HomeMy Public PortalAbout20150114 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 15-01
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
SPECIAL MEETING BEGINS AT 5:00
REGULAR MEETING BEGINS AT 7:00
A G E N D A
5:00 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT – STUDY SESSION
ROLL CALL
1. Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-15-13)
Staff Contact: Kevin Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation: Review and discuss the Action Plan and Budget
Committee’s work on developing an Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy
and direct the General Manager to revise the policy as necessary and return to the Board of
Directors at a future regular meeting for consideration of adoption of the policy.
ADJOURNMENT
7:00 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS – PUBLIC
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Minutes of the December 10, 2014 and December 17, 2014 Board Meetings
SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY
1. Certification of November 4, 2014 Election Results, Board of Directors Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6
(R-15-06)
Meeting 15-01
Staff Contact: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Adopt the Resolution Declaring Canvass of Returns and Results of the Biennial General
District Election held on November 4, 2014
2. Adopt the Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 2 of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3. Adopt the Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 5 of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2. Oath of Office for Director Siemens – Ward 1, Director Kishimoto – Ward 2, Director
Hanko – Ward 5, and Director Hassett – Ward 6
CONSENT CALENDAR
2. Approve Claims Report
3. Award a Contract for the Prospect Road Parking Lot Canopy Structure at Fremont Older
Open Space Preserve (R-15-11)
Staff Contact: Gretchen Laustsen, Planner II
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to enter into a
professional services contract with Harris Design for $39,800 with a 15% contingency of $6,200,
for a total amount not to exceed $46,000, to provide design and construction administration
services for the Prospect Road Parking Lot Canopy Structure at Fremont Older Open Space
Preserve.
4. Approval of First Amendment to Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a Power of
Termination, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation of a
Right of First Refusal, an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails at
Long Ridge Open Space Preserve (San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Number 080-410-
270), and a Determination that the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from
the California Environmental Quality Act. (R-15-03)
Staff Contact: Allen Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution approving First Amendment to Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a
Power of Termination, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation
of a Right of First Refusal, an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails
between Thomas L. Anderson/Sharon L. Niswander and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District.
5. Amend Legal Services Contract with Howard, Rome, Martin & Ridley for a Total
Authorized Amount of $45,000 (R-15-05)
Staff Contact: Sheryl Schaffner, General Counsel
General Manager’s Recommendation: Amend the existing contract for legal services to increase
the contract amount by $20,000 for a total not to exceed amount of $45,000, for legal and subject-
matter expert support of litigation settlement efforts, coordination with the County, and related
legal issues.
6. Lease for Office Space at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Los Altos (R-15-04)
Staff Contact: Allen L. Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist and Tina Hugg, Senior Planner
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the General Manager to enter into an Office Lease with
Wellington Park Investors.
7. Contract to Provide Fence Installation Work at the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve
(R-15-10)
Staff Contact: Clayton Koopmann, Natural Resource Specialist I
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement with Southwest Fence and Supply
Company of Patterson, CA, for a total contract amount not to exceed $149,905 to provide
fence installation work at the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve.
2. Determine that the recommended action is consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for Implementation of the La Honda Creek Master Plan,
approved by the Board on August 22, 2012.
3. Authorize the General Manager to move $30,000 from the Land budget to the Capital budget
to cover the additional costs for the contract.
BOARD BUSINESS
8. Election of the Board of Directors Officers for Calendar Year 2015 (R-15-07)
Staff Contact: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
General Manager’s Recommendation: Elect Officers of the Board of Directors for Calendar Year
2015
9. Appointment of Action Plan and Budget Committee Members for Calendar Year 2015 (R-
15-08)
Staff Contact: Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
General Manager’s Recommendation: Approve the Board President’s appointments to the
Action Plan and Budget Committee for Calendar Year 2015
10. Reclassification of Four District Positions and the Addition of One Classification (R-15-12)
Staff Contact: Candice Basnight, Human Resources Supervisor
General Manager’s Recommendation:
Adopt a resolution approving the following position changes:
1. Reclassification of an Accountant to a Senior Accountant in the Administrative Services
Department.
2. Reclassification of an Administrative Assistant to a Risk Management Coordinator in the
Legal Department.
3. Reclassification of two Real Property Specialists to Senior Real Property Specialists in the
Real Property Department.
4. Reclassification of a Real Property Assistant to Real Property Specialist I in the Real
Property Department.
5. Addition of a Real Property Specialist II classification to the District’s Classification and
Compensation Plan.
11. Priority Conservation Areas in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties (Informational
Presentation) (R-15-02)
Staff Contact: Tina Hugg, Senior Planner, Jane Mark, Planning Manager, and Casey Hiatt, GIS
Administrator
General Manager’s Recommendation: Receive an informational presentation on the Association
of Bay Area Governments’ Priority Conservation Area program adopted on July 17, 2014.
12. Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion Policy (R-15-01)
Staff Contact: Gina Coony, Planner III, Planning Department and Aaron Hébert, Contingent
Project Manager, Operations Department
General Manager’s Recommendation: Approve the new Construction and Demolition Waste
Diversion Policy, as reviewed and revised by the Planning and Natural Resources Committee
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDA
• Donation from the Estate of Mr. Robert Schauer
INFORMATIONAL REPORTS – Reports on compensable meetings attended. Brief reports or
announcements concerning activities of District Directors and staff; opportunity to refer public or Board
questions to staff for factual information; request staff to report back to the Board on a matter at a future
meeting; or direct staff to place a matter on a future agenda. Items in this category are for discussion and
direction to staff only. No final policy action will be taken by the Board.
A. Committee Reports
B. Staff Reports
C. Director Reports
ADJOURNMENT
TO ADDRESS THE BOARD: The President will invite public comment on agenda items at the time each item is considered by the Board of Directors. You may address the
Board concerning other matters during Oral Communications. Each speaker will ordinarily be limited to three minutes. Alternately, you may comment to the Board by a
written communication, which the Board appreciates.
Consent Calendar: All items on the Consent Calendar may be approved without discussion by one motion. Board members, the General Manager, and members of the
public may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar during consideration of the Consent Calendar.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the District Clerk at (650) 691-1200.
Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
Written materials relating to an item on this Agenda that are considered to be a public record and are distributed to Board members less than 72 hours prior to the meeting,
will be available for public inspection at the District’s Administrative Office located at 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, California 94022.
CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA
I, Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD), declare that the foregoing agenda
for the Special and Regular Meetings of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on January 9, 2015, at the
Administrative Offices of MROSD, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos California, 94022. Agenda materials are also available on the
District’s website at http://www.openspace.org.
Signed January 9, 2015 at Los Altos, California.
R-15-13
Meeting No. 15-01
January 14, 2015
STUDY SESSION ITEM 1
AGENDA ITEM
Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Review and discuss the Action Plan and Budget Committee’s work on developing an Employee
Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy and direct the General Manager to revise the
policy as necessary and return to the Board of Directors at a future regular meeting for
consideration of adoption of the policy.
SUMMARY
In March 2014, during final review and acceptance of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2013-14
Compensation Study prepared by Koff & Associates, the Board of Directors (Board) directed the
Action Plan and Budget Committee (ABC) to develop Employee Compensation Guiding
Principles for full Board consideration during FY2014-15. On October 7 and 31, November 18,
and December 10, 2014, the ABC worked on developing such guiding principles by discussing
and providing feedback on the provisions of the General Manager’s recommended draft
Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy. Additionally, at the November 18
meeting, the ABC was presented the results of staff’s preliminary cost analysis of the potential
cost implications of the draft policy, followed by the presentation of additional cost analysis
results at the December 10 meeting. Based on the cost analysis results, the General Manager
prepared alternative policy language for the Committee’s consideration related to employee
benefits. Following the December 10 meeting, the ABC directed the General Manager to bring
the draft policy to the full Board for review and discussion.
