole or in part after the Closing, and all representations and warranties by either party to the other, shall survive the Closing and be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the respective parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and permitted assigns . 11 . 12 Aa-signment . Except as expressly permitted herein, neither party to this Agreement shall assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement to any third party without the prior written approval of the other party. 11 . 13 Further L:!:.::--and Acts . Each of the parties hereto agrees to execute and deliver such further documents and perform such other acts as may be reasonably necessary or appropriate to consummate and carry into effect the transactions described and contemplated under this Agreement . 11 . 14 Binding on SIrrPSS rs and Assigns . This Agreement and all of its terms, conditions and covenants are intended to be fully effective and binding, to the extent permitted by law, on the successors and permitted assigns of the parties hereto. Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 10 11 - 15 - ommAs a part of the amount payable under Section 2 hereinabove, Seller shall pay a real estate agent 's commission in the total amount of Five Thousand Dollars ($5, 000) payable to Joe Beatty Real Estate, c/o Gary Beck, 7172 Anjou Creek Circle, San Jose, CA 95120 . No other such commission is due or payable by District and the Seller agrees to and does hereby indemnify and hold District harmless from and against any and all costs, liabilities, losses, damages, claims, causes of action or proceedings which may result from any broker, agent or finder, licensed or otherwise, claiming through, under or by reason of the conduct of Seller in connection with this transaction. 11 . 16 Like Kind Ex hanaP District understands that Seller intends to effect a like kind exchange (includin g the Possibility of a simultaneous or a delayed "Starker" exchange) , p to Properrty 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, of the Propertyforuaother to be designated by Seller . District agrees to cooperate with Seller to effect such exchange by performing all acts necessary therefor, excluding, without limitation, taking title to the exchange property; provided, however, that District shall not be obligated to incur any additional expense in connection with the performance of its obligations under this Section 11 . 16. 11 . 17 La tons . Captions are provided herein for convenience only and they form no part of this Agreement and are not to serve as a basis for interpretation or construction of this Agreement, nor as evidence of the intention of the parties hereto. 11 . 18 - ran5.. In this Agreement, if it be appropriate, the use of the singular shall include the Plural, and the plural shall include the singular, and the use of any gender shall include all other genders as appropriate . 12 . e . Provided that this Agreement is signed by Seller and returned to District on or before September 28,shall have until midnight October 24, 1990 District Agreement and during said period this 1990 to accept and execute this instrument shall cont i irrevocable offer by Seller to sell and convey the Property totute an District for the consideration and under the terms and conditions herein set forth. As consideration for the tender f said offer, District has paid and seller acknowledges the receipt of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10 . 00) . Provided that this Areement is accepted strict Di , this t g ransaction shall close as soon as practicable inby accordance with the terms' and conditions set forth herein . Purchase Agreement - Goldsmith Page 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this be exec Agreement to executed b their Y duly authorized offic ers to be effective as of the date of final execution by District in accordance with the terms hereof . MIDPENIN LA RE I NAL PEN SiT O O PAS ELLER DI TRI T APPROVED AS TO FORM; Orman E. Go dsmith I Date : 5'AR Stanley Nor n, District ounsel ACCEPTED FOR RECOMMENDATION: Mar �An �Gold�sith Date : L. Craig Britton, SR/WA Land Acquisition Manager APPROVED AND AC� : President, Board of Directors 1 ATTEST: District Clerk Date: CONTINENTAL LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION 4991 CHERRY AVENUE , STE A . SAN' JOSE , CA 95118 a (408 ) 448-2500 GARY BECK ESCROW OFFICER ° 7172 ANf PHYLLIS JOU CREEK CIRCLE TITLE O IS �HARR ° OFFICER SAN JOSE , CA 95120 AIMEE R . HARRISON ATTN : BUYERS NAME PROPERTY ADDRESS APN# 562-21-005 DATED AS OF SEPTEMBER 4, 1990 AT 7 : 30 A .M . YOUR OUR NO . AL173191 IN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION FOR A POLIC INSURANCE , Y OF TITLE CONTINENTAL LAWYERS TITLE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION HEREBY REPORTS THAT IT IS PREPARED TO ISSUE, OR CAUSE TO BE ISSUED AS OF THE DATE HEREOF, A LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION POLICY OR POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE DESCRIBING THE LAND AND THE ESTATE NTEREST HEREINAFTER SET FORTH, INSURING AGAINST LOSS WHICH MAYOBEISUSTAINEDHBREIN REASON OF ANY DEFECT, LIEN OR ENCUMBRANCE NOT SHOWN OR REFERRED TO AS AN EXCEPTION IN SCHEDULE B OR NOT EXCLUDED FROM COVE-RAGE PURSUANT TO THE PRINTED SCHEDULES, CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS OF SAID POLICY FORMS . THE PRINTED EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS FROM THE COVERAGE OF SAID POLICY OR POLICIES ARE SET FORTH IN THE ATTACHED LIST . COPIES OF THE POLICY FORMS SHOULD BE READ . THEY ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE OFFICE WHICH ISSUED THIS REPORT . THIS REPORT (AND ANY SUPPLEMENTS OR AMENDMENTS HERETO) IS ISSUED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING THE ISSUANCE OF A POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE AND NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED HEREBY . IF IT IS DESIRED THAT LIABILITY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A POLICY BE ASSUMED MENT OF TITLE INSURANCE , A CO MMIT- THE BINDER BE REQUESTED . OR COMMIT THE FORM OF POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE CONTEMPLATED BY THIS REPORT IS ; I . CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY - 1988 [ X ] 2 • AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNERS POLICY (10-21-87) ( ] 3. AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY ( ] (6-1-87) 4 • AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (10-21-87) ( ] TITLE OFFICER , AIMEE R . HARRISON S SCHEDULE A PAGE 2 ORDER NO . AL173191 THE ESTATE, OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO COVERED BY THIS REPORT IS : A FEE TITLE TO SAID ESTATE OR INTEREST AT THE DATE HEREOF IS VESTED IN : DORMAN E . GOLDSMITH AND MARY ANN GOLDSMITH, HUSBAND AND WIFE THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, UNINCORPORATED AREA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : LOTS 11, 12, 13 AND 14, SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 9 SOUTH, RANGE 2 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN . APN : 562-21-005 I SCHEDULE B PAGE 3 ORDER NO . AL173191 AT- THE DATE HEREOF EXCEPTIONS TO COVERAGE IN ADDITION TO THE PRINTED EXCEP- TIONS AND EXCLUSIONS IN THE POLICY FORM DESIGNATED ON THE FACE PAGE OF THIS REPORT WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS : A. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, TO BE LEVIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1990 - 1991 WHICH ARE A LIEN NOT YET DUE AND PAYABLE . B. THE LIEN OF SUPPLEMENTAL TAXES, IF ANY, ASSESSED PURSUANT TO THE PRO- VISIONS OF CHAPTER 3.5 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 75 ) OF THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 1. ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY DOES NOT APPEAR TO ABUT A PUBLIC ROAD OR HIGHWAY NOR TO BE SERVED BY ANY RIGHT OF WAY OR EASEMENT OVER ADJOINING OR ADJACENT PROPERTY TO ANY SUCH PUBLIC ROAD OR HIGHWAY . 2. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO : THE PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY PURPOSE : COMMUNICATION FACILITIES RECORDED : OCTOBER 19, 1970, BOOK 9092, OFFICIAL RECORDS . PAGE 219 SERIES NO . : 3890450 AFFECTS : PORTIONS OF LOTS 11 AND 12 I SCHEDULE B PAGE 4 CONTINUED ORDER NO . AL173191 NOTE NO . 1 : THE ONLY CONVEYANCES AFFECTING SAID LAND, WHICH WERE RECORDED WITHIN TWO (2) YEARS OF THE DATE OF THIS REPORT, ARE AS FOLLOWS : GRANTOR : PATRICIA J • OLBERG FORMERLY PATRICIA JEAN FOUST GRANTEE : DORMAN E . GOLDSMITH AND MARY ANN GOLDSMITH, HUS- BAND AND WIFE RECORDED : MAY 22, 1989, BOOK K958, OFFICIAL RECORDS PAGE 37 SERIES NO . : 10118219 NOTE NO . 2 : THE CHARGE FOR A POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE, WHEN ISSUED THROUGH THIS TITLE ORDER, WILL BE BASED ON THE SHORT-TERM RATE - NOTE NO . 3 : ON OR AFTER JULY 1, 1985, THE COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE WILL CHARGE, IN ADDITION TO THE REGULAR RECORDING CHARGES, AN EXTRA $20 . 00 RECORDING FEE, UNLESS A DOCUMENT EVIDENCING A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP IS ACCOM- PANIED BY A "PRELIMINARY CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP REPORT. " IN LIEU OF ' SAID REPORT, SIGNED BY THE TRANSFEREE, THE RECORDER WILL NOT CHARGE AN EXTRA FEE , IF THE DOCUMENT IS ACCOMPANIED BY AN AFFIDAVIT SIGNED BY THE TRANSFEREE THAT THE TRANSFEREE IS IN FACT NOT A RESIDENT OF CALIFORNIA . OUR TITLE BILLING WILL BE ADJUSTED TO INCLUDE SUCH ADDITIONAL FEES WHEN APPLICABLE • NOTE NO . 4 : PURSUANT TO THE TAX REFORM ACT OF 1986, AN ESCROW AGENT MUST REPORT TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE THE GROSS =ALES PROCEEDS ( SALE PRI - CE ) FOR EACH REAL ESTATE TRANSFER HANDLED . FAILURE TO PROVIDE A CORRECT TAX I . D. NUMBER ( SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER ) WILL DELAY CLOSING, AND MAY REQUIRE 20% (OF SALES PRICE ) FEDERAL INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING. NOTE NO . 5 : THE COMPANY MAY MAKE OTHER REQUIREMENTS OR EXCEPTIONS UPON ITS REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED DOCUMENTS CREATING THE ESTATE OR INTEREST TO BE INSURED OR OTHERWISE ASCERTAINING DETAILS OF THE TRANSACTION - NOTE NO . 6 : PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR SHOWN BELOW ARE PAID . FOR PRORATION PURPOSES THE AMOUNTS ARE : FISCAL YEAR 1989 - 1990 1ST INSTALLMENT : $159 .09 2ND INSTALLMENT : $159.09 LAND : $28,069 .00 IMPROVEMENTS : NONE SHOWN H/O EXEMPTION : NONE SHOWN CODE AREA : 72007 ASSESSMENT NO . : 562-21-005 D .T . 9/14/90 AH/AT .7 rrlls mar; i; tij'n!,!I:d as to i;s &r,a1`e,y ?,IA i):,50k r't.( )Me is for the c nvnnicn a e:i 'J::.:AiiQ( r,t the p(Opert'/ in q(it!si10:1- I CONTINENTAL LAWYEB21ITLE I OFFICE OF GOuwTv ASSESSOR•..SArrtA CLAIU COUwr`., WFORRIA 1 A o o F A O f i 562 21 7 22 T.9 5.,R.1 E. 25 23 I 1 R.O.S. 4791,7 4 •(KT.KI 3 I(H.T.A:) 2 I(:.T:K: I � � I MIDPC NINS—A REGION- i 144.f0 LL.Tar ILL IES s0 K.TOTAL OEfN ;g SPACE _17 L (+ISA AO 5 I(u sad f(ANAI=) T [— i • ; . l• I fjI 015T RI[T II I \L © --21---- ------' - 2'? a. --- - -- ----r-- NO u - 19 ats• o d `1�` : (suJ 12 I(a.luU I •(u.luu to K•Lnad - y I I I YID►ENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN 11s.I6 Ar- T 1L I IE1.16 AG.TOTAL _ SPACE DISTRICT 1 1 gyp' hS I (anD K) 13 iHalf+c) 14 i(.0.>1 KJ .15 ..Ifb„� 16 L•rr��� y I I A TT I f I ll_ ` • \\ r I • `� 1..A0A lA9 �� /U/7M rip t: * 31.Ll1. Sd3AM1�� �'�;1`l7NLLt.(00 on•.aAo w w.oll•A•q•rt•Stt>ET - �>%in.+A+li rw.ap n.. 'Ur(I!S7^J tl( 1 AURED SNLSOX-ASSEssae fgn ( G4l uJ,l;n; !(J o5l:a(uanuou ay! iG) sl b5l7liA?;(�tts S;1 31(E',;)PI(1�1e St( 01 sp dew 41[a I Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-124 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 17 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Support for Proposition 149, the California Park, Recreation, and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1990 Recommended Action: Adopt the accompanying Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Supporting Proposition 149, the California Park, Recreation, and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1990 Discussion: The District ' s legislative program for the last session of the state legislature included as an "A" priority support for legislation that would place a state bond act for parks and open space on the ballot . This was accomplished via Assembly Bill 145 Which placed Proposition 149 on the November ballot. Information about the measure is attached. If the measure passes , the District will receive block grants of roughly $510 , 000 and $91 , 000 from the per capita and Roberti-Z 'berg-Harris components , respectively, for qualifying projects . Other funding would be available on a competitive basis for historic restoration, trail development, and other components of the act . I � I 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, California 94040 - Phone: (415) 949-5500 - FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT SUPPORTING PROPOSITION 149, THE CALIFORNIA PARK, RECREATION, AND WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 1990 WHEREAS, there is at present a critical need for increased funding of local parks, open space, and other recreational facilities in order to accommodate the recreational needs of a growing population; and WHEREAS, Proposition 149 would authorize issuance of $437 million in general obligation bonds to be used for the development, rehabilitation, or restoration of state and local park, openspace, beaches, recreation areas, greenbelts, trails , museums , zoos , and for wildlife enhancement , coastal access, and historic preservation; and WHEREAS, Proposition 149 would allocate $184 million for local grants, including the Roberti-Z 'bert-Harris Urban Open Space and Recreation Program and a per capita program; and WHEREAS, Proposition 149 would guarantee that each community would receive funds to improve local park and recreation facilities and would allow each community to determine how best to spend the funds; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby endorse Proposition 149 and urges its passage by the voters. I I I PROPOSITION 149 CALIFORNIA PARK, RECREATION, AND WILDLIFE ENHANCEMENT ACT OF 1990 (AB 145, Costa) Local Grants Per-Capita Formula $ 70 million Roberti-Z 'berg-Harris Formula 20 Historical Resource Projects 8 Museums, Zoos, Aquariums 17 Trails/Urban Greenbelts 27 Urban River & Waterfront Parks 40 Urban Streams Program (DWR) 2 TOTAL LOCAL GRANTS $184 million State Park System I State Park System Development Projects Coastal Resources $ 27 million Inland Resources 25 Volunteer Facilities 1 Historical/Archaeological Resources 8 Trail Development 2 Stewardship of Natural Resources 7 Museums and Interpretive Facilities 13 Total State Park System Development $ 83 million Real Property Acquisition 25 TOTAL STATE PARKS $108 million Wildlife Conservation Board $ 27 million State Coastal Conservancy 15 Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy 10 California Tahoe Conservancy 11 Tahoe Water Ouality Research Facility 5 CDF (Demonstration Forest & Wildland Fire Protections 31 Department of Boating and Waterways 6 SNO-PARKS Program 1 Capitol Park Planning and Rehabilitation 1 Major Metropolitan Museums 18 Unallocated Account 20 TOTAL $437 million i Californians for Recreation, Pal xs and Wildlife Yes on Proposition 149 • honorable Jim Costa, Chairman P.O.Box 161118 • Sacramento,California 95816 Phone(916)446-3625• FAX(916)446-0285 ID#902590 October 2, 1990 Dear Park and Recreation Administrator: We are writing to ask your board or commission to endorse Proposition 149, the California Park, Recreation, and Wildlife Enhancement Act of 1990 . Proposition 149 would authorize $437 million in general obligation bonds for the development, rehabilitation, and restoration of local and state parks, beaches, recreation areas, greenbelts, trails, 'museums, zoos, and for coastal access, historic preservation, and wildlife enhancement. Proposition 149 guarantees that every community will receive funds based on population to improve local park and recreation facilities . Of the $184 million contained in Proposition 149 for local grants, nearly $90 million will be allocated to cities, counties, and districts through the Per Capita Program and the Roberti-Z 'berg-Harris Program. General obligation bonds have provided funding for development and acquisition programs of state and local parks since the 1920s . Historically, park bonds have enjoyed overwhelming voter approval . This year, however, voters are facing a record fourteen general obligation bond measures on the statewide ballot, totaling more than $5 billion. Because this figure represents a significant increase over past years, those in opposition to bond measures have become increasingly vocal and the competition for funds has become fierce. Additionally, because of the late date it qualified for the ballot, Proposition 149 is one of the last measures on the ballot and will not appear in the initial ballot pamphlet sent to voters . Proposition 149 will instead be included in a supplemental ballot pamphlet that will not reach voters until shortly before the November 6 election. Paid for by Californians for Recreation.Parks and Wildlife ano by friends of Jim Costa Committee.1127-1 I th Street.Suite NX).So ramento.CA VS813 -2- Due to these circumstances, we cannot assume voters will approve Proposition 149 unless there is a grass roots effort on its behalf. Your active support for Proposition 149 is especially important in our efforts to ensure voter approval . We are therefore asking you to do the following: 1) Adopt a resolution endorsing Proposition 149 ; 2 ) Forward a copy of the resolution to both the news editors and editorial page editors of your local newspapers , as well as to radio and television stations in your area. 3 ) Forward a copy to this committee so that we can list your community in support of Proposition 149 . We have enclosed a sample resolution and other data on Proposition 1.49 . If you would like information regarding your agency ' s allotment from the local assistance funds in Proposition 149 or if you have any other questions , please contact Diane Stewart at ( 916 ) 446-3625 . Sincer ly, 71 2 L AS JIM COSTA R/ERT THOMAS, President Au or of Proposition 149 California Park and Recreation Society Enc . PROPOSITION ! PARK AND RECREATION BONDS This measure would provide$437 mil- are badly overcrowded.Bonds haveproved lion in bonds to acquire land and develop to be a reliable way to acquire and improve facilities forpublic recreation and forpres- state and local parks and save valuable ervation of historic, natural, and cultural resources for future generations. resources. Although much of the money Opponents say:Many of the items specifi- would be used for state and local parks, tally funded in this measure are not parks at , allocations are included for a variety of all,butpetprojects that benefit only aselect otherprojects,includingjogg ing trails,zoos, few.Parkproperty now in public ownership and fire protection for wild lands. should be developed before any new pur- Supporterssay:Existing recreational sites chases are made. i '.Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-125 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 17 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Support for Proposition 128 , the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 Recommended Action: Adopt the accompanying Resolution of Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in Support of Proposition 128 , the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 . Discussion: Attached are,materials , including pro and con arguments , describing Proposition 128 , known as "Big Green. " Big Green is consistent with the District ' s Basic Policy and would provide $300 million in bonds for acquisition of redwoods and for forestry projects. Some of this funding could be of direct benefit to the District ' s program. f 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 s Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 e FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 128, THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT OF 1990 WHEREAS, Proposition 128 , the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 is consistent with the Basic Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District; and WHEREAS, Proposition 128, if enacted, could provide funding for acquisition of redwoods and for forestry projects of direct benefit to the District ' s program; NOW, THEREFORE be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District endorses and urges the passage of Proposition 128 , "Big Green, " on the November 6, 1990 ballot. 128 Environment. Public Health. Bonds. Initiative Statute Official Title and Summary: ENVIRONMENT. PUBLIC HEALTH. BONDS. INITIATIVE STATUTE • Requires regulation of pesticide use to protect food and agricultural worker safety. • Phases out use on food of pesticides known to cause cancer or reproductive harm, chemicals that potentially deplete ozone layer. • Requires reduced emissions of gases contributing to global warming. Limits oil, gas extraction within bay, estuarine and ocean waters. Requires oil spill prevention, contingency plans. • Creates prevention, response fund from fees on oil deliveries. • Establishes water quality criteria, monitoring plans. Creates elective office of Environmental Advocate. • Appropriates $40,000,000 for environmental research. • Authorizes $300,000,000 general obligation bonds for ancient redwoods acquisition, forestry projects. Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact: • Annual state administrative and program costs of approximately $90 million, decreasing in future years; partially offset by $10 million increased annual fee revenue. • Local governments would incur $8 million one-time cost;$5 million to$10 million annually,decreasing in future years. • State General Fund to incur one-time $750,000 appropriation in 1992-93 for Office of Environmental Advocate, future office administrative costs unknown; $40 million for environmental research grants. • If all bonds authorized for ancient redwood acquisition, forestry projects were sold at 7.5 percent interest and paid over the typical 20-year period, General Fund would incur approximately $535 million in costs to pay off principal ($300 million) and interest ($235 million). • Estimated average annual costs of bond principal and interest would be $22 million. • Per-barrel fee on oil would increase revenues by $500 million by 1996-97, used to pay oil spill prevention(clean-up costs. Indefinite deferral of potentially $2 billion in future state oil and gas revenues resulting from limits on oil and gas leases in marine waters. • Indirect fiscal impact could increase or decrease state and local government program costs and revenues from general and special taxes in an unknown amount. The overall impact-is unknown. Analysis by the Legislative Analyst Background increased as a result of several factors. These include: (1) The state and local governments in California have burning fossil fuels (oil, coal and natural gas) for. energy, developed a number of programs to address environmental (2) clearing forests for industrial or-residential use, and (3) issues. polluting the air with industrial or motor vehicle emissions. Greenhouse gases may warm the earth's atmosphere and Pesticides and Food Safety ultimately could cause significant changes in climate. Many foods grown in California are treated with Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are used as coolants, pesticides to control bugs, molds, and other insulation, solvents, and for other industrial purposes, can produce-damaging pests. The California Department of damage the earth's ozone layer when they escape into the Food and Agriculture (DFA) regulates the sale and use of air. Damage to the ozone layer subjects plants, animals and pesticides in California. Among other things, .the humans to more of the sun's ultraviolet rays. regulations govern (1) the manner in which the pesticide Federal law requires producers to cut CFC sales in half may be applied to crops and'(2) the amount of pesticide by 1998. The United States, however, recently signed an allowed to remain in or on food once it is harvested. calls for a complete international agreement ement which ca s o g P To enforce these regulations, the DFA tests about 17,000 phaseout of all CFC production by the year 2000. The samples of over 200 different kinds of produce.'Produce federal government plans to update its regulations by the g that violates the,requirements are destroyed. In addition, end of 1990.to reflect this agreement. Current state law in the state Department of Health Services assists the DFA does not regulate CFCs but requires that the state achieve being ex posed osed to health risks o f ' eo le e evaluating the he p p g p certain air pollution reduction goals within a 20-year pesticides, and enforces food safety laws to protect period. These laws require reductions in carbonmonoxide - consumers from eating contaminated or mislabeled foods. and nitrogen dioxide levels, as well as reductions in some Air Pollution Emissions other air pollutants within specific,heavily polluted areas of The amount of "greenhouse gases" in the air has the state. 18 G90 Redwoods Preservation and Reforestation materials handling and disposal, and various California contains about 19 million acres of forestland environmental health assessment and enforcement that can support logging operations. This total forestland programs. includes about 1.7 million acres of redwood forests proposal composed of (1) about 1.5 million acres that have been This measure makes significant changes to existing law logged previously (currently managed as second-growth g g g forests) and (2) about 208,000 acres of virgin and partially regarding pesticides and food safety, certain air pollution cut stands considered to be old-growth forest. About 86,000 emissions, old-growth redwood forest preservation, marine acres of these old-growth redwoods are in state and and coastal resources protection, and the coordination and national parks, wilderness areas, or other areas where enforcement of state environmental laws. These changes logging is prohibited. The remaining 122,000 acres include: generally comprise private stands of redwoods that • A phased in total prohibition on the use on foods of currently are being logged, or could be logged in the Pesticides containing any ingredient �chich may cause future. cancer or reproductive harm. Loggers use different methods to harvest timber. These • Adoption and implementation of a new state plan gb which mandates statewide reductions in the emissions methods include clearcutting,which involves cutting all the of greenhouse gases and development of a program to trees on a site at one time,and the selection method,which phase out the use of CFCs. involves periodically cutting selected trees on a site. • Authorization to sell $300 million in bonds to purchase Regardless of which method is used, the timberland owner old-growth redwood forests and to fund tree-planting must ensure that a specified minimum number of trees are programs. growing on the land within five years of concluding logging • A permanent statewide ban on new leases for oil and operations. The California Department of Forestry and gas development in the state's coastal waters. Fire Protection (CDFFP) regulates logging activities on • A new program and funding mechanism for cleaning California's state-owned and private timberlands. up oil spills off the coast of California. Marine and Coastal Resources Protection • Accelerated deadlines for additional treatment of Currently, there is substantial oil drilling and oil wastes that are discharged into water; development by transportation along some portions of the state's coastline. coastal counties of stormwater management plans; and In addition, urban growth and industrial activity near implementation of pollution prevention plans by California's coastal waters have increased the amount of certain waste dischargers. pollution which ultimately reaches the state's marine • Creation of a new elective office of the Environmental waters through runoff or industrial and municipal Advocate with responsibility for overseeing the discharge. implementation of the measure and for enforcement of Oil Drilling and Spill Cleanup. The state grants leases all of the slate's environmental laws. for and receives significant revenues from private oil and Pesticide Regulation. This measure requires that stricter standards be used to determine if pesticides may be gas development on state tidelands and submerged lands that extend to three miles offshore. The State Lands used on food products. Under current law, pesticides that Commission (SLC) has an extensive regulatory program contain an active ingredient (the component of a pesticide designed to prevent spills at offshore drilling platforms, that kills pests) that is known to cause cancer or marine terminals, processing facilities, and pipelines within reproductive harm may not be used on food unless the its jurisdiction. The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) DFA determines that the pesticide will be used in a directs the overall operations of all state agencies involved manner that poses no serious health risk. Under current law, the DFA does not regulate inert ingredients (the in responding to an oil spill. For the actual cleanup work, es the DFG attempts to make the responsible party pay for based on the component arisk rofscancer the tor rep ive ingre oductive hdient) in arm. In the cleanup. If the responsible party is unable to pay for contrast, this measure would ban the use on food of any cleanup, the DFG may use funds recovered from prior pesticide containing a chemical that is known to cause cleanups and civil fines. cancer or reproductive harm, regardless of the manner in Marine Water Quality. The State Water Resources which the pesticide would be used and regardless of Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality whether the chemical is present in the active or inert Control Boards regulate the discharge of wastes into state f the pesticide. componento waters. This re regulation involves a variety of activitiesp g Y This ban would take effect in two to five ears, r quality standards development, y including Ovate qua ty st p , water quality monitoring, and permitting of dischargers. depending on whether it is the active ingredient or the Permitted dischargers currently pay an annual fee for their inert ingredient in a pesticide that contains a chemical that permits. Revenue from the fee partially supports the is known to cause cancer or reproductive harm. However, boards' regulatory programs. if the manufacturer of a pesticide with active ingredients known to cause cancer or reproductive harm demonstrates State Environmental Laws that banning the pesticide would result in severe economic The DFA coordinates state pesticide policy and enforces hardship to the agricultural industry, the measure allows pesticide laws. Three other state agencies are responsible the state Director of Health Services to postpone banning far the development and coordination of state specific uses of that pesticide for up to three additional environmental policies as follows: years. • The Environmental Affairs Agency establishes policies The measure also requires that stricter standards be used _and coordinates state environmental programs related to determine the amounts of pesticide residue that may to air and water quality and solid waste disposal. remain on food based on all potential serious human health • The Resources Agency oversees forestry and wildlife effects, such as debilitating disease or injury. The measure programs, management of state lands, and other prohibits residues of active ingredients on food unless they environmental activities. pose "no significant risk" to human health, and, in some • The Health and Welfare Agency oversees the program cases, makes more restrictive the method used to of the DHS, including drinking water regulation, toxic determine "no significant risk" than the method currently G90 19 used. In addition, the measure prohibits inert ingredients also repeals a $$100,000 per-contract ceiling on the amount from being used on foods, unless the ingredients pose no of the preference payable under existing law. The measure significant risk of debilitating disease or injury. Current law requires the state to reimburse local governments for the does not specify limits on the amount of inert ingredients difference in price paid due to the preference. that may remain on food. Foods—including foods shipped 4. Trees. Requires any person who constructs a into the state from outside California—that contain any residential or nonresidential project to plant one tree for residue of a banned pesticide or a residue that exceeds the every 500 square feet of the project. The measure does not acceptable limits could not be sold in the state. Finally, the define "project." As a result, the number of trees required measure requires the D FAA to establish a program to q p g collect for planting is unclear. For example, if"project" means the and dispose of any pesticides that are banned under the surface area of the foundation of a building, plus the floor measure. space on each level of a multistory building, the measure In addition, the measure transfers from the DFA to the could require thousands of trees for one tall office building. DHS the responsibility for evaluating pesticide health risks If "project" means only the foundation area, then the and setting pesticide exposure limits and other health measure would require fewer tree plantings. standards. The measure also prohibits the DFA from Redwoods Preservation and Reforestation. The measure allowing o m a pesticide t e o be used in a manner e that confli g P cts authorizes the state t 1 o sell 300 million$ on in general obligation with regulations adopted by the DHS. Finally, the measure g gahon expands the information that the DFA must provide to the bonds to acquire stands of old-growth redwoods ($200 public before the department allows a pesticide to be used million) and to support urban forestry projects and rural in California. reforestation programs ($100 million). The DFA currently allows about 2,300 different pesticide In addition, the measure imposes a one-year moratorium products to be used on food. At least 350 of these pesticide on logging in any stand of old-growth redwoods that is 10 products would be banned under the provisions of the acres or larger and which previously has never been measure. The effect on agricultural production of banning logged. After this one-year moratorium, the measure would these products would depend on the degree to which prohibit clearcutting of old-growth redwoods forests, but farmers are able to find,within the timeframe set out in the would allow selective cutting of these forests. measure, effective substitute pesticides for those banned by Coastal Drilling. Currently, state law prohibits new oil the measure or to use economical alternative methods of and gas development in most of the state's coastal waters. producing crops. ` In addition, the State Lands Commission (SLC) has Air Pollution Emissions. The measure imposes new air prohibited new oil and gas leases in the remaining coastal emissions standards and other requirements. Among other waters.This measure prohibits any new oil and gas leases in things, the measure: the state's coastal waters, marine bays, and estuaries. The 1. Greenhouse Gases. Requires the California Energy measure allows a suspension of the prohibition in the event Resources Conservation and Development Commission of a federal energy emergency. (CEC) and the Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop and Oil Spill Prevention and Cleanup. The measure adopt, by January 1, 1993, a plan to reduce greenhouse prohibits the state from issuing or renewing, after January gases. The measure does not define the specific 1, 1992,any lease for a facility located on state tidelands that components of the plan but requires that the plan must (a) is a potential source of oil spills, unless the SLC has adopted reduce greenhouse gases to the "maximum feasible"extent an oil spill prevention plan. The measure requires oil and (b) require net reductions of carbon dioxide emissions facilities and local agencies along the coast to develop oil from the 1988 levels of 20 percent by January 1,2000 and 40 spill contingency plans.The measure also requires the DFG percent by January 1, 2010. These percentages can be to direct all state activities relating to oil spill response, adjusted to reflect differences in the population growth including enforcement of new civil penalty provisions. rate between California and the nation. The measure To fund oil spill cleanups, the measure creates the Oil requires all state and local agencies to adopt regulations to Spill Prevention and Response Fund and requires the SLC carry out the plan. to collect revenues and administer the fund. The SLC is Meeting the measure's carbon dioxide requirements required to impose a fee of up to 25 cents on each barrel of would necessitate substantial reductions in the amount of oil traveling through state waters by tanker or pipeline, so fossil fuel (oil, gas, and coal) , which is used in that the fund reaches $500 million within six years. The I transportation, electrical power generation, and industry. measure requires the Attorney General to take action to The extent of these reductions on these sectors of the recover from parties responsible for oil spills any money economy would depend upon the specific provisions which spent from the fund for cleanup or other response costs. are incorporated into the plan. Marine Water Quality. The measure makes several 2. CFCs. Requires the ARB to develop a regulatory changes in the state's water quality regulation programs program to phase out CFCs by 1997, and specifies some regarding marine bays, estuaries and coastal waters. The int ermediate ate restrictions c ions on CFC use and recycling. measure requires:s Individuals or corporations may petition for extensions of • Certain industrial waste dischargers to develop and the deadlines on the intermediate and final restrictions. implement pollution prevention plans designed to The measure requires the state to establish and administer reduce production of water pollutants. a program, am beginning January 1 19 93 mandating • Coastal counties to deve lop stor w ater management installation and proper use of CFC recycling equipment by plans to minimize runoff that pollutes marine waters. mechanics who service vehicular air conditioning systems. • The SWRCB and sewage treatment facilities to meet a 3. Recycled Paper Products. Requires state agencies and variety of accelerated deadlines for improving water mo st local gov ernments (citie s, countie s, schoo l districts, quality. These improvements already are required by and community colleges) to grant a 10 percent bid federal or state law. preference for companies selling recycled pa er products. In addition, the measure requires the DHS to identify The bid preference allows these companies tote awarded a threats to the public health from contaminated fish and contract, even if their bid is as much as 10 percent higher contaminated waters that are used for swimming The DHS than the lowest bid offered by a competitor that is not is required to set standards to protect the public health selling products made with recycled paper. The measure from contaminated fish and ocean waters, and to take any 20 G90 actions necessary to warn and protect the public regarding cleanup, and related state administrative costs. waters and fish that pose a public health threat. State Tidelands Revenues. Currently, oil and gas Environmental Advocate and State Environmental Law development is prohibited in California's coastal waters. In Enforcement. The measure creates the Office of the some areas this ban results from state administrative action Environmental Advocate in the executive branch of the and in other areas from the enactment of state law, state government, to be headed by a partisan elected Consequently, this measure's ban on new oil and gas official chosen in the November 1992 statewide election. development would have no immediate effect on state oil The advocate will oversee the implementation of this revenues. In the absence of this measure, however, the measure and the enforcement of all state environmental administrative ban could be lifted and the state could protection and public health laws.The advocate may sue or receive offshore oil revenues from some areas over many pursue administrative action to ensure compliance with this ears. The total amount of this potential revenue is measure or other environmental protection and public unknown, but could be up to $2 billion. In addition, by health laws. The measure also provides legal mechanisms making permanent the existing state law bans on drilling in by which public officials and individuals may seek to other areas of the coast,some of which expire on January 1, enforce the provisions of the measure. 