The ABC recommends to the full Board the policy as currently drafted, except for Principle 6
regarding the definition of competitive compensation. The ABC recommends Option C in
Principle 6. However, the ABC would like the full Board to be able to see and discuss all three
options in Principle 6 (A, B, and C), to understand the cost implications of each, and if in
agreement with the ABC’s selection of Option C, to consider wording revisions if necessary to
make the intent of Option C clearer. The preliminary cost estimate for implementing salary and
benefits decisions based on the ABC’s recommendation is approximately $460,000 per year
more than current salary and benefit costs based on current staffing levels. This estimate
assumes, by way of example, a benefits package value enhancement of $150 per month per
employee. With anticipated significant growth in the number of District employees in the
coming decade, this cost impact could increase to $685,000 per year by 2025 (in today’s dollars).
Options A and B in Principle 6 are estimated to cost much more than Option C – a range from
$675,000 to $995,000 per year based on current staffing levels and increasing to $1,000,000 to
R-15-13 Page 2
$1,480,000 over the next decade based on anticipated growth in the number of District
employees. According to the District Controller, the District’s financial model can afford and
sustain the cost increases of any of the options, although at varying levels of trade-off in being
able to add additional employees to accomplish the District’s Mission, including Measure AA
projects. The precise trade-off between enhanced compensation and the number of future
employees cannot be calculated until a more detailed salary and benefits analysis could be
completed, in addition to completion of the Financial and Organizational Sustainability Model
Study.
Adoption of an Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy is not in itself an
action that sets employee compensation. Instead, the principles in the policy would help guide
the General Manager’s consideration of changes to the District’s Classification and
Compensation Plan in the future, with any recommended changes requiring Board approval at
that time. The principles would also help guide labor negotiations and the consideration of
changes to employee benefits, which would also be approved by the Board at that time.
DISCUSSION
Background
On March 26, 2014, the Board accepted the organization-wide 2013-2014 Compensation Study
prepared by Koff & Associates. Prior to this acceptance, during the March 12, 2014 study
session to review the compensation study data, the Board directed the Action Plan and Budget
Committee (ABC) to develop Employee Compensation Guiding Principles for full Board
consideration during FY2014-15 and prior to Board consideration of implementation of any
compensation changes based on the results of the study (R-14-17). The stated purpose for
developing such Guiding Principles was to bring clarity to the Board’s employee compensation
philosophy and minimize process and implementation inconsistencies from study to study. As
presented to the Board at the March 12, 2014 Study Session, potential topics to be addressed in
the guiding principles may include:
• Purpose of competitive compensation, such as recruitment and retention of high-quality
employees
• Accountability to the public
• Definition of “competitive” compensation
• Non-compensatory benefits of District employment
• Salary versus benefits
• Future compensation studies – when, how, consistency with previous studies, consistency
of comparator agencies
• Focused compensation reviews vs. organization-wide studies
In preparation for the ABC’s work, staff considered these potential topics and researched how/if
other elected boards or councils have chosen to publicly develop their compensation policy in
response to specific circumstances confronting the agency, such as dire financial challenges,
heightened public scrutiny of public employee salaries and benefits (particularly pensions), or
employee recruitment or retention challenges affecting the agencies’ service delivery. During
this research, staff learned that although formally adopted Employee Compensation Guiding
Principles are neither unique nor commonplace for public agencies, at this point in the District’s
history development of such principles may help the Board set unrepresented employee
compensation and develop bargaining proposals and consider employee bargaining proposals
related to compensation. In addition, staff also learned that it is important for guiding principles
R-15-13 Page 3
to be flexible; certain principles may be more important at some times and less important at
others.
Summary of ABC Meetings
The minutes from each of the ABC’s meetings are provided in Attachment 1.
10/7/14 ABC Meeting
At their first meeting, the ABC discussed the process for developing guiding principles, the
structure of the guiding principle document, potential elements that could be addressed in
guiding principles along with analysis of these elements, and specific language for each element
recommended by the General Manager as a starting point for the ABC. The ABC acknowledged
that a Board policy document would be the appropriate structure, that the process would likely
entail multiple ABC meetings in which the members reviewed, discussed, and provided direction
on draft policy language recommended by the General Manager, and that elements such as an
introduction/purpose statement, public accountability, affordability, flexibility, legality,
competitiveness, and future compensation studies were appropriate to address in the policy. The
ABC provided numerous wording changes to draft principles and directed the General Manager
to return to a future ABC meeting for continuing discussion of the policy, particularly related to
the definition of competitiveness.
10/31/18 ABC Meeting
At the second ABC meeting the discussion focused on different approaches to achieving
competitiveness when looking at salaries and benefits as two different but important parts of
compensation. Staff explained, and cited a specific example of, the challenge related to
implementing a total compensation approach whereby adjustments to salary are intended to
compensate for benefits that are low or high. This approach makes it difficult to achieve internal
alignment of salaries amongst work groups, departments, or the whole organization. Instead, an
approach that looks at salary and benefits separately, yet strives to ensure each is competitive,
can also result in competitive total compensation. Staff also explained challenges associated
with accurately quantifying and comparing benefit package values between comparators.
Another discussion point in this ABC meeting was that it is acceptable within compensation
study best practices that a range of plus or minus five percent from the target salary goal is
considered competitive, yet allows necessary flexibility to achieve internal alignment within
work groups, departments, or the whole organization. It is impractical to expect that every
classification’s compensation could be set at the precise target salary goal of comparator
agencies while maintaining internal alignment. Finally, the ABC discussed whether median top-
range salary is the appropriate target salary goal. When they reviewed staff’s input about the
normal practice of the plus or minus five percent, the ABC acknowledged its importance but
expressed interest in a target salary goal that would not have any employee’s top-range salary be
below median of comparators. The discussion evolved toward evaluating whether a target salary
goal of the 55th percentile, plus or minus five percent, would better capture the ABC’s interest.
The ABC directed the General Manager to return to a future ABC meeting to continue this
discussion, as well as for the ABC to understand preliminary cost implications of not having any
employee’s top-range salary, or benefits package value, be below median of comparators. The
staff report for this second ABC meeting, provided as Attachment 2, contains more detail about
the numerous topics addressed during this meeting.
R-15-13 Page 4
11/18/14 and 12/10/14 ABC Meetings
At the third and fourth meetings, the ABC primarily focused on the General Manager’s
recommended policy language for the definition of competitive salary and competitive benefits,
as well as the preliminary cost estimate. The ABC directed the General Manager to bring the
policy to the full Board for discussion, stating that the ABC recommends to the full Board the
policy as currently drafted, except for Principle 6 regarding the definition of competitive
compensation. The ABC recommends Option C in Principle 6. However, the ABC would like
the full Board to be able to see and discuss all three options in Principle 6 (A, B, and C), to
understand the cost implications of each, and if in agreement with the ABC’s selection of Option
C, to consider wording revisions if necessary to make the intent of Option C clearer. A summary
of the draft policy provisions and explanation of the cost implications is provided later in this
report.
At the December 10, 2014, meeting the ABC also requested the General Manager provide an
analysis of employee recruitment and retention. Based on research completed by the District’s
Human Resources Division within the timeframe allowed for preparing this staff report, the data
suggest the District’s recruitment efforts have been very competitive and successful and that
retention of employees has also been very successful. For the small number of employees that
have chosen to leave employment with the District, Human Resources’ staff did not find
information that suggests that employee compensation was a main reason for their decision. A
summary of the Human Resources Division’s research is provided in Attachment 3.
Public and Employee Input
During the process undertaken by the ABC, members of the public, as well as employees, have
had the option to address the ABC during the public input time of the meetings, as well as
provide any written public/employee comments. The ABC did not receive any input from
members of the public. They did hear comments directly from numerous unrepresented and
FEA represented employees, as well as received written comments directly. At the outset of the
ABC’s work on this topic, the General Manager did not recommend that the process entail
specific engagement with members of the public or employees, or surveys of these groups.
Employee compensation decisions are management’s responsibility under direction from the
Board and subject to meet and confer requirements with represented labor unions as necessary.
It is the Board’s prerogative to provide compensation policy guidance to the General Manager
that a Board majority deems best achieves the District’s mission in service and accountability to
the public.
Policy Summary by Provision
The draft Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy is provided as Attachment
4. A summary of each provision is provided below, along with key points discussed by the ABC
in developing the specific language of each provision.
• Purpose statement: This statement addresses the importance of high-quality employees
in fulfilling the mission of the District and that compensation is one important tool
amongst several to deliver consistent, high quality service from represented and
unrepresented employees on behalf of the public. This statement also addresses the value
of having clear and transparent compensation principles for employees and the public to
understand the Board’s philosophy, and the importance of the Board retaining flexibility
in compensation decisions.
R-15-13 Page 5
• Principle 1, re: Public Accountability: The Board of Directors is accountable to the
public and is thus constantly tasked with aligning its policy decisions with the priorities
of the public. In recent years, public sector compensation, particularly the considerable
value of a defined benefit pension system, has received increased public scrutiny. The
importance of public visibility and accountability has also been elevated with the passage
of Measure AA.
• Principle 2, re: Affordability/Sustainability: The District’s compensation practices are
critical to its short and long term fiscal health and all compensation adjustments must be
made within this context. The Board is challenged with providing the staffing resources
needed to most effectively and efficiently fulfill its mission in the present, while ensuring
adequate financial resources are available in the future.
• Principle 3, re: Flexibility: This principle states that the Board retains the flexibility in
compensation decisions to respond to changes impacting the District’s ability to attract
and retain high-quality employees.
• Principle 4, re: Legality: This principle refers to the California Meyers Milias Brown
Act (MMBA) to determine what, if any, factors the law identifies related to determining
appropriate compensation through labor negotiations in local public agencies, and
provides a point-in-time excerpt from the law as an attachment to the policy.
• Principle 5, re: Flexibility: This principle conveys that the Board understands that
different work groups of employees, such as represented or unrepresented, field or office,
may have different levels of interest in different types of benefits, and that these
differences should be considered when conducting a benefits analysis. For example,
work time and place flexibility may be more highly valued by some employees than
others.
• Principle 6, re: Competitiveness: This principle conveys the ABC’s recommendation
that salary and benefits should both, and independently, be competitive in order to
achieve competitive total compensation. The ABC reviewed and understands the
importance of achieving internal alignment of salaries within work groups, departments,
or the whole organization. Raising salaries to make up for lower benefits, or lowering
salaries to make up for higher benefits can be detrimental to internal alignment.
Additionally, the ABC reviewed and understands that compensation, whether for salaries
or benefit package values, within a plus or minus five percent of the target value is
considered competitive in the labor market and that this range of flexibility is important
to maintaining internal alignment. Therefore, the central question discussed by the ABC
in developing this principle was at what level to set the target value for top-range salary
and for benefits package value, understanding some employees’ compensation may be
placed below or above the value by up to five percent, yet still achieve competitiveness.
The ABC has developed three options for the full Board’s review and discussion, and
recommends Option C:
Option A (55/55): The target value for both top- range salary and benefits
package value is median to 55th percentile of comparator agencies, plus or
minus five percent, with no employee’s top-range salary below median or
above 60th percentile. The Board retains its decision-making flexibility as
R-15-13 Page 6
provided in the policy and also determines the core benefits that would be
valuated and compared.
Option B (55/50): The target value for top- range salary is median to 55th
percentile of comparator agencies, plus or minus five percent, with no
employee’s top-range salary below median or above 60th percentile. The
target value for benefits package value is median, plus or minus five percent,
with no employee’s benefits package value below 45th percentile or above 55th
percentile. The Board retains its decision-making flexibility as provided in
the policy and also determines the core benefits that would be valuated and
compared.
Option C: The target value for top- range salary is median to 55th percentile of
comparator agencies, plus or minus five percent, with no employee’s top-
range salary below median or above 60th percentile. For benefits, no specific
target value is indicated, but the principle states it is the Board’s intent to
provide a benefits package that helps attract and retain quality employees.
The preliminary estimates of the different cost implications of these three options are
described in the Cost Implications section of this report.
• Principle 7, re: Competitiveness: This principle establishes that the Board of Directors
also considers one-time and individual monetary benefits and non-monetary benefits as
factors in remaining competitive within the District’s labor market. One-time and
individual monetary benefits are payments that accrue to qualifying/participating
individuals, such as merit increases, longevity pay, tuition reimbursement, tax benefits
from 457 deferral plans, etc.. Non-monetary benefits are considerations such as
meaningfulness of the District’s mission, job-stability, future of the organization and
professional growth opportunity, organizational culture, work environment, recognition
of quality work, etc..
• Principle 8, re: Competitiveness: The high Cost of Living in the Bay Area is an ongoing
challenge for public sector employee recruitment and retention. The Bay Area’s higher
cost of labor reflects in part the higher cost of living, but public agencies (and even
private sector companies) are financially challenged to provide salaries that meet the cost
of living, particularly related to housing costs. Principle 8 in the policy acknowledges
this challenge, states that the policy’s other principles that relate to maintaining
competitive compensation within the District’s labor market help to partially address the
Cost of Living challenges, and states that the District is willing to explore innovative
ideas to improve this regional challenge.
• Principle 9, re: Compensation Studies: This final principle is intended to bring clarity to
when and why future compensation studies may be performed, that they are at the
General Manager’s discretion, and that consistency of benchmark comparator agencies is
important.
Cost Implications
Staff has conducted a preliminary cost estimate of the potential implications of the Employee
Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy, showing the difference between Options A, B,
R-15-13 Page 7
and C in Principle 6, based on current staffing levels as well as increased staffing levels in the
future. Data used to calculate the costs are based on Koff & Associates’ 2013-14 MROSD
Compensation Study data. Although staff is confident that these preliminary cost estimates
represent the order of magnitude cost impact that could be expected if/when future employee
compensation decisions are guided by this policy, staff cannot precisely calculate the cost at this
time due to the following reasons:
- Precise salary costing requires a position by position salary range placement decision,
which entails complex management decisions such as internal alignment, Y-rating, or
salary increases or reductions, before precisely knowing the cost difference between
current salary placement and recommended salary placement. The preliminary estimate
assumes that everyone is at top range salary, no one’s salary is reduced, and salaries that
exceed the recommended placement are Y-rated (meaning their salary remains status quo
until the new range catches up to them).
- Current data does not reflect the 3% cost of living adjustment received by District
employees on July 1, 2014. Nor does it reflect changes in salaries or benefits other
comparator agencies have made since the current study was completed in January 2014.
- Precise benefits costing would require a comprehensive benefits package analysis, which
entails assessing limitations of adjusting benefits differently for different classifications
of employees.
- A benefits package analysis will also entail Board direction and/or management decisions
about what benefits should be compared with comparator agencies; those decisions
cannot be made until the details of the benefits are analyzed.
- Future growth in the number of District employees is not precisely known at this time.