1995, the measure could result in the state forgoing In addition, the measure creates a seven-member additional unknown oil revenues. California Council on Environmental Quality (CCEQ) as Timber Harvesting Revenues. This measure could part of the office, with the advocate as council chairperson. increase or decrease the revenue that the state receives The council will administer a competitive research grants from various taxes, depending on the effect of the measure program on (1) alternatives to pesticides in agriculture, (2) on the net value of harvested timber. In addition, the compliance with the other environmental requirements in measure could result in decreased revenue to local the measure, and (3) methods to reduce the amount of governments to the extent that lands acquired under the toxic chemicals produced in the state. measure no longer would be assessed property taxes. Fiscal Effect Potential Indirect Fiscal Impacts The more significant governmental costs and revenues In addition to its direct fiscal impacts on state and local that would result directly from this measure are governments, this measure could have a variety of indirect summarized below. fiscal impacts. This is because the private sector of the Administrative and Program Costs. This measure would California economy would be required to make substantial j result in identifiable annual state administrative and changes in order to comply with the measure's provisions. program costs of approximately $90 million. These costs These changes could increase or decrease state and local would be offset partially by increased annual fee revenue of government costs of providing programs and services and about$10 million. Local governments would incur one-time revenues from general and special taxes. costs of up to $8 million,and annual costs in the range of$5 Examples of the measure's provisions that could have an million to $10 million. The annual costs to the state and indirect fiscal impact on state and local governments local governments would decrease over time. These costs include: would result from activities related to pesticides and food • Mandated reductions in carbon dioxide emissions safety; air pollution, global warming and ozone protection; which will result in reduced use of fossil fuels for and oil spill prevention and cleanup, water quality and transportation, electrical generation, and other waste discharges. economic activities. The measure also makes one-time General Fund • Pesticide use restrictions which could increase the cost appropriations of (1) $40 million for environmental of producing some agricultural crops if farmers cannot research grants in 1990-91 and (2) $750,000 to the Office of find economical alternatives for controlling pests. the Environmental Advocate for administrative costs in e Pesticide/food safety provisions and water/air quality 1992-93. The administrative costs of the office in future requirements which could reduce the number of years is unknown. Californians who experience adverse health effects Bond Costs. The state would incur costs for the bonds such as cancer or respiratory ailments. sold to acquire stands of old-growth redwood trees and to Restrictions on oil drilling and increased requirements support urban and rural forestry programs. These costs for oil spill prevention and response which could (1) would total about$535 million to pay off the principal ($300 reduce the risk of a major oil spill along the coast and million) and interest ($235 million), assuming an interest (2) have an impact on economic activities along the rate of 7.5 percent. The average payment from the state's coast. General Fund would be about $22 million per year, over a These changes could affect such factors as business costs period of about 20 years. The state would incur about $4 and profits, and consumer prices and demand for various million in annual costs to administer the bond program. goods and services, thus indirectly affecting state and local These, administrative costs would be paid from the bond government costs and revenues. The overall net impact of funds. these changes is unknown and would depend on, among Oil Spill Prevention and Response Fee Revenues. The other things, (1) the specific elements that are included in per-barrel fees on oil required by this measure would result plans required by the measure and (2) the manner in in total revenues of $500 million by 1996-97. These which various sectors of the state's economy adapt to the revenues would be used to pay for oil spill prevention, measure's new requirements and restrictions. For text of Proposition 128 see page 74 G90 21 Environment. Public Health. Bonds. Initiative Statute 128 Argument Against Proposition 12$ All Californians are concerned about our environment but MORE LAWSUITS Proposition 128 COSTS TOO MUCH, TRIES TO DO TOO MUCH This initiative would create the potential for thousands of new AND MAY CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS THAN IT SOLVES. We urge lawsuits against state and local governments. Cash penalties and you to VOTE NO. lawyers fees would have to be paid for by taxpaver,dollars. The IT COSTS TOO MUCH BOUNTY PROVISION of this initiative would allow members of radical The INITIAL ESTIMATES by the non partisan independent groups like EARTH FIRST to personally share in any awards from = successful lawsuits. Legislative Analyst said that Proposition 128 would cost nearly $3 BILLION with ADDITIONAL UNKNOWN COSTS"to state and local IMAKES BUSINESS NON-COMPETITIVE taxpayers. Since then,independent non-government economic experts California's businesses, small and large, forced to comply with estimate that costs and lost revenue could be $12 BILLION hundreds of new government regulations, would be at a competitive ANNUALLY. disadvantage with their counterparts in other states. Proposition 128 NO FUNDING SOURCE would require such extreme environmental regulations that it would Californians can't afford that price tag—especially since Proposition GIVE FOREIGN COUNTRIES major ADVANTAGES over California businesses. 128 HAS NO FUNDING PROVISION.That means HIGHER TAXES or SEVERE CUTS IN essential SERVICES. PROPOSITION 128 TRIES TO DO TOO MUCH HIGHER FOOD AND ENERGY PRICES Proposition 128 is 39 pages and more than 16,000 words long.Clearly Hardly anyone denies that the new regulations proposed by we need to protect California's environment. But we must take a Proposition would result in higher costs for food, electricity and rational approach, one that examines issues concerning California's resources—air,too many important issues in Proposition 1 air, water, forests, food and coastline—independently. gasoline. Some estimates indicate FOOD PRICES INCREASING BY There are t 30%, electricity UP 20% and gasoline UP$.60 per gallon! Californians he i be voted on t on fixed incomes,seniors,small businesses,single parents and the poor together. It should be split into separate pieces so the can be would be hardest hit. voted on separately. Protecting the environment is an absolute necessity, BUT NEW STATE BUREAUCRACY PROPOSITION 128 COSTS TOO MUCH,TRIES TO DO TOO MUCH Proposition 128 would create an entirely NEW STATE AND MAY CAUSE MORE PROBLEMS THAN IT SOLVES! BUREAUCRACY with a budget of OVER $40 MILLION! It has been Proposition 128 is WELL-INTENDED but FATALLY FLAWED. widely reported that Tom Hayden, an author of Proposition 128 will VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 128 run for Environmental Advocate,a position the initiative would create. If elected, Tom Hayden would head a whole new Sacramento BARBARA KEATING-EDH bureaucracy employing hundreds of new lawyers, consultants and President, Consumer Alert bureaucrats at a cost of millions of additional taxpayer dollars. AL STEHLY Proposition 128 would give broad authority over all environmental Family Farmer issues to a single individual—independent from and more powerful than the Governor, the Legislature and local governments—with a LARRY McCARTHY multi-million dollar annual budget: POLITICIZING THE President, California Taxpayers'Association ENVIRONMENT IS NOT THE WAY TO SAVE IT! Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 12$ THREE THINGS ARE VERY CLEAR: • Their claims about food prices are simply false—another example • Big Green (128) is a battle for the health of Californians,especially of chemical and pesticide companies crying wolf. our kids and grandchildren; • An independent Environmental Advocate will enforce The chemical and pesticide industries,and their allies are leading environmental laws and fight bureaucratic inaction. the fight to defeat Big Green; • 128 funds research to develop alternatives to harmful chemicals. • We should do everything possible to protect ourselves and our Who's really trying to protect your health?The environmental and children from chemicals that cause cancer and birth defects. health specialists supporting 128? Or the chemical and pesticide BIG GREEN WILL PROTECT OUR HEALTH industries opposing it. NOW AND IN THE FUTURE. LET'S DO WHAT WE KNOW IS RIGHT. • It is tough and enforceable—with strong penalties and no VOTE YES ON 128. loopholes. It stops the use of known cancer-causing pesticides DR.HERB NEEDLEMAN,hi.D. within 2-8 years,and chemicals destroying our ozone layer within 7 Member,American Academy of Pediatrics years. Committee on Environmental Hazards • The chemical and pesticide industries say government is doing DR.JAY HAIR enough. The truth is,government hasn't done enough. 128 deals with one issue:stopping the pollution of our water,air and food. President,National Wildlife Federation • They say it costs too much.That's nonsense. And they don't talk MICHAEL PAPARIAN about the cost of pollution to our health and the economy. State Director,Sierra Club California C90 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. 23 v' Public Health. Bonds. Initiative Statute nlrn nt 128 Environment.me . Argument in Favor of Proposition 128 Proposition 128 is the BIG GREEN initiative. We can't afford not to. It will protect us,and especially our children,from toxic chemical In Southern California every year,we pay$9 billion in extra sick days pollution of our air,water and food supply.It will save billions of dollars and medical bills caused by air pollution. The National Center for in health care and energy costs. It was written by California's Health Statistics issued a study in 1985 stating the overall medical costs well-respected major environmental organizations,and is supported by for cancer in California alone are over$7 billion annually. leadingCalifornia health care professionals,scientists,farmers,business Pesticides have contaminated more than 3,000 drinking water wells into th and labor leaders. State. Sewage and toxic waste are pumped e throughout the St e P P g g It is opposed by the chemical and pesticide industries and big oceans,and fish and marine life are contaminated by toxic chemicals. agribusiness. 90% of our ancient redwoods have already been cut down. An Proposition 128 deals with URGENT HEALTH ISSUES that need epidemic of skin cancers will happen because of the growing hole in addressing.If we don't take responsible action NOW,the problems will continue to get worse. WE OWE A CLEAN AND HEALTHY the ozone laver. ENVIRONMENT TO OUR CHILDREN. PROPOSITION 128 IS REASONABLE AND FEASIBLE. It allows Here's what Proposition 128 will do: time for industry to develop and phase in alternatives. In fact, many • PHASE OUT CHEMICALS THAT DESTROY THE OZONE alternatives are already available. It provides $40 million for research LAYER which protects us from skin cancer,and reduce carbon on safer substitutes. dioxide that threatens global warming; PROPOSITION 128 IS COST-EFFECTIVE. • Phase out the use of pesticides on our food which have already The interest of Proposition 128 is our health—to protect us from toxic been PROVEN to cause cancer or birth defects,and require that chemicals. safer alternatives be used; Our children have a right to a clean environment,free from toxic • PROTECT OUR DRINKING WATER and coastal waters from chemical pollution. toxic chemical contamination. It sets tough new sewage control WE OWE IT TO THEM,for their health and their future.WE OWE and health standards; IT TO OURSELVES. • Protect our ancient redwood forests, and plant millions of new VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 128. trees to reduce carbon dioxide; DR.JAY HAIR • Requires oil companies to establish an oil spill clean-up and President,National Wildlife Federation prevention fund,to protect the coast and to ensure that an Alaskan LUCY BLAKE oil spill disaster doesn't happen here; Executive Director, California League of Conservation • Elect an independent Environmental Advocate with tough powers to crack down on polluters and make government and corporate Voters bureaucrats comply with environmental protection laws. DR.HERB NEEDLEMAN,M.D. The pesticide and chemical industries say we can't afford to clean up Member,American Academy of Pediatrics, California. Committee on Environmental Hazards Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 128 As university scientists and doctors whose life work is ensuring public • There are NO PROVEN human cancer-causing pesticides allowed health, we share the concerns for safe water, air and food. But on foods in California. PROPOSITION 128 is NOT THE WAY. • The National Academy of Sciences recommends we eat more fruits C. Everett Koop, M.D., U.S. Surgeon General 1981-89, agrees. He and vegetables to reduce the risks of cancer and heart disease.But says: 128 would counter that advice by INCREASING PRICES 30% and "I have spent my life admonishing Americans to do things to protect seriously reducing supplies of these healthy foods. and enhance their health. Proposition 128 deals with too many complex issues,and would result "Public policy should be based on sound science, NOT SCARE in higher food, water and energy prices, more bureaucrats, more TACTICS. If I thought this proposition would protect the health of lawsuits and HIGHER TAXPAYER COSTS. mothers and children, as its proponents claim,I'd be with them. I'm And still not make us or our children any healthier. not. Proposition 128 would NOT PROTECT CALIFORNIANS' Read Proposition 128.VOTE NO! HE ALTH." Let's examine THE FACTS: WALLACE I.SAMPSON,M.D. • Proposition 128,dealing with many complex scientific and health Stanford University School of Medicine issues,was written by politicians and lawyers. DR.JUDITH S.STERN • The National Cancer Institute reports cancer rates have decreased Professor,Department of Nutrition or stabilized,except for those related to personal behavior,such as smoking. University of California,Davis • Proposition 128's restriction of carbon dioxide emissions has STEPHAN S.STERNBERG,M.D. NOTHING TO DO WITH SMOG. Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research 22 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. G90 PROPOSITION •Make changes in state water quality NATURAL ENVIRONMENT regulationsincluding Stricter r requirements OPPONENTS SAY 1Eeq 1.Proposition 128 costs too much,tries Y PUBLIC HEALTH for industries who discharge waste into to do too much, and could cause more state waters. watermanagementplans. problems than it solves. THE SITUATION . and public sewage plants. . 2.Actual costs plus lost revenues add up THE and ••Create the Office of Environmental to a nearly$3 billion price tag for Proposi- Although the state maintains majorpro- Proposition 128 is an initiative, popu- Advocate headed by an elected official first tion 128. grams to protect,the public from harmful larly known as"Big Green,"which would chosen in November 1992.The advocate 3.New regulations proposed by Propo- chemicals,there isagrowingconcernabout make changes in existing law regarding would implement Proposition 128 and en- sition 128 would result in higher costs for contamination of the environment and its pesticides,air pollution,marine waters,and force other state environmental laws. food,electricity,and gasoline. impact on health. enforcement of environmental laws.These Under this measure,state program costs 4.Proposition 128 would create a new Areas of concern include the use of pes- changes would: would be about$80 million a year.Paying state bureaucracy which would cost mii- ticides on food.Both Proposition 128 and •Phase out in five years the use on foods off bonds to buy redwoods would cost the lions of taxpayer dollars and give broad Proposition 135 on this ballot make provi- of pesticides which may cause cancer or state about$22 million a year. The state authorityoverall environmental issues to sions for'regulating pesticide use. (For reproductive harm. The use of a certain would also incur one-time costs of $40 single individual.', background information,and comparison million forresearch programs and$7of $40 `LL t pan pesticide could be extended up to three for the Office of Environmental Advocate. 5.There are no proven human cancer- of pesticide provisions of the two mea- years in the case of"severe economic hard- causing pesticides allowed on foods in sures,see analysis of Proposition 135.) . ship"to agriculture.• Lost state revenue from the ban on tideland California + California's rapid economic and popula- Require implementation of anew state oil leases could amount to about$2 billion , tion growth has resulted in a steepincreasegreenhouse over many years.Local costs could ran e p;oxide emiiss onss ld 1 ave[ be ren from$5 million to$10 million a year. g in.the use of fossil.fuels and chemicals which release waste gases into the air.Sci- duced 20 percent below 1988 levels by THE QUESTION enlists say that these"greenhouse gases" .January 1,2000. Should the state ban - will warm the earth and eventually create Develop a pesticides which p program to phase out CFCs could cause cancer,and develop programs significant changes in climate.Emissions by 1997.This includes a gradual change to to decrease greenhouse gases, ban CFCs, from other chemical products(CFCs),used safer coolants in auto air conditioners and p1event and clean up oil spills,acquire old- as coolants,insulation,and solvents,could . refrigerators. growth redwoods, and strengthen water damage the_earth's ozone layer and subject •Require tree planting on new residen- quality standards? humans,animals,and plants to more of the tial and commercial projects. sun's dangerous ultraviolet rays.Clearing . Authorize the state to sell$300 million SUPPORTERS SAY forests also contributes to the"greenhouse in general obligation bonds to buystands of 1'Proposition 128 would remove the risk effect"as trees act as natural controls of "old-growth"redwoods from priate own of eating food treated with pesticides which carbon dioxide emissions, ers,and fund reforestationandurbanfores could cause cancer or birth defects. z About 58 percent of California's old- programs ' 2.It is necessary to take steps to phase growth redwood forest is privatelyowned y out chemicals that destroy the ozone layer andiseitherbein to edorcouldb logged 'state's coastal wwatee�rsand gas leases in the' and reduce gases that threaten global 8 88 in the future. a. „":' warming. Current state law prohibits new oil and •Require the state,coastal communities, 3.About 90 percent of our ancient red- gas leases in most coastal waters; in the and oil companies state, t ,coastal oils ill re_ Mood forests have been cut down.Proposi- remaining coastal waters there are tempo- p p p p tion 128 would protect those which remain. racy bans on new leases. Over a million would be required cleanup ired opl� Oil companies 4.Our coastal waters are contaminated eq pay up to 25 cents on with toxic chemicals.This measure would barrels of oil are transported into the state each barrel of oil delivered by tanker or set new standards to control pollution. each day by ocean tankers and through pipeline through state waters.The money offshore pipelines. would be used to clean up oil spills. 5.Fees charged oil companies would es- To regulate water quality,the state de- tablish an oil spill prevention and cleanup velops standards,monitors thestate waters, fund. and issues permits for discharge of waste. Space -------------- MIDPENINSUTA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-126 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 17 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Support for Proposition 130, the Forest and Wildlife Protection and Bond Act of 1990, and Opposition to Proposition 138 Recommended Action: Adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in Support of Proposition 130, the Forest and Wildlife Protection and Bond Act of 1990 , and in Opposition to Proposition 138 , the Global Warming and Clearcutting Reduction, Wildlife Protection and Reforestation Act of 1990 . Discussion: Attached is information related to Propositions 130 and 138 on the November ballot, including the arguments, pro and con. District staff has met With supporters of Proposition 130 and has identified potential areas of District acquisition that might qualify for funding under the $742 million bond issue. Although the other aspects of Proposition 130 are very consistent with the District ' s Basic Policy, Proposition 138 contains several features in direct conflict and could undermine Proposition 130 , if passed. 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, California 94040 Phone: (415) 949-5500 FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSITION 130, THE FOREST AND WILDLIFE PROTECTION AND BOND ACT OF 1990 AND IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSITION 138, THE GLOBAL WARMING AND CLEARCUTTING REDUCTION, WILDLIFE PROTECTION AND REFORESTATION ACT OF 1990 WHEREAS , Proposition 130, the Forest and Wildlife Protection and Bond Act of 1990, on the November 6, 1990 ballot is consistent with the Basic Policy of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District; and WHEREAS, passage of Proposition 130 may lead to additional funding for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District for protection of additional open space lands; and WHEREAS, Proposition 138 , Global Warming and Clearcutting Reduction, Wildlife Protection and Reforestation Act contains features in direct conflict with the District ' s Basic Policy; and WHEREAS, passage of Proposition 138 may undermine Proposition 130, if passed; NOW, THEREFORE be it resolved that the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District urges the passage of Proposition 130 and the defeat of Proposition 138 on the November 6 , 1990 ballot. 130 Forest Acquisition. Timber Harvesting Practices. Bond Act. Initiative Statute Official Title and Summary: FOREST ACQUISITION. TIMBER HARVESTING PRACTICES. BOND ACT. INITIATIVE STATUTE. • Authorizes 10-year state acquisition program,limited logging moratorium, to permit public acquisition of designated ancient forests providing wildlife habitat. measures. Limits logging • Requires wildlife surveys, mitigation me sites, including those near waterways. • Requires state-funded compensation, retraining program for loggers displaced by new regulations, acquisitions. • Authorizes general obligation bond issue of$742,000,000 to fund acquisition, other provisions. Limits tim ber cutting practices, burning of forest residues, on California timberlands. • Lim g • Mandates sustained yield standards. timber harvesting new hm g Permit fees. • Imposes • Revises Board of Forestry membership. • Discourages foreign export of forest products. Imposes penalties for violations. 