The District has grown by 50% over the last ten years, which includes a major
recessionary period. The preliminary estimate assumes this same growth rate over the
next ten years. There are currently 124.55 full-time equivalent budgeted positions, of
which 112.5 receive benefits. The preliminary cost estimate for increased staffing levels
ten years from now is based on 187 full-time equivalents, of which 169 receive benefits.
Salary Cost Estimate (Annual): Year 1 Year 10
(Current Workforce) (Estimated Future Workforce)
$255,000 $380,000
All three options in Principle 6 set the target top range salary within the range of median to
55th percentile, with no one’s top range salary below median nor above 60th percentile. The
difference in annual salary costs between Koff & Associates’ recommended salary range
placements between median and 55th percentile and no one below median, compared to
salary range placements between 45th percentile and median is approximately $255,000 per
year with the current workforce. This assumes all employees are at top-range salary, no
one’s salary is reduced, and salaries that exceed the recommended placement are Y-rated.
This cost impact could grow to $380,000 per year based on an estimated growth rate of 50%
of employees over the next 10 years (slightly less depending on how many positions were Y-
rated initially and how many years it takes for salary ranges to catch up to the Y-rated
salaries).
R-15-13 Page 8
Benefits Cost Estimate (Annual): Year 1 Year 10
(Current Workforce) (Estimated Future Workforce)
Option A: $500,000 - $740,000 $750,000 - $1,100,000
Option B: $420,000 - $610,000 $625,000-$915,000
Option C: $205,000 $305,000
Option A in Principle 6 sets the target benefits package value within the range of median to
55th percentile, with no one’s benefits package value below median nor above 60th percentile.
Option B sets the target benefits package value within the range of 45th percentile to median,
with no one’s benefits package value below 45th percentile nor above 55th percentile. Option
C does not specify a target value for benefits. However, just as an example for cost estimate
purposes, a $150 increase in benefits value per employee per month was estimated. The
estimated cost to raise the current benefits package value to median to 55th percentile range
(Option A) would range from approximately $500,000 to $740,000 per year with the current
workforce. This cost impact could grow to a range from approximately $750,000 to
$1,100,000 per year (in today’s dollars) based on an estimated growth rate of 50% of
employees over the next 10 years. The estimated cost to raise the current benefits package
value to 45th to median range (Option B) would range from approximately $420,000 to
$610,000 per year with the current workforce. This cost impact could grow to a range from
approximately $625,000 to $915,000 per year (in today’s dollars) based on an estimated
growth rate of 50% of employees over the next 10 years. The estimated cost to increase the
current benefits package value by $150 per employee per month would be approximately
$205,000 per year. This cost impact could grow to approximately $305,000 per year (in
today’s dollars) based on an estimated growth rate of 50% of employees over the next 10
years.
FISCAL IMPACT
Total Annual Cost Estimate: Year 1 Year 10
(Current Workforce) (Estimated Future Workforce)
Top-Range Salary &
Benefits Option A: $755,000 - $995,000 $1,130,000 - $1,480,000
Top-Range Salary &
Benefits Option B: $675,000 - $865,000 $1,000,000-$1,295,000
Top-Range Salary &
Benefits Option C: $460,000 $685,000
If the full Board adopts the ABC’s recommended Employee Compensation Guiding Principles
policy, setting the compensation target for top-range salary at median to 55th percentile of
comparator agencies and not specifying a target value for benefits, it is estimated that potential
changes to employee compensation could cost approximately $460,000 more than current salary
and benefit costs based on current staffing levels. With anticipated significant growth in the
number of District employees in the coming decade, this cost impact could increase to $685,000
per year by 2025 (in today’s dollars). The precise fiscal impact in the short term will be
unknown until a detailed review and analysis of a final recommended salary schedule and where
each employee sits in his/her salary range, as well as a comprehensive benefits package analysis,
can be completed.
According to the District Controller, the District’s financial model can afford and sustain the cost
increases of any of the options, although at varying levels of trade-off in being able to add
R-15-13 Page 9
additional employees to accomplish the District’s Mission, including Measure AA projects.
Option C is the most affordable and sustainable option, at the expense of being able to add four
to seven additional employees that could otherwise be hired to accomplish the District’s Mission,
including Measure AA projects. Option B translates to an approximately seven to thirteen
additional employee trade-off; Option A, an approximately seven to fourteen employee trade-off.
The impact, particularly for Options A and B, would be to lengthen the time required to complete
Measure AA projects. The precise trade-off between enhanced compensation and the number of
future employees cannot be calculated until a more detailed salary and benefits analysis could be
completed, in addition to completion of the Financial and Organizational Sustainability Model
Study.
ALTERNATIVES
The Board may wish to consider the following alternatives:
1. Final wording changes to specific principles as may be suggested and discussed by Board
members and supported by a majority of the Board;
2. Due to the potential fiscal impact of Principle 6, the Board may choose to delay a
decision on this matter until a comprehensive position by position salary range analysis
and benefits analysis can be completed and the Financial and Operational Sustainability
Model Study is complete. With current staff workloads, position by position salary range
analysis and benefits analysis are estimated to take two to three months to complete.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This item is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
Following the Board’s discussion and input at the January 14th study session, and unless directed
otherwise by the Board, the General Manager recommends that staff finalize revisions to the
draft policy and bring the policy to a regular Board meeting in February for consideration of
adoption.
Following approval of these principles, the General Manager will complete review and analysis
of the 2013-14 Compensation Study results and bring forth any proposed compensation
recommendations to the Board for consideration in the future, which may be during the FY2015-
16 budget process or following labor negotiations.
Attachments
1. ABC meeting minutes from October 7 and 31, November 18, and December 10, 2014
2. Staff report for October 31 ABC meeting
3. Summary of MROSD Recruitment and Retention Analysis
4. Draft Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy
R-15-13 Page 10
Responsible Department Head:
Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Kevin S. Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
*Approved by the Action Plan & Budget Committee on October 31, 2014 1
SPECIAL MEETING
ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
October 7, 2014
APPROVED MINUTES*
I. ROLL CALL
Director Kishimoto called the Special Meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.
Members Present: Yoriko Kishimoto and Curt Riffle
Members Absent: Pete Siemens
Staff Present: Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz, Assistant General Manager Kevin
Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner, Human Resources
Supervisor Candice Basnight, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to adopt the
agenda.
VOTE: 2-0-0 (Director Siemens absent)
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Approve the Minutes from the following meetings:
November 12, 2013
February 4, 2014
February 6, 2014
February 11, 2014
Director Siemens arrived at 2:04 p.m.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to approve the
minutes.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 7, 2014
2
VOTE: 3-0-0
2. Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-14-125)
Human Resources Supervisor Candice Basnight presented the staff report summarizing the
General Manager’s recommendation explaining that the recommendation is meant to act as a
starting point for the District’s development of compensation guiding principles. Ms. Basnight
also provided background and contextual information regarding the guiding principles and topics
of discussion by the Committee.
Public comment opened at 2:36 p.m.
Alex Hapke, member of the Field Employees Association, provided comments related to the
exclusion of total compensation, which includes benefits, from discussion in the draft employee
compensation guiding principles. Mr. Hapke requested the Committee and the Board include
discussion of total compensation as they develop the employee compensation guiding principles
as are included in examples provided by staff.
Anthony Correa, member of the Field Employees Association, spoke urging the use of total
compensation, including possible study of “public safety benefits,” as part of a compensation
study and requested the Board respond to Mr. Hapke’s comments at a future meeting.
Public comment closed at 2:41 p.m.
Director Riffle inquired when the discussion related to employee benefits will be addressed.
Mr. Woodhouse explained that the draft employee compensation guiding principles does not
prohibit a future discussion of employee benefits. Due to the various factors that are involved in
employee benefits, it makes it difficult to compare to other public agencies.
Director Siemens provided comments regarding specific language in the draft policy and
suggested median salary be defined including the method for calculating median salary for
comparator agencies in the policy. Director Siemens also requested that flexibility be built into
the policy to prevent the District from being locked into use of median salary.
Director Riffle provided comments regarding the difference between represented and
unrepresented employees stressing the importance of both sets of employees are treated with
fairness and consistency without creating a divide between the two groups while also taking into
account the appropriateness of benefits as applies to each position.
Mr. Woodhouse explained that the draft policy will apply to all employees equally. Mr.
Woodhouse also suggested that this type of conversation relates more to process for labor
negotiations with represented and non-represented employees than an employee compensation
philosophy.
Directors Siemens and Riffle suggested staff begin looking for methods of studying total
compensation including benefits and providing that information to current and potential
employees in addition to the salary information currently provided.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 7, 2014
3
Director Kishimoto stated that the District needs to look at total compensation in the future and
look at the District’s benefit package prior to the next round of negotiations in order to establish
policy separate from the negotiation process.
Director Siemens suggested that benefits need to be considered in conjunction with salary to
allow for possible adjustments to total compensation to reflect changes in either salary or
benefits.
Director Siemens suggested removing the “+/- 5% of median” requirement from the draft policy.
Director Kishimoto stated that this guideline helps set expectations for staff and the public.
Director Siemens suggested in the alternative removing “and do not warrant changes.”
The Committee members agreed to this change by consensus.
Director Kishimoto requested that language stating that the guidelines apply equally to
represented and non-represented employees.
Director Kishimoto requested that language be included to address non-compensatory benefits,
such as flexible scheduling and time and place of work.
General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner and District Labor Counsel Jack Hughes suggested that
language directly related to types of compensation be excluded from the draft policy.
Director Siemens suggested including a reference to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act fact-finding
provisions in the policy.
Board members provided comments regarding comparison of benefits in addition to salary
comparisons. Director Siemens suggested inclusion of specific “base benefits” or “core
benefits” as benchmarks for total compensation with additional benefits, such as longevity pay,
merit-based pay and tuition reimbursement, listed separately.
Director Kishimoto suggested inclusion of a new bullet point to address non-compensatory
benefits. Director Siemens agreed that miscellaneous benefits should be addressed separately
from “core benefits.”
Committee members agreed that an additional Action Plan and Budget Committee meeting is
needed to continue discussion regarding the draft employee compensation guiding principles
draft board policy.
V. ADJOURNMENT
Director Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting of the Action Plan and Budget Committee of
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 4:05 p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Attachment 1
*Approved by the Action Plan & Budget Committee on November 12, 2014 1
SPECIAL MEETING
ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
October 31, 2014
APPROVED MINUTES*
I. ROLL CALL
Director Kishimoto called the Special Meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.
Members Present: Yoriko Kishimoto, Curt Riffle, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Administrative Services
Manager Kate Drayson, Human Resources Supervisor Candice Basnight,
and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Siemens moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 3-0-0
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Approve the Minutes from the October 7, 2014 meeting.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to approve the
minutes.
VOTE: 3-0-0
2. Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-14-135)
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse summarized edits to the draft Employee
Compensation Guiding Principles policy made since the October 7, 2014 Committee meeting.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 31, 2014
2
Mr. Woodhouse provided an example illustrating the difficulty of using salary increases to make
up the difference between salary and total compensation when taking benefit levels into account.
Director Siemens questioned the exclusion of the Social Security benefit from the provided
example because whether the District pays into Social Security may affect the amount the
District would pay into CalPERS for retirement benefits and therefore affects total staff
compensation.
Director Riffle suggested inclusion to the phrase “or situation” to the end of the policy’s purpose
statement. The Committee agreed to this change by consensus.
Director Riffle suggested numbering the guiding principles in the policy. The Committee agreed
to this change by consensus.
Director Siemens suggested listing core benefits in the policy, which would be the same for all
District employees. Miscellaneous benefits which are not utilized by all District employees,
such as uniform allowances or tuition reimbursement, would not be listed in the policy. Listing
core benefits would prevent benefits from being applied differently to various employee groups.
Mr. Woodhouse explained the difficulties associated with listing core benefits in a Board policy
because core benefits are discussed as part of labor negotiations.
Public comment opened at 10:26 p.m.
Alex Hapke, member of the Field Employees Association, inquired if the Committee had
responses to any of the written comments he submitted at the last Committee meeting. Mr.
Hapke also requested information on when employees would be Y-rated when within +/-5% of
the median. Finally, Mr. Hapke thanked Director Siemens for his comments regarding payment
of Social Security benefits by various comparator agencies.
Casey Hiatt provided comments regarding a letter submitted by members of the District’s
Planning Department’s and regarding employee retention. Ms. Hiatt stated that the District has a
history of hiring excellent staff, which also makes them in high demand to other employers in the
public and private sector. High costs of living in the District make it difficult for employees to
live and work in the District without looking for employment elsewhere.
Tina Hugg provided comments regarding the difference between cost of living and cost of labor.
Ms. Hugg stated that the cost of living has rapidly escalated in the District and local areas. The
cost of living has risen much faster than the ability of individuals living in the area can absorb
the costs, and recognition of this challenge by the Committee and Board would be appreciated.
Public comment closed at 10:34 a.m.
Director Kishimoto provided comments regarding the high cost of living in the Bay Area, and
suggested there may exist other innovations, such as District-owned employee housing or
providing housing allowances to all District employees instead of limiting this benefit to Board
appointees.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 31, 2014
3
Director Riffle provided comments regarding use of median salary as a benchmark stating that
this may not be the benchmark to use in order to allow the District to continue to attract
exceptional staff.
General Manager Steve Abbors provided comments regarding potentially using median salary as
a floor for compensation or increased examination of the cost of living in the area.
Director Siemens suggested removal of +/-5% as an applicator of the median. Director Siemens
also provided comments regarding increased revenue to the District from increased property
taxes are not necessarily a positive change because District employees are also paying these
increased property taxes and suggested the District pay above the median, perhaps up to 25%
above.
Director Kishimoto expressed her concerns regarding using 25% above the median as a
benchmark due to fact that this may lead to continuing increasing salaries and prefers use of the
policy’s flexibility clause to remain competitive as an employer.
Director Riffle suggested that this discussion should be held by the full Board of Directors.
Director Riffle stated that the goal of the District should be to endeavor to pay above the median
and not below. Director Riffle suggested the District also look at surrounding factors in the
economy to determine if salaries should be above the median in any given year.
The Committee directed staff to return to the Committee with additional information regarding
the implications of the changes the Committee had suggested. Those suggestions being defining
a competitive salary as 55% of the median +/-5% and that no employee be paid below the
median salary. The item will be agendized for the November 18, 2014 Action Plan and Budget
Committee meeting.
V. ADJOURNMENT
Director Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting of the Action Plan and Budget Committee of
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 11:30 a.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Attachment 1
*Approved by the Action Plan and Budget Committee on December 10, 2014 1
ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
November 18, 2014
APPROVED MINUTES*
I. ROLL CALL
Director Kishimoto called the Special Meeting to order at 2:04 p.m.
Members Present: Yoriko Kishimoto and Curt Riffle
Members Absent: Pete Siemens
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner,
District Controller Mike Foster, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Administrative Services
Manager Kate Drayson, Real Property Manager Mike Williams, Natural
Resources Manager Kirk Lenington, Public Affairs Manager Shelly
Lewis, Planning Manager Jane Mark, Operations Manager Michael
Newburn, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers present.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to adopt the
agenda.
VOTE: 2-0-0
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Approve the Minutes from the November 12, 2014 meeting.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to approve the
minutes.