1 Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact: • If all authorized bonds are sold at 7.5 percent interest and paid over the typical 20-year period, General Fund will incur approximately $1.3 billion in costs to pay off bond principal ($742 million) and interest ($585 million). • Estimated average annual cost of bond principal and interest is $55 million. • State administrative costs of up to $16 million annually for state forestry review and enforcement programs, fully offset by revenues from timber harvesting fees. • Such fees would also offset current state logging-related regulatory costs, thus resulting in state savings of about $6.4 million annually. • Unknown effect on revenues from other state taxes, possible decreased revenue to local governments to extent lands acquired under measure would no longer be assessed property taxes. Analysis by the Legislative Analyst Background methods to harvest timber. Among others, these methods California contains about 19 million acres of forestland that include clearcutting,which involves cutting all the trees on a can support logging operations. Of this total: site at one time, and the selection method, which involves • Two million acres are in parks,wilderness areas,or other periodically cutting selected trees on a site. Regardless of areas where logging is prohibited. which method is used, the timberland owner must ensure • Nine million acres are owned by the federal government that a specified minimum number of trees are growing on where logging is regulated by the United States Forest the land within five years after the logging operations. Service Sales of State-Owned Tirnber. The state owns seven forest • Eight million acres are owned either by private areas consisting of about 72,000 acres on which logging is individuals or'by the state. Logging activities on these allowed. Existing law prohibits the sale of logs from these timberlands are regulated by the California Department forests to anyone who intends to process them at a mill of Forestry and Fire Protection (CDFFP) according to outside the United States, unless the logs are first sawn into rules adopted by the.Board of Forestry (BOF). The planks at a mill in the United States. regulations cover several aspects of logging operations. proposal Harvesting Plan Review. Logging on nonfederal lands is this measure: prohibited unless it complies with a timber harvesting plan In summary, P prepared b a registered professional forester and 3F= • Imposes new restrictions on logging operations on a(THP) g pproved by the director of the CDFFP. The THP must nonfederal lands. provide various information,including the amount of timber • Imposes new restrictions on the sale of state-owned to be cut, the cutting method, erosion control measures, and timber and state purchases of timber products. special provisions to protect unique areas or wildlife that exist • Authorizes the sale of$742 million in general obligation within the harvest area.The THP is valid for three years,and bonds to acquire old-growth forestlands, and for a separate THP must be approved for each specific piece of compensation and retraining of timber employees. property that the timberland owner intends to log. The • Establishes new fees to cover the state's costs of CDFFP has a total of 25 days to review the plan and to regulating logging. consider information provided by other agencies and the - • Revises the membership of the BOF. public. • Contains language stating how conflicts between it and Cutting Methods. Loggers are allowed to use different two other measures on this ballot are to be resolved. 28 G90 Restrictions on Logging bond fund at the e f five years to be used for old-growth This measure imposes several new restrictions on logging forest acquisitions. activities on nonfederal lands. Among other things, these New Fees and Enforcement Action restrictions: This measure requires the state to establish and implement • Prohibit clearcutting with limited exceptions. a system of fees to be paid by persons submitting THPs that • Prohibit anyone who owns more than 5,000 acres of cover all governmental costs (both state and local) associated timberland from cutting, during a 10-year period, more with reviewing forestry plans, conducting related field timber than would be replenished on their land during inspections,and enforcing the provisions of the measure.The that period measure also imposes new civil penalties and increases • Require the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to existing fines for violating logging regulations. In addition, determine if the area in which logging is proposed is g within an old-growth forest or includes habitat that the measure allows state or local governments, or any person would be sensitive to logging operations. If the area is acting in the public interest, to sue any person who violates within an old-growth forest, the measure requires the these regulations. DFG to refer the proposal to the Wildlife Conservation State Board of Forestry Board (WCB) so it may consider acquiring the forest. This measure revises the qualifications for appointment to The measure also allows the DFG to recommend the BOF and provides for the appointment of four of the nine alternatives that would prevent or reduce possible harm members by the Lieutenant Governor instead of the to wildlife caused by the proposed logging operations. Governor. Restrictions on Sale and Purchase of Timber Conflicts With Other Measures on This Ballot This measure prohibits the state from selling timber from state-owned forests to any person who exports or processes in This measure contains language that states how conflicts nd other measures on this ballot are a foreign mill any logs harvested from private lands within between this measure a j California. In addition, the measure prohibits the state from to be resolved. purchasing lumber or other forest products from persons who Specifically, the measure provides that if both this measure obtain logs from companies that process logs in,or export logs and Proposition 128 (The Environmental Protection Act of to foreign mills. 1990) are passed by the voters, the Environmental Advocate General Obligation Bonds provided for by Proposition 128 would appoint four members o the BOF instead of the Lieutenant Governor. This measure authorizes the state to sell $742 million in to addition, the measure provides that if both it and general obligation bonds to (1) acquire and preserve proposition 138 (Global Warming and Clearcutting fundold-growth forests (at least $710 million) and (2) create a Reduction,Wildlife Protection and Reforestation Act of 1990) fund of up to $32 million to compensate or retrain timber b passed industry employees whose pay is reduced, or job is lost, as a are P Y the voters and this measure receives more result of the state acquiring and preserving forestlands. The votes, it would invalidate all provisions of Proposition 138. state is obligated to pay the principal and interest costs on The legal effect of this language is uncertain. This is because general obligation bonds. General Fund revenues would be the State Constitution provides that only the conflicting used to pay these costs. These revenues come primarily from provisions of the measure that receives the greater vote the state personal income and corporate taxes and the state prevails. sales tax. Fiscal Effect Forestland Acquisitions. The measure requires the WCB to use at least $710 million of the bond money to acquire General Obligation Bonds. For these types of bonds, the old-growth forests consisting of (1) about 3,000 acres of state typically would make principal and interest payments old-growth redwoods in Humboldt County called the from the state's General Fund over a period of about 20 "Headwaters Forest" and (2) unspecified stands of virgin years. If all of the bonds authorized by this measure are sold redwoods and other old-growth trees throughout the state. at an interest rate of 7.5 percent,the cost would be about$1.3 The WCB would purchase private timberlands using several billion to pay off the principal ($742 million) and interest criteria, including the size of the forest, the value of the ($585 million). The average payment would be about $55 property as wildlife habitat, and the extent of roadless areas million per year. within the forest. These forests would be managed as state .Administrative Costs and Fee Revenue. Costs to parks,preserves,or wilderness areas.The measure allows the administer the bond program would be paid from bond bond proceeds to be used to pay for all WCB and DFG costs proceeds. The measure also would result in administrative related to the acquisitions program, including administrative costs of up to $10 million annually for state agencies to casts. conduct new review and enforcement activities. These costs Timber Industry Employee Compensation Program. This would be fully offset by revenue from the new fees paid by measure requires the Legislature to establish a program to persons submitting THPs. In addition, these new fees would offset entirely the cost of administering existin provide compensation,job retraining; and job placement to g logging timber industry employees whose pay is reduced, or job is regulations, thereby resulting in state savings of about $6.4 is lost, due to the forestland acquisitions funded by the million annually. measure. The measure limits compensation, when combined Potential Effect on Revenues. This measure could with earned wages and unempployment benefits, to no more increase or decrease the revenue that the state receives from than the erson s actual a durin the previous year. The various taxes, depending on the effect of the measure on the e g PY p r. In addition the measure could yy f harvested timber. > m to rnent Development net value o m fires the E P measure requires P Y q governments to the Department to administer this program and allows up to $32 result in decreased revenue to local gover million in bond funds to be used for this purpose.Any money extent that lands acquired under the measure no longer not used for the compensation program would revert to the would be assessed property taxes. For text of Proposition 130 see page 94 C90 29 Forest Acquisition. Timber Harvesting Practices. 130 Bond Act. Initiative Statute Argument in Favor of Proposition 130 California's ANCIENT REDWOOD FORESTS, with giant trees supply. By restricting the export of logs to foreign timber mills, more than 2000 years old,ARE BEING DESTROYED even faster than Proposition 130 HELPS KEEP JOBS HERE AT HOME. the tropical rainforests of the Amazon. Proposition 130 REFORMS THE STATE BOARD OF FORESTRY, No law exists today to STOP THE CLEARCUTTING of these making it free of industry domination.The new Board will be balanced magnificent forests. Proposition 130 creates the law that will. and independent,with strong protections against conflicts of interest, Once, more than 2 million acres of VIRGIN REDWOOD forests to preserve our forests and serve the public interest. stood as PROUD SYMBOLS OF OUR GOLDEN STATE. Now a mere Proposition 130 DOES NOT REQUIRE A TAX INCREASE. 5% remain. Proposition 130 was WRITTEN BY FORESTRY EXPERTS and The devastation of our forests by the timber companies threatens not knowledgeable environmentalists.That is why it is supported by more only the big trees themselves,but also the endangered wildlife,fish and than 100 environmental and civic organizations including people which depend upon them for survival. PEOPLE NEED ANCIENT FORESTS. Preserving these forests AUDUBON SOCIETY CHAPTERS prevents flooding, protects our salmon and trout populations, and SIERRA CLUB increases opportunities for family recreation. NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL These wondrous forests are filled with awe-inspiring ancient giant PLANNING AND CONSERVATION LEAGUE redwoods,and a spectacular variety of other plant and animal life. DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE PROPOSITION 130 PROHIBITS CLEARCUTTING—where the CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS timber companies strip the forest of all its trees and then burn it, It is opposed by the big timber companies. leaving California mountains raw to the elements, causing massive Even more outrageous,the timber industry has placed another forest erosion and landslides, devastating fish and wildlife, and making tree initiative on the ballot,written specifically to defeat Proposition 130. If regeneration difficult. their measure passes,Proposition 130 loses. Proposition 130 authorizes the sale of bonds to purchase and The timber industry says we can't afford to protect our ancient PRESERVE ANCIENT REDWOOD AND OTHER FORESTS forests. throughout Northern and Southern California for use and enjoyment We can't afford not to. by the public. Proposition 130 also creates a simple requirement for all those who If you want to SAVE CALIFORNIA'S ANCIENT FORESTS and seek to cut down our forests; they mac cut down no more than they STOP THE CHAINSAW DESTRUCTION of the oldest and largest grow. This means we will have A WOOD SUPPLY FOR THE living trees on earth,you must vote no on 138 and YES on Proposition FORESEEABLE FUTURE,and that our state will not be stripped of its 130. forests. DR.RUPERT CUTLER Timber companies are cutting down the forests much faster than President, Defenders of Wildlife they can grow back. By requiring sustainable forestry, Proposition 130 will help PREVENT THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT OF GLOBAL MICHAEL L.FISCHER WARMING by preserving big trees which absorb carbon dioxide and Executive Director,Sierra Club produce oxygen. DAVID PESONEN Proposition 130 provides jobs by guaranteeing a lasting timber Former Director, California Department of Forestry in Favor f Proposition 130 Rebuttal to Argumento 0 P The proponents of Proposition 130 promise the measure will There's no question:Proposition 130"sounds"great.Everyone wants "provide jobs by guaranteeing a lasting timber supply." to protect California's ancient redwoods. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH! But that's NOT what Proposition 130 is about! Unfortunately, PROPOSITION 130 GUARANTEES JUST THE It's about throwing the lessons of more than a century of forestry OPPOSITE. experience out the window. Economic estimates show that Proposition 130 WOULD PUT TENS It's about REPLACING the CRITICAL ROLE LICENSED OF THOUSANDS OF CALIFORNIANS OUT OF WORK. It would PROFESSIONAL FORESTERS and WILDLIFE BIOLOGISTS play create a tremendous hardship for timber workers and their families and with a COSTLY BUREAUCRACY. LETTING SACRAMENTO untold numbers of Californians whose jobs are indirectly dependent on POLITICIANS make decisions on technical forestry issues on which . they are not properly trained. the forest products industry. It's about TAXPAYERS FOOTING THE BILL FOR THE LEGAL The extremists backing Proposition 130 claim the measure would FEES OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS in lawsuits. take care of these displaced workers,but the fine print tells another Proposition 130 is SUPPORTED BY PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH story. THE RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP EARTH FIRST! and Perhaps the investment banker financing the campaign can afford to FINANCED BY A WEALTHY INVESTMENT BANKER. take a gamble on Proposition 130,but some of us work for a living! Protecting our forests is an important endeavor,but PROPOSITION VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 130! 130 IS BAD NEWS! JOHN F.HENNING VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 130! Executive Secretary-Treasurer SUE GRANGER-DICKSON California Labor Federation,AFL-CIO Wildlife Biologist 30 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and,have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. G90 Forest Acquisition. Timber Harvesting Practices. 130 - Bond Act. Initiative Statute Argument Against Proposition 130 There is no question that California's precious forests must be appears on your ballot as Proposition 138, the "Global Warming and protected.No one is arguing otherwise. Clear Cutting Reduction, Wildlife Protection & Reforestation Act of But Proposition 130 is simply TOO RADICAL an approach. 1990". If Proposition 130 passes,it will: Proposition 138 represents a far more reasonable approach to the • Reduce timber harvesting by an unprecedented 70%, PUTTING protection of our forests.Furthermore,it is more comprehensive. MORE THAN 100,000 CALIFORNIANS OUT OF WORK. Proposition 138 provides for the protection and enhancement of • Give financial incentives for special interest groups to file lawsuits wildlife and the planting of trees in urban areas. against the government,resulting in THOUSANDS of LAWSUITS Specifically,Proposition 138 kvill: AGAINST the State of CALIFORNIA with TAXPAYERS • Ban clearcutting of old growth redwood and other old growth FOOTING the LAWYER FEES. forests. • POLITICIZE the TIMBER HARVEST APPROVAL PROCESS and. • Require timber harvesters reduce clearcutting in all other forests establish a costly new BUREAUCRACY. by 50% over the next five years. • Replace the critical role licensed professional foresters and • Provide for a $300 million bond to plant millions of trees in cities biologists play with Sacramento bureaucrats and political and other areas throughout California to help reduce global appointees who have little knowledge of forestry practices. • Result in the hazardous build-up of forest debris, which leads to warming. • Require timber companies to re are long term management catastrophic fires such as the ones that recently ravaged q P" p P� g g Yellowstone Park and Southern California. plans that would protect wildlife and ensure more trees are • Significantly INCREASE CONSUMER PRICES for new homes, planted than cut. timber and paper products. • Keep harvesting practices in the hands of licensed professional • COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS, according to the independent foresters and biologists and away from Sacramento politicians and Legislative Analyst. bureaucrats. Not surprisingly, Proposition 130 is SUPPORTED by persons • Request Congress to ban the exporting of logs. associated with the RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP EARTH Only Proposition 138 strikes an important balance between FIRST!, notorious for driving spikes into trees, vandalizing logging environmental,economic and human concerns. equipment and harassing timber workers and their families. PROPOSITION 130 is simply TOO RADICAL an approach that And their antics don't stop there.On the national television program Nyould COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS. "60 Minutes", Earth First! leader, Darryl Cherney, advocated VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 130 and YES on PROPOSITION 138. terminally ill people should strap bombs to themselves and blow up GERALD L.PARTAIN dams, power plants and other structures they believe harm the Former Director,California Department of Forestry environment. In fact, several members are currently under and Fire Protection investigation for blowing up a power plant and under federal PHILLIP G.LOWELL indictment for conspiring to sabotage power lines. We must take steps to protect our forests, but not the drastic steps Executive Director,Redwood Region Conservation Council proposed in Proposition 130. SCOTT WALL There is a rational alternative to Proposition 130 on the ballot. It President, California Licensed Foresters Association: Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 130 The big timber companies are desperate. ENJOYMENT AND WILDLIFE PRESERVATION. Proposition 138 They are trying to convince you that a measure SUPPORTED BY does not. MAJOR ENVIRONNENTAL ORGANIZATIONS in California,as well Your votes on Propositions 130 and 138 depend upon WHO YOU as former TOP DEPARTMENT AND BOARD OF FORESTY • TRUST: the timber corporations who have stripped our mountainsides OFFICIALS,has somehow been secretly designed by radicals! raw or the ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS with long records of working Let's get one thing straight:Proposition 130 is written and supported to SAVE CALIFORNIA'S UNIQUE NATURAL HERITAGE. by responsible, mainstream environmental organizations representing California environmental groups say cote no on the timber industry''s MILLIONS OF CALIFORNIANS. It will STOP THE BIG TISIBER Proposition 138 and COMPANIES from destroving our forests and will PROTECT VOTE YES ON PROPOSITION 130. FOREVER OUR NIAGNIFICENT ANCIENT REDWOODS. There is nothing radical about trying to PRESERVE JOBS by making ROBERT VAN METER sure there will be working forests twenty years from now.There is President,Los Angeles Audubon Society nothing shocking about wanting our children to inherit a state as JENNIFER JENNINGS golden as the one we have enjoyed. Those who avant to know more about the timber companies'greedy Forest Project Director,Planning and Conservation and destructive practices should read the November 1989 Reader" League Digest article entitled "California's Chainsaw Massacre." JEFF DuBONIS Executive Director Association o Forest Service Exec ,� AININ OLD f RE.I GO Pro funds to PURCHASE Proposition 130 provides GROWTH REDWOOD and other forests and open them for PUBLIC Employees for Environmental Ethics •ccur acy by any official agency. 