VOTE: 2-0-0
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee November 18, 2014
2
2. Review Proposed District Fund Balance Policy & Capitalization Policy (R-14-141)
District Controller Mike Foster provided a brief summary of the proposed Fund Balance Policy
including the various components of the District’s fund balance, specific reserved funds and
amounts, committed funds, assigned funds, and unassigned funds. Mr. Foster explained that if
approved by the Committee, the draft policy will be forwarded to the Board of Directors at its
November 25, 2014 meeting.
Directors Riffle and Kishimoto expressed concerns regarding using specified numbers in the
policy because they will require updating the policy each year.
Mr. Foster explained that the numbers can reflect the initial amount of the funds.
Director Kishimoto requested the fund amounts be removed from the Board policy and be
adopted separately for the upcoming budget year and be amended, as necessary, as part of the
annual budget.
Accountant Andrew Taylor provided information on the proposed revisions to the Capital
Expenditures and Depreciable Fixed Assets board policy explaining the changes were
recommended by the District’s auditor to better reflect the District’s assets and annual budget.
Public comment opened at 2:30 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public comment closed at 2:30 p.m.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to recommend
approval by the full Board of Directors of the proposed new District Fund Balance Policy and
revisions to the Capital Expenditures and Depreciable Fixed Assets Board Policy. The numbers
will be stricken from the “Committed Funds” portion of the Fund Balance Policy, and initial
balances for the reserve funds as written in the proposed policy are recommended for separate
approval.
VOTE: 2-0-0
3. Review Proposed Format Changes to District Budget and Action Plan Documents
Administrative Services Manager Kate Drayson described the proposed new format for District
Budget and Action Plan documents. Ms. Drayson explained that as the District’s financial
operations become more complicated it will be helpful for the Board to adopt a standalone
budget document rather than the current budget documents, which are a part of a Board report.
Ms. Drayson outlined the various sections of the proposed budget document and described the
format for Department Budgets and Workplans as well as detailed project pages.
District Controller Mike Foster inquired where information would be included for staffing costs
for Measure AA projects.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee November 18, 2014
3
Ms. Drayson explained that departments will have detailed breakdowns of labor costs and staff
time will be included as part of capital costs, excluding benefits.
Director Kishimoto inquired if additional information will be given to the Action Plan & Budget
Committee.
Ms. Drayson explained that additional information may be presented to the Action Plan &
Budget Committee if needed, which information will also be available to the public.
Director Riffle inquired as to the reasons for making changes to the current format.
Ms. Drayson explained that the proposed format changes will remove the necessity of staff
inputting budget information in to duplicate documents but will allow for all information to be
inputted and maintained in a single document.
Director Kishimoto suggested including the “Summary list of capital projects” and “MAA
Projects summary” earlier in the budget document, such as directly after the General Manager’s
transmittal letter.
General Manager Steve Abbors suggested staff can return with revised budget documents to
address Committee member concerns.
Director Riffle stated that removing the details may be the way the Board should be headed as it
moves towards a policy making body and away from the details of project implementation.
Public comment opened at 3:06 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public comment closed at 3:06 p.m.
No action taken by the Committee.
4. Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-14-143)
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse summarized previous discussions by the Action
Plan & Budget Committee and corresponding revisions to the policy. Mr. Woodhouse provided
information regarding the potential cost impact of increasing salaries and benefits from 50% to
55% of the median.
Director Kishimoto inquired as to why the cost for the benefits is so much more than the
difference in salaries between 50% and 55% of the median.
Ms. Drayson explained that the difference is largely due to the cost range for individual
positions.
Director Kishimoto inquired as to how staff determined the $300 per month cost for benefits.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee November 18, 2014
4
Mr. Woodhouse explained that this amount was determined based on the average cost of
bringing current employee benefits up to median.
Director Riffle inquired if it is included in the draft policy that total compensation, including
salary and benefits, will be examined as part of determining staff compensation.
Mr. Woodhouse stated that this is included in item 6 of the draft policy.
Mr. Abbors stated that the Board will most likely want additional cost information before
making a final decision, and the District Controller will need to include this information in his
financial models.
Public comment opened at 3:40 p.m.
Gina Coony, Planner III, provided comments on the difficulty of this process. Ms. Coony
expressed her confusion as to the goal of the proposed policy. Ms. Coony stated that the purpose
of the policy should be to attract and retain staff in a transparent and consistent manner including
benefits that can be offered to employees and increasing diversity among the workforce
including age range.
Public comment closed at 3:44 p.m.
Director Kishimoto suggested that information be provided to the full Board of Directors
regarding the cost of bringing benefits to the median and to 55% of the median.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion forward the
policy, as drafted, to the Board of Directors and recommends approval of the draft Employee
Compensation Guiding Principles, with the exception of Item 6 of the policy. Staff is also
directed to provide additional information related to the cost of bringing current benefits to 50%
and current salary to 55% of the median and cost information to bring both salary and benefits to
55% of the median.
VOTE: 2-0-0
V. ADJOURNMENT
Director Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting of the Action Plan and Budget Committee of
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 3:58 p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Attachment 1
1
ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
December 10, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
I. ROLL CALL
Director Kishimoto called the Special Meeting to order at 5:31 p.m.
Members Present: Yoriko Kishimoto, Curt Riffle, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner,
District Controller Mike Foster, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Administrative Services
Manager Kate Drayson, Real Property Manager Mike Williams, Natural
Resources Manager Kirk Lenington, Public Affairs Manager Shelly
Lewis, Planning Manager Jane Mark, Operations Manager Michael
Newburn, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers present.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 3-0-0
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Approve the Minutes from the November 18, 2014 meeting.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to approve the
minutes.
VOTE: 3-0-0
2. Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-14-157)
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee December 10, 2014
2
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse summarized previous direction provided by the
Action Plan & Budget Committee and corresponding cost analysis completed by District staff.
Mr. Woodhouse described three alternatives for Principle number 6 (Competitiveness) of the
Employee Compensation Guiding Principles and provided cost analysis for each alternative
describing the constraints of completing and applying the costs to all District staff. Mr.
Woodhouse described the benefits and costs of Option C described in the staff report and
addressed comments received from members prior to the Action Plan & Budget meeting.
Finally, Mr. Woodhouse outlined proposed next steps for the process.
Director Siemens suggested that rather than using set percentages to calculate benefits for the
policy to list core benefits that will be provided to all District staff. Director Siemens also
suggested that the following language be removed from number 6 “with no employee’s top-
range salary below median or above 60th percentile unless under the Board’s decision-making
flexibility as provided in this policy.”
Director Riffle inquired if analysis has been completed regarding increases to salary and benefit
costs as compared to revenue growth.
District Controller Michael Foster explained that increases to salary and benefits would be
affordable to the District, but in the future it could constrain future budget actions.
Director Kishimoto inquired regarding the current CalPERS PEPRA retirement formulas.
Mr. Woodhouse provided the current formulas for new and classic CalPERS employees and
explained that District employees are currently paying the 8% employee contribution allowed
under PEPRA.
General Manager Steve Abbors provided comments on Option C, which is the option
recommended by staff, stating that Options A and B would limit the District’s ability to hire staff
and complete projects funded by Measure AA.
Public comment opened at 6:24 p.m.
Alex Hapke quoted an article from San Jose Mercury News regarding the high cost of homes in
the Bay Area compared to salaries.
Kristin Johnson provided comments regarding the high rental costs in the Bay Area and offered
comments regarding availability of staff housing for field staff.
Grant Kern spoke in favor of adoption of the 55/55% option and tying implementation of the
formula to District revenue to prevent salary and benefit costs from outpacing District revenues.