31 C90 0 i f the authors•nd have not been checked fora e r heo opinionsa Arguments printed on this pao are t p 6 ! i � M PROPOSITION FOREST AND WILDLIFE PROTECTION BOND AND INITIATIVE THE SITUATION of forest products from state or private The continuing conflict between eco- timberlands. logical forces and economic forces con- The measure would also revise the mem- ceming old-growth forests and logging bership of the Board of Forestry so that only practices in California's timberlands is re- two of the nine board members may have flected in three measures on this ballot: financial interest in the forest products in- Propositions 128, 130, and 138.Proposi- dustry. It would also provide for the ap- tions 130 and 138 are.competing timber pointment of four of the nine members by harvesting measures.Proposition 128,the the Lieutenant Governor instead of the "Big Green"initiative,deals with avariety Governor. of environmental issues. Proposition 130 contains language that In California, logging operations are states how conflicts between measures 128, permitted and regulated by the U.S.Forest 130,and 138 are tobe resolved.Proposition Service on nine million acres of timberland 130 provides that if both it and Proposition owned by the federal government.Logging 128 are passed,the Environmental Advo- operations are also permitted on eight mil- cate provided for by Proposition 128 would lion acres of timberland owned either pri- appoint four members to the Board of For- vately or by the state of California.Opera- estry rather than the Lieutenant Governor. lions on these lands are regulated by the Proposition 130 also provides that ifboth California Department of Forestry and Fire 130 and 138 are passed and Proposition 130 Protection, receives more votes,it would invalidate all Logging on nonfederal lands must com- provisions of Proposition 138. The legal ply with a Timber Harvesting Plan pre- effect of this language is uncertain because pared by a registered professional forester the California Constitutition provides that for approval by the Director of the De- only the conflicting provisions of the partment of Forestry. These plans must measure that receives the greater vote pre- include the wnount of timber to be cut,the vail. cutting method,erosion control measures, THE QUESTION and provisions to protect wildlife.The plan Should the state issue $742 million in is valid for three years.The umber owner must ensure that a specified minimum bonds to acquire ancient forests providing number of trees are growing on the land wildlife habitat and to retrain loggers? within five years after the logging opera- Should the state revise its limits on timber lions cutting-by banning clearcutting and man- Ancient forests or old-growth timberare dating sustained yield standards? forests containing some tees greater than SUPPORTERS SAY 200 years of age. Ecologists believe that 1.The purchase and preservation by the these "virgin" forests have an important state of ancient redwood and other forests role to play in regulating water levels and will prevent flooding,protect fish and wild- quality,cleaning the air,enriching the sta- life,and provide public recreation. bilit and character of the soil, v' - o and o td 2.This measure prohibits clearcutting ro b is c tun Y Pr P 8 ing habitat for fish and wildlife. which can cause soil erosion and the loss of THE PROPOSAL tree regeneration,and itmandates sustained Proposition 130,placed on the ballot by yield to ensure the continued existence of initiative,would authorize a$742 million forests and a supply of wood products for the future. bond issue to: •Acquire and preserve designated an- 3.TheBoard of Forestry wouldno longer be dominated c the timber industry,but cient forests providing wildlife habitat(at would be balanced and independent to bet- least$710 million); •Create a fund to compensate or retrain ter serve the public interest. timber industry employees whose employ- 4.The measure is opposed by the timber ment or pay is affected by state acquisition industry' of forestlands(up to$32 million). OPPONENTS SAY Proposition 130 would limit timber cut- 1.The reduction of timber harvesting by ting practices and logging sites by prohib- 70 percent will wipe out the jobs of more iting clearcutting.This measure would de- . than 100,000 Californians. fine clearcuttinglogging as ogg g more than 60 2.Consumer prices for new homes,tim- percent of the timber volume of an area ber, and.paper products would increase greater than 2 1/2 acres. It would define significantly. sustained yield as prohibiting an owner of 3.The measure establishes a costly bu- more than 5,000 acres of timberland from reaucracy and politicizes the timber har- cutting more timber than would be re len- vesting approval process. ished on the land during a ten-year period. 4.This measure is supported by mem- Proposition 130 includes provisions bers of a radical environmental group. which would discourage the foreign export 138 Forestry Programs. Timber Harvesting Practices. Bond Act. Initiative Statute Official Title and Summary: FORESTRY PROGRAMS. TIMBER HARVESTING PRACTICES. BOND ACT. INITIATIVE STATUTE • Authorizes $300,000,000 general obligation bond issue to fund, subject to Legislature approval, program for loans, grants to public entities, others for forest and park restoration, urban forestry projects, reforestation of private timberlands under 5,000 acres. •I Limits timber cutting practices, requires state-approved timber and wildlife management plans, on certain private timberlands exceeding 5,000 acres. • Mandates timberland, wildlife, global warming studies. • Authorizes state acquisition of designated timberlands, suspends state's eminent domain power.for 10-year period over other timberlands. • Urges Congress ban foreign timber exports. • Provides between competing timber initiative(s) this measure overrides other(s). Summary of Legislative Analyst's Estimate of Net State and Local Government Fiscal Impact: • If all authorized bonds are sold at 7.5 percent interest and paid over the typical 20-year period, state General Fund will incur about $535 million in costs to pay off bond principal ($300 million) and interest ($235 million). • Estimated average annual costs of bond principal and interest is $22 million. • Annual costs of approximately $3.2 million, funded through sales of state-owned timber, to administer grants program. Initial, increased annual state costs of over $1 million to review timber management plans, which could over time be more than offset by savings resulting from reduced periodic state regulatory reviews. • One-time state costs of about $1.1 million for climatological studies, fully offset by revenues from new regulatory fees. Unknown effect on revenues from other state taxes. Analysis by the Legislative Analyst Background The CDFFP has 25 days to review the plan and to California contains about 19 million acres of forestland consider information provided by other agencies and the that can support logging operations. Of this total: public. • Two million acres are in parks, wilderness areas, or Cutting Methods. Loggers are allowed to use other areas where logging is prohibited. different methods to harvest timber. Among others, • Nine million acres are owned by the federal these methods include clearcutting, which involves government where logging is regulated by the cutting all the trees on a site at one time, and the United States Forest Service. selection method, which involves periodically cutting • Eight million acres are owned by private individuals selected trees on a site. Regardless of which method is or by the state. Logging activities on these used, the timberland owner must ensure that a specified timberlands are regulated by the California minimum number of trees are growing on the land Department of Forestry and Fire Protection within five years after the logging operations. (CDFFP), according to rules adopted by the Board Forest Improvement Program. In addition to of Forestry (BOF). The regulations cover several regulating logging, the CDFFP also provides matching aspects of logging operations. grants. to nonindustrial timberland owners (owners of Harvesting Plan Review. Logging on nonfederal less than 5,000 acres of timberland) to help'improve their lands is prohibited unless it complies with' a timber -timber production. Currently, the CDFFP spends about harvesting plan (THP) prepared. by a registered $3 million annually for this program. professional forester and approved by the Director of the proposal CDFFP. The THP must provide.various information, including the amount of timber to be cut, the cutting In summary, this measure: method, erosion control measures, and special provisions • Revises current restrictions on logging operations on to protect unique areas or wildlife that exist within the nonfederal lands. harvest area. The THP is valid for three years, and a • Requires the state to conduct studies on separate THP must be approved for each specific piece "greenhouse gases" and establishes a new fee to pay of property.that the timberland owner intends to log. for these studies. 60 G90 • Authorizes the sale of $300 million in general The state is obligated to pay the principal and interest obligation bonds to pay for a grant program to public, costs on general obligation bonds. General Fund and private entities for forest improvements. revenues would be used to pay these costs. These • Places new restrictions on state acquisitions of revenues come primarily from the state personal income private lands. and corporate taxes and the state sales tax. • Contains language stating how conflicts between it Restrictions on State Acquisitions of Private and two other measures on this ballot are to be Lands. This measure also restricts for 10 years the resolved. to s te's over to acquire, without the agreement of the P q g Restrictions on Logging. This measure generally timberland owner, privately owned timberlands in the prohibits, beginning January 1, 1994, industrial redwood region of northern California. timberland owners (owners of more than 5,000 acres of Conflicts With Other Measures on This Ballot. This timberland) from logging their lands unless the measure contains language that states how conflicts harvesting operations comply with a "Long-term between this measure and other measures on this ballot Industrial Timber Management Plan" (TMP) approved are to be resolved. Specifically, the measure provides by the CDFFP. The TMP must include,among other that if both it and either Proposition 130 (the Forest and things, (1) a wildlife management plan prepared by a Wildlife Protection and Bond Act of 1990) or Proposition wildlife biologist who is certified by a professional society 128 (the Environmental Protection Act of 1990) are and (2) an analysis of the impacts reasonably expected to passed by the voters and this measure receives more result from implementing the plan. Unlike a THP votes than the other measures, then it would invalidate required under current law, which is valid for three (1) all the provisions of Proposition 130 and (2) those years and which covers only one specific piece of provisions in Proposition 128 pertaining to the acquisition property, the TMP required by this measure would be of old-growth redwood forests. The legal effect of this valid for an unlimited time period and could cover all of language is uncertain. This is because the State the timberland owner's property. Constitution provides that only the conflicting provisions In addition, this measure (1) prohibits clearcutting in of the measure that receives the greater vote prevails. privately owned old-growth forests and (2) places certain restrictions on clearcutting in other Fiscal Effect privately-owned forests. Under the measure, however, General Obligation Bonds. For these types of bonds, harvesters would not be precluded from using methods the state typically would make principal and interest currently approved by the BOF in which all trees on a payments from the state's General Fund over a period of site could be harvested over a three-year period. The about 20 years. If all of the bonds authorized by this measure also prohibits clearcutting in areas within 100 measure are sold at an interest rate of 7.5 percent, the feet of state highways, parks, and publicly owned cost would be about $535 million to pay off the principal recreational areas. Finally, the measure requires the ($300 million) and interest ($235 million). The average BOF, by 1996, to assess various potential impacts of payment would be about $22 million per vear. restricting clearcutting. Administrative Costs and Fee Revenue. In the short "Greenhouse Gas"Studies and One-time Fee. This run, the CDFFP would incur increased costs of over $1 measure requires the state to contract for studies on (1) million annually to review TMPs submitted by industrial the effect of forests in California on greenhouse gases timberland owners. These costs would be paid from the (air pollutants that may contribute to changes in General Fund. In the long-run,however, these additional climate), (2) the relationship of timber growing and costs could be more than offset by savings resulting from harvesting in California to greenhouse gases, and (3) eliminating the need to periodically review harvesting alternative management programs for forestland that plans. The current cost of reviewing these plans is about will minimize the production of greenhouse gases. The $5 million annually. measure also imposes, from November 7, 1990 through The CDFFP would incur annual special fund costs of December 31, 1991, a $3 per acre fee for all acreage about $3.2 million to administer the forest improvement covered by THPs submitted during that period. Revenue grant programs. fromr h i would would be used a for the studies on The measure also ou d result in one-time costs of this fee ou d ed to s pay greenhouse gases. about $1.1 million for studies on the effect of forests on Forest Improvement Bond Programs. The bond greenhouse gases and climate change. These costs would money from this measure would be used for (1) loans be paid from the Timberland Wildlife Management and grants to nonindustrial timberland owners to help Fund, which the measure creates, and would be offset them improve timber production on their lands ($120 fully by revenue from the new fee on timber harvest million), and (2) a new program of grants to public plans. agencies and nonprofit organizations for urban and rural Potential Effect on Revenues. This measure could tree planting and forest restoration projects ($180 increase or decrease the revenue that the state receives million). The CDFFP would administer these grant from various taxes, depending on the effect of the programs. measure on the net value of harvested timber. For text of Proposition 138 see page 130 C90 61 138 Forestry Programs. Timber Harvesting Practices. Bond Act. Initiative Statute ti v Argument n Favor of Proposition 138 Most people agree on one issue: California's remaining old growth Proposition 138 is supported by licensed professional foresters, forests must be protected for future generations. wildlife biologists and other experts in the forestry field. Two ballot propositions offer dramatically different approaches to The other ballot measure addressing the protection of California that end. Proposition 138 is the REASONABLE choice. It strikes an forests is Proposition 130. It represents a far more radical approach. important balance between environmental, human and economic Persons associated with the radical environmental group Earth First!, concerns. Proposition 138 is also more COMPREHENSIVE in scope, best known for driving spikes into trees,vandalizing logging equipment providing for WILDLIFE PROTECTION and the PLANTING OF and other activities that harass timber workers and their families, TREES IN URBAN AREAS. support Proposition 130. Titled "The Global Warming and Clear Cutting Reduction, Wildlife Proposition 130 would: Protection & f 199D Proposition Act of 138 will: * Cut back timber harvesting by an unprecedented 70%! BAN CLEARCUTTING IN OLD GROWTH REDWOOD FORESTS • Put more than 100,000 Californians out of work. AND LIMIT CLEARCUTTING ELSEWHERE • Significantly increase consumer prices for new homes,timber and • Ban clearcutting in old growth redwood and other old growth paper.products. forests. • Set up a costly bureaucracy and politicize the timber approval • Require timber harvesters to reduce clearcutting in all other process. forests by 50% over the next five years. • Give financial incentives for special interest groups to file lawsuits ENACT A MASSIVE TREE PLANTING PROGRAM against the government,with taxpayers footing the bill. TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING • Cost taxpayers billions,according to the independent Legislative • Provide for a$300 million bond to plant millions of trees in cities Analyst. and other areas throughout California. A tree planting program Protecting our redwood and other forests is a goal for which all such as this is vitally important to help reduce global warming. Californians must strive. Only one measure on the November ballot, ENACT STRICT FOREST MANAGEMENT Proposition 138,offers a reasonable plan to meet this goal. REGULATIONS AND PROTECT WILDLIFE In addition, Proposition 138 will'enact a massive tree planting program,require strict forest management regulations,protect wildlife • Require timber companies to prepare long-term management and keep timber harvest decisions away from the Sacramento political plans that wouid protect wildlife and ENSURE MORE TREES arena. ARE PLANTED THAN CUT. California timber harvest laws are VOTE YES on PROPOSITION 138 and NO on PROPOSITION 130. already the strictest in the country. Proposition 138 makes then: -even tougher. GERALD L.PARTAIN KEEP TIMBER HARVEST DECISIONS Former Director, California Department of Forestry and AWAY FROM SACRAMENTO POLITICIANS Fire Protection • Keep harvesting practices in the hands of licensed professional PHILLIP G.LOWELL foresters and wildlife biologists and away from Sacramento Executive Director,Redwood Region Conservation Council politicians and bureaucrats. SCOTT WALL REQUEST CONGRESS TO BAN THE EXPORT OF LOGS President, California Licensed Foresters Association e Proposition 138 formally requests Congress to ban the export of logs to keep California jobs in California. Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 138 The big timber companies want you to believe that their Proposition Panicked,the big timber companies scrambled to create Proposition 138 protects the environment. 138 to defeat Proposition 130 and step up their destruction of our Close examination of Proposition 138 reveals the big timber forests. companies are still up to their old tricks. For example; while claiming to support urban tree planting, Proposition 138 is JUST A SMOKESCREEN to cover their continued proposition 138 actually GIVES $120 MILLION OF YOUR TAX devastation of our mountainsides, waterways and wildlife—while DOLLARS TO PRIVATE FOREST LAND OWNERS! MAKING YOU PAY FOR IT. They say they would toughen timber harvest laws. But Proposition The big timber companies have waged A SHAMEFUL CAMPAIGN. 138 actually EXEMPTS.THE BIG TIMBER COMPANIES from They apparently think you aren't smart enough to see through their important safeguards in existing environmental laws! scam.Prove them wrong. They say they would expand State Parks. But Proposition 138 VOTE NO on PROPOSITION 138. provides NOT ONE PENNY TO HELP OUR PARKS!! They say they offer a reasonable choice.But CONSERVATION•AND GAIL LUCAS ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS ARE UNANIMOUSLY OPPOSED to State Forest Practices Task Force Chair Sierra Club Proposition 138 because it destroys the most magnificent symbols of our AY D.HAIR natural heritage. J Simply,the big timber companies went too far. President,National Wildlife Federation They opposed every effort in the Legislature to stow the RAPID JOHN H.ADAMS DESTRUCTION OF OUR FORESTS.The public finally got fed up and Executive Director,Natural Resources Defense Council placed on the ballot Proposition 130,designed by forestry experts and environmental groups to protect our forests. 