Ken Bolle provided comments regarding the savings District staff provide to the District and the
high quality of work completed by staff.
Brennon McKibbin provided comments regarding the value of District staff and staff’s
commitment to complete Measure AA projects.
Attachment 1
Action Plan & Budget Committee December 10, 2014
3
Eric Stanton provided comments regarding the funding for completion of Measure AA projects
as compared for funding of District staff salary and benefit costs. Mr. Stanton also provided
comments regarding the Field Employee Association’s support of Measure AA and sacrifices
made by employees that they were told would help Measure AA pass, but now feel they should
be supported by the Board and District.
Donald Marchesy provided comments regarding competitiveness as outlined in the draft
Employee Compensation Guiding Principles and defined by the three options outlined in the
staff report. Mr. Marchesy also provided comments regarding the high quality of work
completed by District staff and its value.
Public comment closed at 6:38 p.m.
The Committee members provided comments on whether or not they should be setting general
guidelines or strict policies regarding Employee Compensation Principles.
Director Riffle provided comments on the need for employee benefits to be “caught up.”
However, the “catch up” may be done gradually.
Mr. Abbors provided comments regarding the District’s ability to retain staff and prevent
overspending.
Director Kishimoto expressed her support for Option C with the inclusion of specific guidelines
including not paying public safety benefits and salaries, do intend to raise benefits for staff to be
at median or above, and direct staff to clarify core benefits
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to forward to the
Board the draft Employee Compensation Guiding Principles with all three options as outlined in
the current draft policy, and the Committee recommends adoption of Option C with the
understanding that the full Board would provide input on the wording of Option C. The
Committee also directs staff to return with additional information regarding historical employee
retention data.
VOTE: 3-0-0
V. ADJOURNMENT
Director Kishimoto adjourned the meeting of the Action Plan and Budget Committee of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 7:03 p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Attachment 1
ACTION PLAN & BUDGET COMMITTEE
R-14-135
October 31, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 2
AGENDA ITEM
Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Continue discussion and development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles.
SUMMARY
In March 2014, during the Board of Directors’ final review and acceptance of the Fiscal Year
(FY) 2013-14 Compensation Study prepared by Koff & Associates, the Board directed the
Action Plan and Budget Committee (ABC) to develop Employee Compensation Guiding
Principles for full Board consideration during FY2014-15. On October 7, 2014, the ABC began
work on developing such guiding principles by discussing and providing feedback on the
provisions of the General Manager’s recommended draft Employee Compensation Guiding
Principles Board Policy. The ABC directed the General Manager to revise the draft policy and
return to the ABC for further discussion and consideration of the policy.
DISCUSSION
Background
On October 7, 2014, the ABC discussed and provided feedback on the General Manager’s
recommended draft Employee Compensation Guiding Principles Board Policy. The draft
minutes for this meeting are provided as Attachment 1. Based on the ABC’s feedback, staff has
edited the draft policy (showing the changes), provided as Attachment 2, for further discussion
and direction from the Committee.
Policy Revisions
• Introduction/Purpose statement: This statement was revised to clearly state that the
Employee Compensation Guiding Principles are intended by the Board to apply to
unrepresented employees, as well as represented employees.
• Public Accountability, Affordability, and Flexibility: Wording for the three guiding
principles related to each of these topics was approved by the ABC.
Attachment 2
R-14- 135 Page 2
• Legality: The ABC approved this legality provision, which refers to the California
Meyers Milias Brown Act (MMBA). However, it was suggested that the policy should
attach an excerpt from the MMBA. The revision to this provision provides for such an
attachment, with the limitation that it is a “point-in-time” reference to the excerpt, should
the law change in the future.
• Flexibility related to benefits between different employee groups: A new provision has
been added that acknowledges that there may be differences in the appropriateness of
certain benefits between different groups of employees.
• Competitiveness: There are three provisions in the draft policy that address
competitiveness -- salaries and benefits, one-time and non-monetary compensation, and
the Cost of Living. The ABC did not provide final direction to staff on these provisions,
proposing instead to continue discussing them at the next meeting. Based on ABC
discussion, staff has drafted revisions to these provisions as follows:
Salaries and benefits: This provision has been restated to emphasize that both forms
of compensation, salary and benefits, are key factors comprising competitive
compensation. Additionally, this provision clarifies that when comparing to
benchmark agencies, the median salary of the comparator agencies is considered
competitive, plus or minus five percent, utilizing “top-range” salary when comparing
classifications. On the benefits side, the median benefits package value is considered
competitive, plus or minus five percent, utilizing comparisons of select core benefits
as determined by the Board of Directors. Median is defined as the midpoint of the
data collected, with 50% of the comparators below and 50% above (when there is an
even number of comparators, the mid-point is half-way between the two middle data
points).
Discussion Points:
1. There are two approaches to consider regarding providing median total
compensation. The first is to evaluate salaries and benefits separately
and provide the median salary and the median benefits. The second
approach combines salaries and benefits and takes the median of the
combined total, increasing salaries to offset below median benefits, or
vice versa, so that the total compensation is competitive. These
approaches employ a difference in philosophy, as well as a difference in
the ability to implement. The latter is a philosophy that if benefits are
low or high compared to median, then as long as salary is adjusted to
balance out the difference in benefits so that the total compensation is at
median, then total compensation is competitive. However, adjusting
salary levels depending on whether benefit levels are high or low
presents a significant implementation challenge to maintaining
compensation alignment within a department and throughout the
organization. Striving for competitiveness of salaries in addition to
competitiveness of benefits is a philosophy whereby salaries and
benefits would both be evaluated, but separately, and achieving median
in both would result in competitive total compensation.
Attachment 2
R-14- 135 Page 3
2. Benefit package values can be difficult to quantify, making it difficult to
accurately compare with benchmark agencies due to differences between
retirement plans or insurance plans. Regarding these two categories of
benefits, there are often legal or contractual limitations which constrain
an agency’s options for its employees, such as the California Public
Employee Pension Reform Act of 2012 or contract options within the
CalPERS health system. Also, there are Board-established policies
related to job duties and retirement plans that require consideration when
comparing benefit values, such as whether it is accurate to compare the
District’s miscellaneous employees’ retirement plan to public safety
retirement benefits. Another challenge in comparing benefits is with
organizations whose retirement packages include Social Security in
addition to CalPERS, as the salary compensation data does not reflect
the employee social security contribution, thus artificially inflating the
total compensation amount. Furthermore, for benefits that accrue during
retirement, including retiree health benefits, there are complexities and
assumptions related to individual employee facts, actuarial analysis, and
how Social Security and CalPERS affect each other in retirement that
would need to be analyzed in detail in order to accurately compare the
benefit value.
Due to these many variables, the General Manager’s recommendation in
the draft policy is for the policy language to focus on the high-level goal
of achieving a competitive benefits package value. Staff’s rigorous
analysis of benefits and the detailed discussions about that information
would be performed in the context of labor negotiations, or periodically
as necessary, and guided by the Board’s direction as to what constitutes
accurate benefits comparisons.
3. In considering and implementing the results of a compensation study,
the General Manger recommends the Board acknowledge that a range of
plus or minus five percent from median remains competitive yet allows
necessary flexibility to achieve internal alignment within work groups,
departments, or the whole organization. It is impractical to expect that
every classification’s compensation could be set at the precise median of
comparator agencies while maintaining internal alignment.
One-time, individual, and non-monetary compensation: The ABC acknowledged that
one-time monetary compensation (such as lump sum merit or longevity pay),
individual monetary compensation (such as tuition reimbursement, deferred
compensation, and flexible spending), and non-monetary compensation (such as
meaningfulness of the District’s mission, job-stability, professional growth
opportunities and organizational future, organizational culture, work environment,
employee recognition, or flexible scheduling) are factors in competitiveness.