62 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. G90 Forestry Programs. Timber Harvesting Practices. Bond Act. 1 Q Initiative Statute DO �O Argument Against Proposition 138 The big timber companies,who have been cutting down our forests • Proposition 138 will cause MASSIVE JOB LOSSES and a future in what one newspaper called"A LOGGING FRENZY,"are the same TIMBER FAMINE by allowing the timber companies to cut down companies who wrote and PAID FOR THIS deceptive initiative. our forests faster than they grow. These are the same timber companies who clearcut ancient redwood • Proposition 138 TAKES JOBS FROM CALIFORNIANS by allowing forest groves,leaving not a single tree standing. continued export of logs to foreign countries. These same companies then burn the remaining stumps,leaving a ♦ Proposition 138 INCREASES THE CHANCE OF GLOBAL charred black desert devoid of all plants and wildlife. Landslides and WARMING by allowing the continued destruction of our forests. massive erosion result. Streams and rivers are choked with mud, ♦ Proposition 138 ABOLISHES THE FOREST REFORMS and destroying salmon and trout.Wildlife disappears. protections of Prop..130,placed on the ballot by environmentalists California's once BEAUTIFUL MOUNTAINS BECOME to save our forests. MOONSCAPES. Who's responsible? GIANT, GREEDY TIMBER COMPANIES. Like Vote NO on Prop. 138. IT'S A HOAX—created and paid for by the the company controlled by the corporate raider who bought it with same people who are destroying our forests. junk bonds. It was created for one reason: to stop the forestry protection and Now he has tripled the cutting of the largest and oldest living trees reforms of Prop. 130. on earth just to pay off the junk bond debt and to collect a salary and To get their way,the timber companies will say anything and spend bonus of$8 million! a lot of money to get your vote. He and the timber industry want you to believe that Prop. 138 will protect the forests. We cannot afford to lose our ancient redwood forests. But Prop. 138 is OPPOSED BY FORESTRY EXPERTS,professionals DON'T BE FOOLED.This timber industry measure is like asking in forest management,AND MORE THAN 100 ENVIRONMENTAL the fox to guard the henhouse! GROUPS including the Sierra Club, Planning and Conservation PROTECT CALIFORNIA'S FUTURE. League, Audubon Society Chapters, and the California League of Please VOTE NO on Prop. 138. Conservation Voters. READ THE SMALL PRINT written by timber company attorneys.It GEORGE FRAMPTON will make you vote NO on Prop. 138 because: President, Wilderness Society • Proposition 138 allows clearcutting by big timber companies. • Proposition 138 ALLOWS TIMBER COMPANIES.TO CHOP MAURICE GETTY DOWN ALL BUT ONE LONELY TREE PER ACRE,AND THEN President, California State Park Rangers Association COME BACK LATER AND GET THAT ONE! PHILLIP S.BERRY • Proposition 138 would subsidize timberland owners with public Former Vice Chair, California Board of Forestry funds. Rebuttal to Argument Against Proposition 138 The opponents of Proposition 138 seem to have gotten a few of their • Requests Congress to PROHIBIT the EXPORTS of LOGS from facts WRONG. state timberlands to KEEP CALIFORNIA JOBS IN CALIFORNIA. But don't take our word for it,CHECK FOR YOURSELF! • EXPANDS OUR STATE REDWOOD PARKS. READ THE OFFICIAL ANALYSIS of Proposition 138 prepared by Proposition 138 is SUPPORTED BY FORESTRY EXPERTS, the state's independent,non-partisan Legislative Analyst.It's located in including registered professional foresters and wildlife biologists. your voter pamphlet along with the initiative. It is OPPOSED BY PERSONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE Here's what you'll find: RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP EARTH FIRST! that want to • Proposition 138 BANS CLEARCUTTING in OLD GROWTH dismantle,rather than improve time-tested forestry laws. REDWOOD and OTHER OLD GROWTH FORESTS. READ THE INITIATIVE!It's all there in black and white. • Authorizes bonds to the Department of Forestry and Fire Then YOU decide. Protection to PLANT TREES IN CITIES TO HELP REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING. VOTE YES ON PROP 138! • Prohibits timber companies from harvesting lands unless a SUE GRANGER-DICKSON thorough analysis has been undertaken by a CERTIFIED Wildlife Biologist WILDLIFE BIOLOGIST identifying NATURAL HABITATS and ENDANGERED SPECIES that must be PROTECTED. G90 Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency. 63 PROPOSITION FORESTRY PROGRAMS AND'TIMB� ER , • HARVESTING BOND AND INITIATIVE- THE SITUATION projects and$180 million in grants to pub- See THE SITUATION,Proposition 130. lic agencies and nonprofit organizations for THEPROPOSAL urban and rural tree planting and forest Proposition 138,placed on the ballot by restoration projects? , - initiative,would authorize a$300 million Should the state revise its limits on tim- bond issue for: ber cutting by prohibiting clearcutting in •Loans and grants to small timberland privately owned old-growth forests, and owners to improve their timber production reducing clearcutting in other privately ($120 million); owned forests,and by instituting long-term •Grants forurban and rural tree planting timber management plans? and forest restoration projects ($180 mil- SUPPORTERS SAY lion). 1.This measure offers an important bal- Proposition 138 would revise current re- ance between environmental,human,and strictions on logging 'operations on economic concerns, non federal lands by prohibitingclearcutting 2.Clearcutting will be banned in old- in privately owned old-growth forests,and growth forests and reduced in all other reducing clearcutting by 50 percent over forests. the next five years in otherprivately owned :3.Millions of trees will be planted in forests. urban areas and other areas`to help reduce This measure requires state approved global warming. timber and wildlife management plans on, 4.Strict long-term forest management private timberlands exceeding 5,000 acres. and wildlife plans will protect the environ- Unlike the current plans which are,valid .ment. for only three years and for a specific piece OPPONENTS SAY of property,these plans would be valid for measure will still allow Th is an unlimited time period and could be ap- clearcutting 1,1. This by big timber companies. plied to all of the timberland owner's property. 2•Timberland owners will be subsidized In addition,Proposition 138 would man- with public funds. date timberland,wildlife,and global warm- 3•The continued destruction of forests ing studies;restrict fora ten-yearperiod the will increase the possibility of global state's power to acquire privately owned warming, timberland without the agreement of the 4.The timbermanagement plans required owner,and urge Congress to ban the export by this measure would be valid for an un- of new logs. -. limited time period and would not be sub- ject to future public review. . THE QUESTION Should the state authorize$300 mill"on in bonds:$120 million for loans and is' to small timberland owners for forest re- source improvement and reforestation of ' � ���' {$�pry :,•>��•��: :=> ��wY ����€%�::=Wt4 Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-123 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 17 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager SUBJECT: Special Districts Forum in 1991 Recommended Action: Extend an invitation to the 1991 Special Districts Forum participants to a program at the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in conjunction with the forum. Discussion: In 1984 the East Bay Regional Park District and our District co-hosted the Special Districts Forum. We have had numerous compliments about the program (and good time ! ) our District offered the day participants came to this side of the bay. The East Bay Regional Park District is hosting the forum from April 1 to 4 , 1991 (please see attached brochure) , and although we will not be official co-hosts we have an opportunity to invite the participants to our facilities before or after. I would like to coordinate our invitation with the next mailing the East Bay District sends out for the forum. Therefore, your approval of the invitation is needed. Details can be worked out later, but I see only one or perhaps two days of activities here, primarily based on a field trip (s) to District preserves . Net out-of-pocket costs to the District can be kept minimal , although a balance will have to be struck between a low fee to encourage participation and a higher one to cover out- of-pocket costs completely. l 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 •Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 - FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shellev i Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-115 (Meeting 90-25 October 24, 1990) REPORT October 10, 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; S. Marioni-Cochran, Associate Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Cothran et al . Property Addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. Recommended Actions: 1 . Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Cothran et al . property addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve. 2. Indicate your intention to withhold the property from dedication at this time. Discussion: At your May 23, 1990 meeting, you approved the acquisition of the 358-acre Cothran et al. property addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (see report R-90-69 dated May 14, 1990) . You also tentatively adopted the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the addition, including naming the property as an addition to the Cathedral Oaks Area of Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve and indicated your intention to withhold the property from dedication as public open space at this time. In accordance with your adopted Land Acquisition Notification Procedures, final adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan was deferred until after close of escrow to allow further time for public comment. Escrow on the property closed on September 28 , 1990. You will recall that there were two previous attempts by the District to acquire this property, but escrow failed to close because of title complications. All of those issues have now been resolved and the District holds marketable fee simple absolute title to the property. Staff has received no further public comment. Staff will now make arrangements for removal of all remaining debris from the property, including building remnants. 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 ® FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-116 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 10, 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager SUBJECT: Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Harmon Property Addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Recommended Actions: 1. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Harmon property addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve, including the naming, as contained in report R-90-89. 2. Indicate your intention to dedicate the property as public open space. Discussion: At your September 12 , 1990 meeting, you approved the acquisition of 43-acre Harmon property addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve (see report R-90-84 dated August 30, 1990) . You also tentatively adopted the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the addition, including naming the property as an addition to La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve and indicated your intention to dedicate the property as public open space. In accordance with your adopted Land Acquisition Notification Procedures, final adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan was deferred until after close of escrow to allow further time for public comment. Escrow on the property closed on October 5, 1990. The District Land Acquisition Manager and Land Manager met with a representative of the Djerassi Foundation, whose property lies to the south and west of the former Harmon property. Items discussed included public use of the area, access easements to the Djerassi property over District property, boundary line clarification and the Djerassi gate, also located on District property. These issues are expected to be resolved to mutual satisfaction over the next few months . In addition a letter was received by your President from the adjacent neighbor to the northwest. No response was necessary, as they were in attendance at the Board meeting at the time of acquisition and staff has had subsequent conversations with them about future neighborhood meetings . Staff has received no further public comment. 2M San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 ° Phone: (415) 949-5500 • FAX: (415) 949-5679 Genera!Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy;Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-117 (Meeting 90-25 October 24, 1990) REPORT October 10 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager RESPONSIBILITY AND PREPARATION: D. Hansen, Land Manager; M. Gundert, Open Space Planner SUBJECT: Final Adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Peninsula Open Space Trust Property Addition to Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve Recommended Actions: 1 . Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the Peninsula Open Space Trust property addition to the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve, including the naming, as contained in report R-90-100. 2. Indicate your intention to withhold the two easternmost parcels from dedication as public open space, and indicate your intention to dedicate the remaining eleven parcels as public open space. Discussion: At your September 12 , 1990 meeting, you accepted the gift of the thirteen parcel, POST property addition to the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve (see report R-90-100, dated September 4, 1990) . You also tentatively adopted the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the addition, including naming the property as an addition to the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. In accordance with your adopted Land Acquisition Notification Procedures , final adoption of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan was deferred until after close of the transaction to allow further time for public comment. The transaction on the property closed on September 21 , 1990 . Staff has received no further public comment. 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 . FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teen Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT R-90-114 (Meeting 90-25 October 24 , 1990) REPORT October 16 , 1990 TO: Board of Directors FROM: M. Foster, Controller SUBJECT: Establishment of Separate Payroll Checking Account Recommended Actions : (1) Adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Amending Rules of Procedure (2) Adopt the attached Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Authorizing Signing of Payroll Checks for Payroll Checking Account (First Interstate Bank - Los Altos) Discussion: The District ' s auditors , Deloitte and Touche , have recommended the District 1) utilize a check signing machine and 2) open a separate imprest bank account to improve the efficiency of our in-house payroll system. After follow-up discussions with Deloitte and Touche, staff has concluded that a check signing machine is not practical for an operation the size of the District. Rather, for payroll checks, only one staff signature , rather than two, would be required. The Administrative Services Manager (referred to as District Clerk in the attached resolution) would be the designated payroll check signer. In her absence, the General Manager, Land Acquisition Manager, or Land Manager could sign. A separate imprest bank account for payroll should make it much easier to control both payroll and regular disbursements , which are currently overwhelmed by the volume of routine payroll checks . In the near future, I will also be proposing some changes to our check signing procedures for regular disbursements . 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 - Phone: (415) 949-5500 • FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AMENDING RULES OF PROCEDURE Section 2 . 40 of the Rules of Procedure of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is hereby amended to read as follows : Section 2 . 40 Financial Instrument Signatories OVon-Pavroll) (a) The authorized signatories to checks , warrants , withdrawal applications and Santa Clara County claim forms of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in amounts less than $75 , 000 shall be those of any two of the following eight officers : M the President , (ii) the Vice President , (iii) the Treasurer, (iv) the Secretary of the Board, (v) the General Manager, (vi) the Land Acquisition Manager, (vii) the Land Manager, and (viii) the District Clerk. The authorized signatories to checks , warrants , withdrawal applications and Santa Clara County claim forms of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District in amounts of $75, 000 or greater shall be the following officers : M one signature of : the Treasurer, or in his/her stead, the President , or in his/her stead the Vice President , or in his/her stead the Secretary of the Board and (ii) one signature of : the General Manager , or in his/her stead, the Land Acquisition Manager , or in his/her stead, the Land Manager or in his/her stead, the District Clerk. Financial Instrument Signatories (Pa vroll) The authorized signatories to payroll checks of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District shall be any one of the following: (I) the General Manager, (ii) the Land Acquisition Manager, (Ili) the Land Manager, and (iv) the District Clerk. X hrm0 of OeporanOn 5,gna,u+e s+gna,uraa One �� Cefo R<t0rv00 AGCOVnI Number Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District -- Payroll X k��brdancejIwitit PF- Account OLtLLtIlNL9n- FResol ufrti od-90- C0RP9RriiE RESOLUTION X _ $,gna.ure "RESOLVED:The President Vice President,Secretary,Assistant Secretary or Treasurer of this Corporation is authorized to enter into deposit account,c ement and service X agreement(s)with any First Interstate Bank(s)on behalf of this��,and to designate - s,gnawre Irpp��LIm��e��11��lime who may sign checks and otherwise give instructions regarding this Pdyr01 1 6�•tfe'r5Xr6at's funds and account(s).FURTHER RESOLVEO:This authorization is in addition X to any other authorizations in effect and shall remain in force until the Bank(s)receive written Atroonl To.Iwease r—h -- -- — notice of its revocation at the offices where the accounts are maintained or at any other address specified by the Bank(s)." CERTIFICATION .- I certify that: p1S+r,Cf-,CJ.q„rL 1'asfYi C� _ _ • I am the of the Gerperat a named above; T,ft - sags nca The tot pm r QQlulion is a complete and accurate copy of a resolution duly adoptedby lhe�Ks Board of Directors; F—IPayroll one PayF2l 1. • The resolution is now in full force and has not been revoked or changed in any way;and a«o.m uue tPlaasr Pr nn • The signatures of the persons signing on the reverse side and below are the genuine - i and authorized signatures of those persons. First!I also certify under penalty of perjury thal: •6{y;[X' CORPORATE Cx the number shown on this form is the s correct taxpayer identification Interstafe number l s"PcZ lo, -Qr7(lk SIGNATURE CARD ❑ to the best of my knowledge and belief.the ipwtafroni aforeign corporation exempt aunwdlzco SIGNERS - coven Trve No srga ReR. fro k th in a eaddressoftheprincipal office NamelrnlelPgasePumorry>o.t LAND MG o-�+lure S�ai AZ38}Pi$ �iPi1�`p2"„p3 $__------ ----- cprporaLs<elMountain View, CA4040 T L. Craig Britton X Payroll ) IOp,anaq — 19_ Drners Lae05a No stow rD -- Da,e First 1 tic r am<,T,111IPi0a5eP—01Typet LAND MANAGER $'g^'I°+ RInterstate CORPORATE 2 David Hansen X Rank SIGNATURE CARD ACCEPTANCE BY @6RPARkfifeND(ST'y.LcT 2 B signing below,you certify and a 0 t a 13--Lmanse No Secona D AUTHORIZED SIGNERS e Y 9 9 Y Y 4r,Pti e u,martrlla tPiea:e Pnm r+type} t. You received and agree that the�e account(s)will be governed by First � GENERAL MANA Interstate's schedule of account fees and rates,the"Rules Governing First - T,I IN—P ,or Type) srgnm�r< H. GrenCh Interi1 a nn state Deposit Accounts"and the rules governing analyzed accounts(it 3 X on.ere Lweme r+o. Svc—to applicable); 2. The number of signatures required on checks and other written instructions is set D+.era L,Gans.No <pno+d forth one WT,,I.Jr`-ePum or Type) ,gnaw.« ,.. atiochaGCR�:e o 'q -_;¢rcC 2 " DISTRICT CLER 9. The persons named on the reverse as authonzed signers are authorized to sign a Jean H. F i ddeS X checks and otherwise give instructions on behalf of the Geapeaatwu regarding its or,vers LaOnse No secona�o accounts and services. DicNl Type of At<o ata cone _ rD o naa oepo: a,oa,e elo:eo BY _. Prezl,dent.r-BDarH Of Directors ChacY nq vn I} 3 NamOrtnle(Please Prrnl oe iy;,ef sg vna+ure 19._— --}— Dnve.a Lweme No coral ID BY General Manager"' $+gnalura rrlle _�I� Savngs BANK USE ONLY — ___ Trw rI AGGovm AGti crae vmDnr om<openea oat o•Poan D.I.g elosea T,ma __... rYOa of Bvs�nesa Te,epnore Na 0eposn Cnece+nq Cprporala ACo.esa C+Iy S.a,e Z,p Cope Imams, $Ial0men1 Matl.nq A—— Cny $ta,e 2p Cmfe rSpe<ral Ins,+O<nons/CU RanewaVO,ner $av+ngf Gf.fOrmerry wrrh Is—Name an0 Lcea,wn) CC,No Time Depose Inlro0uc0a 8Y IRC NO T—,.r IGenllrlc_ton No.III Bny) gifKei a Approval BOC Cooe Dade Ca+tl ReceiveG Sletemenis ten '— nad (SPeciai lns,ru ns/Cn Renawai+peer —�IHOIo I I 'Open MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager DATE: October 24 , 1990 SUBJECT: F. Y. I . I I I 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 ®Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 - FAX: (415) 949-5679 Genera!Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley I Open Space ............................—` MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT October 10 , 1990 Honorable Rebecca Morgan 830 Menlo Ave. Suite 100 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Dear Becky: We very greatly appreciate the effort you made to get a state appropriation to help complete the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve Interpretive Center. I know that the Governor ' s elimination of this item from SB 2621 was as much a disappointment to you as it was to us and to Peninsula Open Space Trust . We ' re regrouping now to see what can be done with more limited funds. Onward and upward! Best Regards , Herbert Grench General Manager HG:dmz cc: MROSD Board of Directors Ralph Heim Audrey Rust 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 • Mountain View, California 94040 • Phone: (415) 949-5500 • FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley Y��`\ /F TyF TAKE q PRIDE IN A United States Department of the Interior AMERICA�� 0 =. � NATIONAL PARK SERVICE P.Q.BOX 37127 IN REPLY REFER TO: WASHINGTON, D.C. 20013-7127 00T 1 0 100,K) L6019 {782) I Herb Grench, General Manager Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Herb: From the reports of the six of my staff who attended, I understand that the recent International Open Space Conference in Palo Alto you hosted was a resounding success. It sounds as if you achieved the range of vision and technical expertise, and the balance of hard work and fun, that we all had hoped. We are pleased that the National Park Service was able to serve as one of the primary Sponsors for the event and are certainly pleased with the results. We hope it will indeed be a springboard for renewed commitment and activism for the protection of Open Space in the 90 's. I especially wanted to thank Judy Kunofsky for her excellent work in pulling the program together. With a somewhat late start she nonetheless assembled an outstanding array of speakers and presenters with the national and even international perspective we had hoped. In addition, the performance of the staff of the Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District was reportedly superb. From field i staff and trail maintainers to the logistical, administrative, and organizing crew, your staff apparently outdid themselves in putting on a truly fine conference. They have given well- deserved national prominence to the Open Space District. Please extend our admiration to each and every one of them. We look forward to continuing work with the Open Space District in coming years and, again, congratulations. Sincerely, William T. Spi )z %sChief Recreation Res Assistance Division cc: Ray Murray Judy Kunofsky Larry Orman Debbie Richards STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN,Governor DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION P.O. BOX 942896 SACRAMENTO 94296-0001 (916) 445-2358 OCTuF Mr. Herb Grench, General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Building C Mountain View, CA 4040 Dear Mr.*Gc I wish to 6 A�atulate you, Nonette Hanko, President of the Board of Directors, members of the Board, your staff and volunteers for the successful orchestration of the 1990 International Open Space Conference. The theme, "Open Space in the 1990s: The Critical Decade", was an important message emphasized in the well-planned workshops. The international participants offered us different perspectives on open space issues throughout the world and focused on the necessity for world-wide efforts to preserve open space during this critical decade. All of us left the Conference with a sense of vision and with knowledge of the goals and tools with which we should be working to create a better quality of life for all citizens, everywhere. Members of my staff who participated in the Conference join me in thanking you for your efforts and your success in bringing this important conference to California. Sincerely, e o a Director Envirt ental Resource Center San Jose State University One q Washington Square g San Jose, CA 95 1 92-01 1 6 October 10, 1990 Herbert Grench, General Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA 94040 Dear Mr Grench: I extend my most humble thanks and appreciation for your j assistance in facilitating my attendance at the Open Space Conference last month through the scholarship awarded me by the San Francisco Foundation. I have enclosed a copy of the letter you asked for as well as my final evaluations from the Conference; my apologies for the tardiness in returning them. The Conference sparked a powerful wave of creativity and vision inside me which has led to the birth of many new projects for our Center. I also have begun speaking to college students and various environmental groups to mobilize volunteers for the Santa Clara County Open Space campaign. The exposure I received to the political arena of Open Space acquisition and management provided a fresh look at the process of Open Space protection; I learned how the game is played and how I can be a more effective player; and, the folks I met have already proven to be rich resources for our work in the E.R.C.. I was very enlightened by the whole program, and especially the inspiring words of Wangari Maathai and James Coliinson. I was disappointed I didn't get more time to speak with Mr. Collinson; the Green Plan he spoke of was particularly intriguing and relates directly to my studies in Geophysiology and sustainable futures at San Jose State. If you could help me g PP very et in touch with him, I would appreciate it ve much. Once again, thank you for your time and efforts, Mr. Grench, and I look forward to fighting for Open Space with you in the future. Sincerely, Al"k S4ephtnShunk, Director Environmental Resource Center 633 Los Palos Drive Lafayette, CA . 94549 September 30, 1990 1,, s . Nonette lianko President , Board of Directors Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District jOi San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, CA. 94040 Dear Nonette: My hat is off to you, members of your Board of Directors, Herb Grench, and members of your staff for a superbly handled International Open Space Conference. The arrangements were not only excellent but all members of your Board and staff were courteous, all-the-ball all the time , and the program was as good as any I have attended in a long time. You deserve all of the accolades possible for such a fine job. As you know, I have planned many a conference and program myself over the years and I know how much hard work and dedication must go into such an event . I heard many others who attended the Conference speak very highly of the way in which you handled this event . Please extend my thanks and congratulations to members of your Board and staff. This was a job done extraordinarily well! Cordially, II Richard C. Trudeau i Open Space MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT TO: Board of Directors FROM: H. Grench, General Manager DATE: October 24, 1990 SUBJECT: F. Y. I . I I I 201 San Antonio Circle, Suite C-135 Mountain View, California 94040 . Phone: (415) 949-5500 FAX: (415) 949-5679 General Manager:Herbert Grench Board of Directors:Richard Bishop,Betsy Crowder,Katherine Duffy,Nonette Hanko,Teena Henshaw,Robert McKibbin,Edward Shelley f }� ±= BAY AREA RIDGE TRAIL. COUNCIL 116 NEw MONTOONIERY, SUITE 640 SAN FRANCISCO.CA 94105 (41 5)543-4291 To: All interested agency staff, citizens and land trust staff From: Barbara Rice, Director, Bay Area Ridge Trail Council BAY AREA RIDGE TRAIL COUNCIL ANNOUNCES SEMINARS ON RECREATIONAL USE STATUTE The Bay Area Ridge Trail Council is sponsoring a series of 3 evening round table discussions of the Recreational Use Statute, Civil Code section 846. The recreational use statute was enacted in 1963 in response to a growing concern among private landowners about public recreational use of private lands. The law was developed to immunize landowners from liability for injuries sustained by people who enter private land for recreational purposes. Certain exceptions to the law exist. To familiarize agencies and landowners with the current law we developed a publication entitled: "California's Recreational Use Statute and Landowner Liability"(enclosed for those who have not yet seen it). David Webster an attorney with Pettit& Martin, author of the pamphlet, will be available at each of the three evening seminars to review the material and to answer questions that you may have concerning the law as it stands today. We will also briefly discuss a proposed amendment to the law that if passed would allow landowners an opportunity to recover the cost of defense if proven innocent under the recreational use statute. We are presenting these seminars free of charge. Refreshments will be served. Please pass the word to fellow agency and land trust staff and to trail supporters interested in this subject. The sessions are as follows: (You're invited to attend one of the following. Each session covers the same subject matter.) _�-- _"'a Thursday,.November 1st, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Board Room 210 San Antonio Circle, Mountain View Parking is available at MROSD Wednesday, November 7th,7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. Trust For Public Land 116 New Montgomery, 4th Floor, San Francisco Parking is available on most city streets after 6:00 p.m. over Thursday, November 15, 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. City of Napa Chamber of Commerce 1556 lst Street, Napa (cross streets are School and Seminary. It is located next to Herritts Flower Shop.) Park in back, and enter through back way. If you plan on attending, please let us know so that we may plan accordingly. Thanks. ** Please note that these sessions are being offered as training sessions for agency and land trust staff and other appropriate individuals who may be directly involved in working with landowners to develop support for j the Bay Area Ridge Trail. i I I THE HOW AND WHY OF OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION Leaaue of California Cities 1990 Annual Conference Anaheim, Tuesday, October 23, 3 : 30 - 4: 15 P.M. I . Introduction (Herb Grench) - II. Integrating Open Space Needs With Community and Reqional Planning (Larry Orman) A. What ' s happening on the California landscape? B. How do we respond in terms of values and goals? C . Promising strategies to respond III . Acquiring and Managing Open Space (Herb Grench) A. Community needs met regionally B. Alternative governmental structures to meet needs C. Acquisition techniques D. Managing open space IV. The Fairfield-Solana County Experience (Neil Havlik) Origins of a local open space program Expansion to a community-wide and regional program A permanent "shoreline" V. Summary (Herb Grench) VI . Comments , Q & A P E O P L E F O R O P E N S P A C E OUTLINE FOR COMMENTS OF LARRY ORMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT CALIFORNIA LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE October 23 , 1990 1, ISSUE: How do we integrate open space protection with growth management and regional planning? 2. CONTEXT: a. The re-emergence of growth management in California and the nation b. Increasingly, growth management is a regional concept: areas which have metropolitan interdependence require regional responses. c. The opportunity of using open spare as an element in large scale growth management and regional planning, How a vision of the entire landscape in a metropolitan region can help break the deadlock between development and conservation needs. d. San Francisco Bay region as example: 6 million g people, 100+ cities and counties; 4 . 5 million acres of land, 3 . 8 million of which are open; development trends that would double size of urban area in 30 years; pattern of seatteration creating enormous problems, only resolvable at regional scale. 3. GOALS AND VALUES a. Why have boundaries around cities? The major functions of protected open space: 1) ecological conservation; 2) economic production; 3) health and safety; 4) community and regional identity; 4) shape growth. i MAIN OFFICE • 116 New Montgomery Suite 640, San Francisco CA 94105• (415)543-4291 SOUTH BAY OFFICE♦ 960 West Hedding Suite 220, San Jose CA 95126 ♦ (408)983-0539 The Bay Area-Keep It Green b. But these elements miss the need for an integrating vision; use of Greenbelt to package into a technical and publicly understandable concept. C. Lessons of the successful English Green Belt experience. 4. A PROMISING STRATEGY a. The urban growth boundary; state, regional, county and city strategies b. The Greenbelt itself C. Role of acquisition in complementing growth + management and landscape protection aims 5. IN THE LONG RUN. . . a. The need for commitments to permanent boundaries Attachments; -- Description of Greenbelt Alliance -- Accomplishments of Greenbelt Alliance -- Map of Threats to Bay Area Open Space -- Summary publication list 2 saw MOST FREQUENTLY REQUESTED PUBLICATIONS This is a list of our most frequently ordered publications. If you would like a complete publications list,please call the office at(415)543-4291. We appreciate your interest and welcome your membership support. Reviving the Sustainable Metropolis: Guiding Bay Area Conservation and Development intothe 21st Century...........................................................................................................$6.00 A concise and eloquent report on how to resolve the San Francisco Bay Area's growing metropolitan problems, including urban sprawl,Greenbelt destruction,and traffic congestion. Offers a short history of the region,an analysis of current land development trends and their consequences,a "recipe"of policy solutions,and a fact- based appendix detailing the experiences of other regions-in the U.S.and abroad-in shaping metropolitan growth. (32 pp,June 1989) AtRisk: The Bay Area's Greenbelt....................................................................................$6.00 This study's detailed computer mapping of plans and development proposals shows the Bay Area urban lands could double in 20-30 years. Report contains statistics and maps for each county. The data will be revised annually. (23pp,August 1989) Endangered Harvest: The Future of Bay Area Farmland— Summary........................$3.00 A summary of the original Endangered Harvest(1980), the first major report on agricultural land in a large U.S. metropolitan region. This summary version has updated information on the extent of farmland loss in the Bay Area,as well as a strategy for the permanent protection of the region's farmbelt. (24 pp,April 1985) Room Enough: Housing and Open Space in the Bay Area .........................................$9.00 The final summary of Greenbelt Alliance's Housing/Greenbelt program,Room Enough demonstrates how the Bay Area's housing needs can be met without compromising the Greenbelt. This study presents detailed alternatives to the current development pattern of low-density suburban growth.(64 pp,May 1983) Tools for the Greenbelt: A Citizen's Guide to Protecting Open Space ..................$25.00 The first in-depth citizen's guide to the full range of open space protection tools. Written in non-technical,non- legalistic style, the Guide identifies the dozens of techniques available to concerned Greenbelt activists,planners and elected officials. Includes case studies,criteria for choosing a technique,discussion of planning and regula- tory programs,and references. (140 pp,August 1985) Using Initiatives and Referenda to Protect Open Space............................................$14.00 This handbook offers an excellent set of examples for those conservation activists interested in using the ballot box to preserve open space. The focus is on the drafting of ballot measures that can be properly implemented and can withstand legal challenge. The handbook includes the relevant election laws that must be followed,and a summary of almost 20 examples of initiatives with lessons from those examples. (66 pp,March 1986) "TREASURES OF THE GREENBELT" VIDEOCASSETTES.............................................................................._$19.95 A Celebration of the Countryside in the San Francisco Bay Region Within the nine counties surrounding San Francisco Bay lies some of the most beautiful and productive land in the United States.. .nearly four million acres of parks and watersheds,farms and ranches,forests and vineyards the San Francisco Bay Area Greenbelt. "Treasures of the Greenbelt" explores this area,revealing a rich and unique regional tapestry of city and countryside. Narrated by Jerry Graham("Bay Area Backroads"),original music by Gary Remal and produced by the Independent Documentary Group. 28 MINUTES,VHS OR BETAMAX FORMAT—Discounted to$17.95 for members (Please call Greenbelt Alliance for information about rental of our 16 mm. film) ORDER FORM ON REVERSE GREENBELT ALLIANCE PUBLICATIONS ORDER FORM SOLD TO: I am ordering(Please check): Name ❑ for my personal information Organization ❑ for my organization's use Address ❑ for teaching City Zip ❑ other(please specify): Phone: Day( ) Evening( ) Greenbelt Alliance Member? Yes No PUB # TITLE QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL 0689 Reviving the Sustainable Metropolis $ 6.00 0889 At Risk $ 6.00 0485 Endangered Harvest $ 3.00 5831 Room Enough $ 9.00 0885 Tools for the Greenbelt $25.00 0386 Using Initiatives $14.00 Subtotal: $ 0861 "Treasures of the Greenbelt" $19.95 VHS Betamax Listed price includes 3rd class postage for publications,1st class for video. If you wish speedier delivery, FOR PUBLICATIONS,1st class postage: if subtotal is$6-$10,add$1.00 if subtotal is+$10- $20,add$1.50 if subtotal is over$20,add$2.40 Yes! I want to join Greenbelt Alliance. Annual Dues: $25.00 Yes! I would like to make an additional contribution to help defray production costs. Enclosed is my contribution of: Total of Order: $ All orders must be accompanied by full payment. Make checks payable to Greenbelt Alliance and send to: 116 New Montgomery,Ste. 640,San Francisco,CA 94105. Allow 3-4 weeks for delivery. Thank you for your order! AB0UT GREENBELT ALLIANCE . . . Greenbelt Alliance is the Bay Area's regionwide citizen land conservation organization. Founded in 1958,it is dedicated to protection of the region's Greenbelt and to enhancing the livability of its cities.Greenbelt Alliance is a non-profit,tax-deductible organization with over 2,000 members throughout the Bay Area and offices in San Francisco and Sap Jose. Greenbelt Alliance produces studies,reports and analyses to catalyze and assist public support and action for the Greenbelt. Protecting the Greenbelt will keep the Bay Area a special place to live. We hope you will find our materials valuable and will support our work by becoming a member orby making a special contribution. PEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE GREENBELT ALLIANCE GOALS AND PROGRAMS SUMMARY August 1989 REENBELT ALLIANCE is the Bay Area's regionwide conservation organization. Founded in 1958, it is dedicated to the protection of the region's Greenbelt and to enhancing the livability of its cities. The long term purpose of Greenbelt Alliance is to ensure that the nine county Bay Area remains a sustainable com- munity for all who live here—a community with a prosperous economy and a protected natural environment. I Greenbelt Alliance is a non-profit,tax deductible organization with over 2000 members throughout the Bay Area and offices in San Francisco and San Jose. The current mission of Greenbelt Alliance is to protect the Bay Area's Greenbelt of farmlands, parks, watersheds and other productive open space for present and future generations,in order to ensure the economic, social and environ- mental well-being of the entire metropolitan region. In 1987, we began our Greenbelt Campaign to meet the challenges facing the region's open lands. The goal of the Campaign is to transform both the public's support for Bay Area open space and the many local action efforts aimed at saving these lands into a powerful regional movement, capable of protecting the entire Greenbelt. By 1992, the Campaign will create a presumption in favor of Greenbelt protection in most land use decisions in the Bay Area. Our campaign programs include: creating a regional vision of the Greenbelt goal; establishing strong support for it among the people of the Bay Area; mobilizing citizens into a regional movement; gaining needed changes in public policies to protect the Greenbelt and to redirect development towards appropri- ate locations; and building Greenbelt Alliance into an organization with the resources and capability to successfully carry out the five year campaign. Your support is vital to our Campaign to keep the Bay Area green. To find out how you can be involved, call us. MAIN OFFICE SOUTH BAY OFFICE 116 New Montgomery Suite 640 960 West Hedding Suite 220 San Francisco,CA 94105 San Jose,CA 95126 415/543-4291 408/983-0539 P e o p l e f o r O p e n S p a c e 1987,AVING THE BAY AREA'S 3.8 MILLION ACRE Since Greenbelt Alliance has been Greenbelt is essential to protect the region's engaged in a campaign that will establish a future. It's a big task that requires fighting every citizen movement to save the Greenbelt—a goal day to conserve hillsides and farmlands from endorsed by over 100 organizations representing sprawl,educating people in all nine counties 200,000 Bay Area residents. about the importance of the Greenbelt,building Through its unique combination of field regional leadership to meet critical land use work,research and education Greenbelt Alliance problems,and activating grassroots supporters has produced impressive results. Here's the of the Greenbelt. current Campaign scorecard: The Protection of Open Space ■ Catalyzed passage of$225 million in park bonds ■ Placed"Greenbelt"onto the public agenda, for the East Bay,funds that will be used to through an extensive news media campaign and acquire over 25,000 acres of open space; the efforts of scores of outreach volunteers; ■ Formulated provisions of Alameda County ■ Created the computerized Greenbelt Mapping general plan that will protect 250,000 acres of and Assessment Program(GMAP),the first ever ridgelands; acre-by-acre inventory of Bay Area open space ■ Defeated major low density sprawl proposals on and the threats to it; farmland in Morgan Hill,Brentwood and ■ Produced award-winning film,Treasures of the numerous other places in the region; Greenbelt,seen by 400,000 Bay area residents on ■ Provided technical and organizing expertise to public television. 1990 election initiatives that if passed will save: 300,000 acres of farmland and wildlife habitat in Contra Costa.. .50,000 acres of rolling hillsides Leadership for the Entire Region in Santa Clara County...15,000 acres of ridgelands in Alameda County...tens of ■ Initiated the blue ribbon Bay Vision 2020 Com- mission to help shape the Bay Area's future by thousands of agricultural acres in Napa County addressing key land use issues from a regional . ..and thousands more acres of farmland in Sonoma County. perspective; ■ Sponsored the Bay Area Ridge Trail Council which is creating the 350-mile Bay Area Ridge Public Education and Support Trail for hiking,bicycling and horseback riding. for the Greenbelt ■ Pioneered new ways of reconciling old Bay Area Across America,no environmental organization equals conflicts through policy reports including, Greenbelt Alliance in vigorously defending,decade by decade, Reviving the Sustainable Metropolis:Guiding Bay a great metropolitan region's open space. Area Conservation and Development into the 21st Century,and The Bay Area's Quality of Life. — Neal Peirce,national urban affairs columnist MAIN OFFICE: 116 New Montgomery Suite 640 San Francisco CA 94105 (415)543-4291 THE HOW AND WHY uF OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION Tuesday, Oct. 23 - 3:30 - 4:45 pm Salon E - Marriott Hotel Open Space ........... MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT The How and Why of Open Space Preservation League of California Cities 1990 Annual Conference (Outline of Segment of Session Given by Herbert Grench) III . Acquiring and Managing Open Space A. Community needs met regionally 1 . History of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District formation and annexation a . Relationship to county parks programs 2 . Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District progress in open space protection B . Alternative governmental structures to meet needs 1 . Regional open space districts (Public Resources Code sec. 5500 et seq. ) a . Park, open--space, or park and open--space districts b. Formed by majority of electors C. Originally, to be governed hy iindependent , elected board d. Before Proposition 13 , property tax could he levied 2 . Santa Clara County (SB 1422 in 1989) a . Created Santa Clara County Open Space Authority b. All south county cities opted in by resolution except Gilroy C. Interim governing board ( 1) 1 supervisor (2) 2 San Jose council members (3) 2 non-San Jose council members d. In 1992 directly elected board if funding passes e. Special , parcel tax of $25/year by 2/3 vote will yield $7M/yr 3 . Riverside County (SB 486 in 1989) a . Measure placed on November ballot by resolution of board of supervisors b. Cities can opt in by resolution C. Board of supervisors to govern d. Majority vote of electors needed to pass an assessment of $26 per year per parcel 4 . Sonoma County (AB 3630 in 1990) a. Measure placed on November ballot by board of supervisors b. All cities included C . Board of supervisors to govern d. Name to be "Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District" e . To be financed by a 1/4� sales tax with majority vote of electors 5. Fairfield and Solano County C . Acquisition techniques 1 . Fee title vs . open space easements 2 . Installment purchases and note issues 3 . Buying land on an opportunity basis 4 . Use of eminent domain 5. Non-profit support organizations D. Nanag-inci open space 1 . Open space versus parks a . Public access - full or limited b. Stewardship vs . development 2 . Development , maintenance and operations a . Type of facilities b. Patrol needs C. Visitor safety and information d. Volunteer programs e . Equipment needs f . Costs THE HOW & WHY OF OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION Tuesday, October 23 - 3:30 4:45 pm Salon E - Marriott Hotel THE HOW AND WHY OF OPEN SPACE`* PR�.SERVATION THE FAIRFIELD/SCLANC COUNTY EXPERIENCE BACKGROUND Solano County has grown from abc-lut .15-ii-Ij, 000 in 1970 t.:, _320, 000 in 1990 Growth has been largely suburban in cnaracter, eating up great cht.mes of land Concern has ari-sen over, the need and desire t.::, retair, viable agricultural areas, and maintair: bulFfers between the cities within the COL(rtty. County v­ters passed Measure A in !98'ff, which lock in agricultural LtSeS in the urtiriccirpirrated areas. EETPBLISHING THE FARMLANDS AND OPEN SPACE FOUNDATION MISaSLWe A led tc, large-scaln annexation Proposals, which raised citizen cc-incerris and resulted ir, oppositi,-_,ri. Fairfield p--,.--,p.DsL-d annexatic,ri clf 4, 000 acres; prnposal resulted in litigation. Lawsuit settled _,}.it of court ; atrnc�rzg the settlE�rnent itenis was the establishment --if a land trust to fost(nr :.per, space and agri- cultural land preservati,-_,ri, Prid to ".:,ld title tt--, such lands for plAblic trust plarp,�Ises. Solana Courty Farm I ands and Open Space Fc,undatitart incorporated April 24, 1986; party tc an agreement with City of Fairfield whereby the Fouridatir-in provides services tc. the intracity Cc-rtimu- nity FacilitiLns District "reasonably related" to the District' s functions; these are cipct-rt space acqui sit iori and management. GROWTH OF THE FOUNDATION; GROWTH MANAGEMENT IN SOLANO COUNTY The Board of the Foundation included representatives :,f both the pliairitiffs and defendants in thf-% 1,%wSuit. Board members spent a year in training efforts and learning to work together-, develop trust, and c,utline priorities for the or@anization. Agreed upon priorities wer,in preservati,-_,r- C,f important agricl-ilti.tral lands Arid community buffers within the C,,Dunty. Staff was' hired tr-, begin work, ir, SEpterriber 1387. (A D 70 tp r— ct r, 0 D 't ct D x 't C+ -5 lz� D in -6 c: 3) 'D X3 'Tj D ct Cu T3 ki) th -t 0; -1 'D Ul LA �u .0 ::r C+ 't 11 ol tit cl ct a U -t� I) I , 0 M Cru 'D rr R < 't rD W. �< 0 0) -:f (n to k0 0 0 0 ci- CL qj 0 fD to -- a) n Ul < 0 1 -k E fl) M jj-� ID fr Do to -5 �t -0 f3 < 't OD fb ;u '. T , 91 ib 'D 1) CL < 0, ct -Tj I V.) -S IS a I Ell -J� C r) — cr a 11 " �u rt ti W 5L rx r) -7 't. < in Ln -4 M to In rD C, CD cl- T) -a '0 -n )r < cl ;u -S ro ct 70 to T a) c+ fu L. T 1 0 .3 1:1 a f) 11 o :T co w ct --h < < fD to to ij X -h to k< r) m m LD - C <+ i� , 9) ID c+ c, a Z 1 M M ct ct X 0) ID ct :r cr C Z J I C, !D Ln FD r tD 0 j rD ro rt 14 M (D ( LA CLlR LQ w 0 :5 (+ rD l< OL 10 0 D CL OL 7r, 9) OL M a D C U:) LA C+ 0 <+ M Ln -% .0 Ul 16 a n 0- 71 - -0 aL tn ul -fi b, 0 :T Tj go < < R c+ ► c+ rt .10 CD ct 5L, ". C+ [I CD J Ll I Cr (T (D Cl- 3 (B ou , I I OL < - U3 1 M- rT r J cr r) CL fn ID rt (D ". y :r n 'D CL 3ct (D 3 fD Ln ID -- 6 -q ---'r, ct :T ct ic) V rD C, Ll -1 ID Z; (D C' ID IP U", -0 61 ul (D -h V) 61 ct EY 1 01 cl �lj M m B La M X 9) -1 - 3 fp LA V� gu M �; D — c+ 7 C+ ;-j Ln r) LI rt rj ra 0 a ru 0 < ct V) u EU <:3 'D Cl (D fo to 2t Q. oj :5 i-) W act Ul -1 to to — ). - to — 0 ft ct.0 or r", ro u n w. IS C, fD t) 4-1 LA cyl to < 'k a CI- LA l< :lr < -h w ca :T rk) ci (D 1,3 M :T rt x o i-,- ::r a re !P. < (D ct fD 0 f:. Ct gi fn + 0 cl (14 0 FD rD c+, 711' ct :5 < < 'in I CL D' ct -, 0 C+ C+ 7- in -. -- < . ok �j 'J' C,oj rj -D 70 !11 'D 6 Ln M < C+ :7 - < It < Ll to 'D (D ? fn 21 Ili C; n- :T a sD D CO- ill to pw 0 -e.- - m to ct or 0 LA r.) CL C) 0 0) < (D P) -, Q 25 C+ Lo ml, IT, -1 :5 k< -:' 0 m (+ Dr a) x D ct < -t 'D '0 r) cr OL (D c+ n < 1�1 cr 1 :5 �u [j Eu 1:j C, cy - ET -S 0 1-- 3, l< < ":-x -1 UL -7 9, rul m M ct ri -h to rD go -h-0 -h k< 91.J.' CL fl) fb M Ct -h U3 ID I-- b -h c+ LA iD to -h (D ct- :3 -at :1 c+70 ei. < C+ rj ro n X < LA 0 al #,. M (D m li ID F., �t I - 1c, to ct ct Q x 'U T) :3 x M tc "U Ll ct r) r+ -5 ::r f- X 0 n ID cl- 0- C+ to 0 'D to _aj to fb C+ -0 rl X cr OLS rt - U) :5 cx 0 0 fD to (D 21 :5 0 to I- C+ n :5 cl J ct n, -.3 - f-I < C+ "o q n cl. 0 IVto LA I Ln D) 0 to c: 01 --1 fD 0 x ct 0 '0 E 'D FD -5 ct -0 c+ zr I C+ M C. ul Ln rt ct El Ct .D < iD k- < 1:1 0. C, w Di a, a C+ n rt- l< LA to �< i rj -D-0 tn a M V, rU < 9) 5L c+ Ct M - pj W a.- ID 2� fD ct Ln U U3 ro < C to ct cr, 0 u) rD ri M rt < CL 't :E rt in 4., ki) u Jr D 7 61 -0 9, C+ 1A (D ul 9) ID I nt M w- , C+ -5 ct n 0 -4 G ED 0 x ill rj C 0 m :T 0 (D tn to fu -5 a Ct m -1 < 3 " Or :s I.- M n c+ ct ru la 1:j in ct CI- 2; r�, FD tA 1A Ilt -0 fo 0 ct -11 10 Ct r) :jr r)rb Di L, -S < F 37 CL ". D, rD :c r) C+ < x 0 t3 cl -5 cr ::r ID ev f+ lu 0 3 -1 3 0 rt -1 cl W. lu l< ID 00 U) I �4 ct :lr 4:k ID E DA (m ct ct n fD to c- ILI to ru 0 C+ ct 0) -0 Ict :3 EL cat- to :T Ct ID I C' m IL m ID ro EL 0 L4 C+ ID CREATING THE PERMANENT SHORELINE The creation of the Solano County Farmlands and Open Space Foun- dation has been a catalyst to open space and agricultural land preservation in Solano County. The organization has been able to serve as a source of funds for projects, but more importantly as a conduit for funds from State and Federal sources. The heightened awareness of loss of open space and the stark pos- sibility of urban sprawl from Vallejo to Davis has led to a renewed interest in open space preservation in Solano County generally and along the 1-80 corridor particularly. The communities along this corridor are actively looking to their futures to include permanent open space buffers and permanent agricultural reserves. We refer to this as the "BCDCapproach", after the San Francisco Pay Conser- vation and Development Commission, which makes the contribution of a project to the establishment of a permanent shoreline for San Francisco Say a major consideration in approval of that project. Those involved in open space activities in SolanQ County foresee a strong effort in the future to maintain our important open space and agricultural lands, and channel growth--which will come and which will be substantial--into those areas best suited for it. We look forward to a Fairfield and a Salano County of some ultimate Size and configuration of urban areas that retains the essential qualities that make Solano, County the attractive area to live that it is today. Thank 3 la�G_z� Meeting 4t)-25 nn Date: i)C ',A 199t) ART�Tf"'}:TVV,,Tc�++ Ti' TT L'21i�C r>1V11V_7T,y�y REGIONAL 4GT NA 1 OPP7_VT SPACE ]R ITT Tr Amount Marne Dl. .a_ l�esl 1�\.a.on --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A 4C75. ,0 t"r � ACi�.B1son 1990 Conference `>v�?ah�?r L-nrense 4826 64.35 A1Fs, rarhic.s Ma; - - 4827 95.00 ASPA Region X Conference Conference Registration- Fiddes 4828 125.00 Americ-axi Red Cross Rental 48219 1L e- Q.e Amil Li110 IY y11 Y:7 C'Aterll�� l'AL S SlecC 1~lnil Event 4830 553.16 Arrou eZ Tire Service Tires 4831 $1.34 Craig Becki,ban lies 4832 223.58 � Yining; Chevrolet Vehicle Regairs -- 4833 256.00 William G. Bunch 1990 C%onf er P_.nce : oeaker H;mense 4.34 2,460.00 Luuis Borth Grad lnc' i - 4835 30.00 " "° State of California Permit Fee Department of Fishy anl_1 Came 4836 25.00 State of California Pey,>Lit Fee Detaar., P_nt of Fish and Game 4837 88.00 State of California rrnr Fee l�.ial Dam Denar tment of G�ter Resources _A 229.53 California Water Service Company :eater Service 4839 450.00 California Professional Services--1990 'Note Iss.ae Statistic Inc. 4u-t 1,912.70 Cabo Sigris Signs iarion As ia _._ , Inc 1990 Conference S7,,e_3 Aer �aense 4842 1,59.72 Clark.L s Aii-o carts BSc MAchlnie Shon Vehicle tar-s **h4' 165.00 Sheryl Ma1.ioni Cochran Reamr-ursement -Serrdnar Registration 484-1 178.7v Annette Coleman _Exzaen-_se 4ci45 Co=n un1cation Research C%o>many Radio tarts and Repairs 4846 52.89 Patrick Congdon Reim�arse,rPnt--Field Su-,-,;Dlies A3A i95,000.00 Continental Laroyer's Title �_ou ally Lam- Purchase--Gold.- it!7 4848 :343,95 Kay Crawford 1990 Conference S,_,eaker r y_oense 4849 2$3.78 fire Dari`room Annual I{e�?ort P'not0giaprwS 4850 ,ter:, Thor_as De La irze, Inc. Printing--1990 �tiote Issue ate% 3,876.o0 ._.r� �,n ��,_ ef � _ t Recognition nt48cy 58.7v iny Lam {Pim4�Svllen._"-c+af 4852 _18.70 East Palo Alto Water District grater Service 4853 15,000.00 Rrnst Sk Yoimg Professional Services--1990 Note Issue 48,54 i 042.r m Event Security Se_ .r i:_J Patrol .P La s" 1 Qv _ 1� ti �.�-�485:� u.7 >�e�, r ,. �fi,7 _ Federal �� �_ _ ,offoration _^_>,)y _._._ L.5i1 4856 2,036.84 First AnGeric� title Inrarance title Policy and Insnarar,ce C�nr_anv 4857 1,256.00 David B. Fisher Legal Services 4-858 130.27 Faster Bros. Security S-yatems Inc.. revs and Locks 4859 254.62 Goodco Press Printing 4860 2,599.20 Greenbelt Alliance Conference Consulting Services 4861 657.82 Herbert Grench Reimk-xarsement--Conference Ex-nenses 4862 37.55 Gross mci's Field S1 Dillies 4863 392.00 Noel Grove 1990 Conference Sceaker Ex-,)ense 4864 55.83 David Fnsen Reimbz_ssement--Fi1m and Deveioring 4865 200.00 Carroll Harrington Staff Recognition Event 4866 315,00 Honeyvae l l Protect ion Services Bn=j"Ll ar Alarm Mainten,-,aice Rnergency check is�zed on CxJtdsaer 17, 1990. ^` Emergency check issued on October 15, 1990. **Emergency check issnued on October 10, 1990. r-- Claims No. 90-19 MILDPEivILNSl7r,,A AFC O irr P -�"C i �iaTe?; C)fT. 24, i 9i� � i ,i_Tuna C)cu�! Srn�.r, itiSii`{,,.t 'j' =�4ii:?�';L% -\eS_•r1tlt1on ---------------------------- - ---------------- 4v?t 207.00 -------- /� n_e n u� S. �,._ _�s -4 9 90 Conf-erenr.P_ S,,Pa' 46"vv 28,l65.00 Hyatt iRickey= 1990 Confer enceP n'P � Ig E�T `-t.7 CP4`69 95.00 Konca DsinesSt �CnineS Copier e _ z T '1 n P f 19.30 Conference . �n" e'^?4871 � 000 Steve Kritzer I i iti7n vr nt1_ rCG= - Ci4j72 54 19-1 Lan Sa-e r- eerie=� St ti11?S Y873 100.00 La horx'.a Vis` :SY? a rester C._a�i7ily �va, j 7- A'- Service.A. -r 1 .(ltj _er La'eA Trli.^i Alliance 1990 Conference ` _ nr once t,_,e�,;er �.,,�.,e.rse A T _87ti _�).i�tj i.,as ra13Ti$S rtXZl Service � *A-.; i O _ _ Al - - Poo" ,•,alnter�ance 487r1 tI A.F .24 Los Ai TtSS CY it t�c-e C'41mnY D,, i 77 95 �" �,,.,,,,, ser Eental 48 .00 Los Altos IAlediccal Clinic _^-e-t=snsir lPr,Ysicai 4878 6�.,4tj Gerald r_' J. Merai 1990 Conference Speaker E;-mense 4879 A *A - " �'•- _ 1 i r,w-rs. ienve, Rilback Scv iwcS.- i .a1 SeiJlces 4880 289. Minton Is Lumber St PLY 1n�1 Field Supplies- F1_ 4881 9,500.00 P/`t rcl t s Investors cervices Professional c er- �rJ1_ ^.7 3421u _i 4l,G6 . Freda W. titllnoiiard 1990 Conference S2�?ai�'ei Eri�nse 4883 26.49 Northern EnerGy Proo�Eale Gas 4834 31 .79 Norne 's of t,_yij ain `'ieW sc 4885 Norton Js,-ice S1-iml1 es - nt.1m,s._ ann ".xpenS2S and cie^t" (`,"._iar ter L1tigatlon '-�)r-e 488(; 241 ,E Office t ,Ll; S 2 . 0"4 che _14887 1t58.19 Orchar S'uzp:71y ix:arac- re FiPld `S,mty �l1ie1 es i(). i7 cf leie-pin` e s i��_,P_^_fi? 4,13:9 3r573.79 Pac!Klard Press C;orpx;raion IS. ;;�e C.'-_.iv_iC:e.^ -Ar�i9t� A t-y -- -ti - -r_4.U'_1 taiKllCi� C'a,iipiilia, Inc. Printing-1990 iOte ISSt_�e AT891 i21 .0 Loro roc ters7n iCe1Ti1C-.-liSE'iCr'i1 --i i'liiCs ri Expense =di Fie,, _ -np1 ies 48,32 325.5o >s-en. 1 n s,i . l a TJl ile•ti 1r1 _te !;yer1 ys--!T ri?n4893 278.n0 Bober t Pirnlll 1990 nITLrL n'�' �P Speaker En YDen4894 "1, 00.9A- Port-O-Tei tiitation Services 4895 ta.5i Precision ,r ^,(�7.'` vers Inc.. v e ;'. c. 2, ' �a,ii u cad_ t� � 4-3 2,150.00 Vi Cfirf?Peiteoi •i�_iig, iaTV1ceS489- 6."i4.23 Rich's lire Service Tires 212 i ink489r � � F2-,, neer4899 , A c s cn07.23 Rods Renlr Service vehicle Re7,7al-irs and i�1ntenar e 4900 1,208.71 Sa i i.a C~t"t i2 �:Ot,u,GS I- C.c iT"^u_,an-y, Inc. Cort�,st' 4901 352.00 Scenic Arerica 1990 Conference Srea.ter Expense 4902 864.00 Ernest W. S^:ri1Ca' T ��1Services 4903 275.51 ShP11oii C�`aii j F.'i 1P- -1 4904 209.14 Sherrill Cellars Tr Wine for ail -vbrksnorr--- 4905 1,97a.88 Srencer AS•sociates Consulting' Services 4906 61000.00 Standard & Poor`s Cog±oration 1990 'Note Issue P 49 � �.. _ SF?i J1C�s 07 L,42.12.35 Stanford�anfol �' P d ti 1 T�ci`i ��" Suns 4908 60.00 San Mateo Tires Ne'vspaper Gr un S11'rscriotion 'I-Emergency chec*-,^-, issued- an October 17, 1990. i Claims No. 90-19 i•`�erinr '� -2= 1� is te: ( %. 24 1990 ��lrrulvl�+_�t,i,n RL(�1��2`1n,J OPEN' _.F'nvi i%lSliil R,=tJIS nmoun- i3.a,Ii2 _ SCi]i 1 iCSil --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4909 �89.34 Sin-unit Uniforms *910 130.00 Telenhone Emwori=, Inc. Eardmi,en` Repair c9 1 5,639.46 Tr y�C & iiy'CC Cons(.11�iih� Services 491� -Al 2 A .39 " United Parcel Service Shiin� 4913 158.00 Urban Edges, Inc. 1990 Conference Srea ker En?pnsz 491At 85.00 Valley Title CorL q-rI Reconve-yance Fees =t915 9.63 Valle L..Asiness rrcniU.rS (3ir1Ce JZirj(J11e 49i8 A ,�(38,54 Y-hi.tnore, Kay &i Stevens Legal Ser vices 4`917 ?11.79 De e1 W' cx'i vein�.rse,-nen�--Y lei�1 �v''.^�r�SisC,1s �lii�j i"-' 1 i 138.78 l,brd Products Office .'`3Ium-,L1e8 - -- 4919 59.92 Thy'' WorKing,! n's E„—qporiLurn T.Tni..ioii„ E''n"tv--nSe 4920 93.95 D,.--*A:)ra_rl Ducker ft�'2Ti1 1� c'i ?n --iliiitle Surxplie^+ 4921 389.51 Carroll Harri.nn� on Staff Recognit-ion Eventi 4922 21 89 S,:{nr'Lse Winery .Stuff ttQC•=gTLi+ipn JF?iZ 't.323 10")0 00 tAni-ed SrRtes ros._,t .^_�s^?r ' 4924 201.87 Pe:t, Cla.^_.n Office and F4e!d Ex-sense, Film and Devel4tainr,,, Delivery Services, ane, Private Vehicle Expense 4"ariergency . i._ zPci nn October 10, 19,30. I I 90.00 WHAT WE DO . . . MAJOR OPEN SPACE AREAS OF YOU CAN HELP . . . SOLANO COUNTY Farmland Protection. The Solano County Farmlands and The Foundation works with the agricultural PUTAH Cq Open Space Foundation needs your community to seek permanent preservation EEK support in carrying out its purposes. of the important farmlands in Solano County, 505 80 The Foundation is a private, non-profit, especially those areas where pressure for tax-exempt corporation under Section development may be highest. This is done /� E HILLSIi • DIXON Fun Fun (c) 3 of the Internal Revenue Code. NGLIS by the acceptance of donations, by acquisition 501 vacA ding for Foundation projects comes of conservation easements (restricting land MTS. DIXON from tax-deductible donations from use to agricultural purposes) and by acquisition VACA RIDGE corporations, grantmaking organizations, of land. Under this program, land can NORTH VALLE'f and individuals. remain both in private ownership and NO SCALE • VACAVI LLE agricultural production. �� cif '00 Marsh and Stream Restoration. UGOON The Foundation works with public and VALLEY private donors to foster protection and JEPSON restoration of marshland and riparian SUISUN PRAIRIE habitats throughout Solano County. VALLEY • FAIRFIELD CACHE • SLOUGH Rangeland Conservation. SUISUN CITY One of the main goals of the Foundation POTRERO is the preservation and maintenance of SUISUN HILLS --MARSH 12 open space and grazing lands between the growing communities in our County. This 680 RIO VISTA • effort is conducted in the spirit of multiple NAPA _MARSHES MONTEZUMA use, with the cooperation of interested parties S HILLS SUISUN HILLS and application of modern range • VALLEJO BAY management principles. BENICIA o SACE' � a Research and Education. • Contributions to the Foundation's land The Foundation is committed to conservation activities are furthering agricultural, rangeland and natural gratefully accepted. If you would history research on lands under its control. URBAN AREAS like to help please contact the We also work to improve public awareness of Foundation at 707-428-7580. the value of a healthy and diverse pattern FARMLAND of land uses. MARSHLANDS HILL LANDS I vm PARTNERS IN il CONSERVATION - - r U LOCAL STYLE 'T7 07 O � W " n n The Solano County Farmlands and Open Space Foundation is an independent, o °x "� z private, non-profit corporation. It was ` ' c formed by a coalition of farmers and � U, z �n v conservationists for the purpose of preserving Solano County's important w O r agricultural areas and open space between z our urban communities. The Foundation v err; seeks to accomplish these goals through Board of Directors public and private assistance and cooperation. Bob Berman, President ,a Land conservation throughout the U.S. Robert Leland Secretar y . is entering an era where cooperation Arthur Toob , Finance Officer y � u among different interest groups and Frank Andrews, Jr. ,` government is replacing confrontation in an Leroy Bertolero � effort to achieve specific goals. Hulet Hornbeck Garry Ichikawa The Solano County Farmlands and Gary Mangels SOLANO COUNTY Open Space Foundation is a part of this effort. The Foundation works with FARMLANDSlandowners to permanently protect these For further information, contact lands through acceptance of donations, acquisition of conservation easements, and Foundation Executive Director AND outright purchase of land. Neil Havlik at 707-428-7580. OPEN SPACE FOUNDATION SOLANO COUNTY FARMLANDS AND OPEN SPACE FOUNDATION Post Office Box 115 Fairfield, California 94533