However, it was recommended by staff that the policy language not attempt to
delineate all of these types of compensation, therefore the revised draft policy deletes
the parenthetical lists.
Cost of Living: The ABC has not specifically discussed this provision yet. It remains
unchanged from the October 7th draft policy, pending ABC review.
Attachment 2
R-14- 135 Page 4
• Future Compensation Studies: Based on the ABC’s comments about this provision,
several specific revisions have been made, as well as rephrasing to make the intent of this
provision clearer. The sub-provision concerning the competitiveness of a plus or minus
five percent range when comparing salaries and benefits with comparator agencies has
been moved into the earlier provision that defines competitive compensation.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact directly related to the Committee’s work on developing Employee
Compensation Guiding Principles. Any anticipated or known future fiscal impacts that could
result from guiding principles that may be eventually recommended by the Committee for the
full Board’s consideration will be analyzed as part of that recommendation.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This item is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
Following the ABC’s discussion and input at the October 31 meeting, and unless directed
otherwise by the ABC, the General Manager recommends that staff finalize revisions to the draft
policy and bring the policy to a Board study session in November, followed by final Board
adoption of the guiding principles in December.
Following development of these principles, the General Manager will complete review and
analysis of the 2013-14 Compensation Study results and bring forth any proposed compensation
recommendations to the Board for consideration in the future, which may be during the FY2015-
16 budget process or following labor negotiations.
Attachments
1. Draft Minutes from October 7, 2014 ABC meeting
2. Revised Draft Employee Compensation Guiding Principles
Responsible Department Head:
Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Kevin S. Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Attachment 2
1
SPECIAL MEETING
ACTION PLAN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
October 7, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
I. ROLL CALL
Director Kishimoto called the Special Meeting to order at 2:03 p.m.
Members Present: Yoriko Kishimoto and Curt Riffle
Members Absent: Pete Siemens
Staff Present: Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz, Assistant General Manager Kevin
Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner, Human Resources
Supervisor Candice Basnight, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
II. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
III. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to adopt the
agenda.
VOTE: 2-0-0 (Director Siemens absent)
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
1. Approve the Minutes from the following meetings:
November 12, 2013
February 4, 2014
February 6, 2014
February 11, 2014
Director Siemens arrived at 2:04 p.m.
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to approve the
minutes.
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment 2
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 7, 2014
2
VOTE: 3-0-0
2. Development of Employee Compensation Guiding Principles (R-14-125)
Human Resources Supervisor Candice Basnight presented the staff report summarizing the
General Manager’s recommendation explaining that the recommendation is meant to act as a
starting point for the District’s development of compensation guiding principles. Ms. Basnight
also provided background and contextual information regarding the guiding principles and topics
of discussion by the Committee.
Public comment opened at 2:36 p.m.
Alex Hapke, Secretary of the Field Employees Association, provided comments related to the
exclusion of total compensation, which includes benefits, from discussion in the draft employee
compensation guiding principles. Mr. Hapke requested the Committee and the Board include
discussion of total compensation as they develop the employee compensation guiding principles
as are included in examples provided by staff.
Anthony Correa, member of the Field Employees Association, spoke urging the use of total
compensation, including possible study of “public safety benefits,” as part of a compensation
study and requested the Board respond to Mr. Hapke’s comments at a future meeting.
Public comment closed at 2:41 p.m.
Director Riffle inquired when the discussion related to employee benefits will be addressed.
Mr. Woodhouse explained that the draft employee compensation guiding principles does not
prohibit a future discussion of employee benefits. Due to the various factors that are involved in
employee benefits, it makes it difficult to compare to other public agencies.
Director Siemens provided comments regarding specific language in the draft policy and
suggested median salary be defined including the method for calculating median salary for
comparator agencies in the policy. Director Siemens also requested that flexibility be built into
the policy to prevent the District from being locked into use of median salary.
Director Riffle provided comments regarding the difference between represented and
unrepresented employees stressing the importance of both sets of employees are treated with
fairness and consistency without creating a divide between the two groups while also taking into
account the appropriateness of benefits as applies to each position.
Mr. Woodhouse explained that the draft policy will apply to all employees equally. Mr.
Woodhouse also suggested that this type of conversation relates more to process for labor
negotiations with represented and non-represented employees than an employee compensation
philosophy.
Directors Siemens and Riffle suggested staff begin looking for methods of studying total
compensation including benefits and providing that information to current and potential
employees in addition to the salary information currently provided.
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment 2
Action Plan & Budget Committee October 7, 2014
3
Director Kishimoto stated that the District needs to look at total compensation in the future and
look at the District’s benefit package prior to the next round of negotiations in order to establish
policy separate from the negotiation process.
Director Siemens suggested that benefits need to be considered in conjunction with salary to
allow for possible adjustments to total compensation to reflect changes in either salary or
benefits.
Director Siemens suggested removing the “+/- 5% of median” requirement from the draft policy.
Director Kishimoto stated that this guideline helps set expectations for staff and the public.
Director Siemens suggested in the alternative removing “and do not warrant changes.”
The Committee members agreed to this change by consensus.
Director Kishimoto requested that language stating that the guidelines apply equally to
represented and non-represented employees.
Director Kishimoto requested that language be included to address non-compensatory benefits,
such as flexible scheduling and time and place of work.
General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner and District Labor Counsel Jack Hughes suggested that
language directly related to types of compensation be excluded from the draft policy.
Director Siemens suggested including a reference to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act fact-finding
provisions in the policy.
Board members provided comments regarding comparison of benefits in addition to salary
comparisons. Director Siemens suggested inclusion of specific “base benefits” or “core
benefits” as benchmarks for total compensation with additional benefits, such as longevity pay,
merit-based pay and tuition reimbursement, listed separately.
Director Kishimoto suggested inclusion of a new bullet point to address non-compensatory
benefits. Director Siemens agreed that miscellaneous benefits should be addressed separately
from “core benefits.”
Committee members agreed that an additional Action Plan and Budget Committee meeting is
needed to continue discussion regarding the draft employee compensation guiding principles
draft board policy.
V. ADJOURNMENT
Director Kishimoto adjourned the special meeting of the Action Plan and Budget Committee of
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 4:05 p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
Attachment 2
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board Policy Manual
Employee Compensation
Guiding Principles
Policy #
Chapter 2 – District Personnel & Board
Support
Effective Date: Revised Date:
Prior Versions:
ATTACHMENT 2
Purpose:
The District’s Board of Directors values high-quality employees dedicated to fulfilling the
mission of the District in service to the public. Competitive compensation is one important tool
to attract and retain high-quality employees. By clearly setting forth Employee Compensation
Guiding Principles in this policy, the District’s Board of Directors is establishing its compensation
philosophy for represented and unrepresented employees, through a transparent and public
process for employees and members of the public, to guide the General Manager’s employee
compensation recommendations into the future. These guiding principles are flexible. Factors
may prove to be more or less important in particular negotiations.
Guiding Principles:
• As stewards of public funds, the District shall hold accountability to the public as a
cornerstone value in maintaining competitive, fair, and equitable compensation for its
employees for their high-quality and hard work in delivering excellent services to the
public; [public accountability] [Staff note: wording OK, per 10/7 ABC input]
• Employee compensation decisions shall be considered in the context of short and long-
term affordability, and shall not negatively impact the District’s ability to fulfill its
mission with excellent service into the future; [affordability] [Staff note: wording OK,
per 10/7 ABC input]
• The Board of Directors shall always retain flexibility to address circumstances that may
be negatively impacting the District’s ability to attract and retain high-quality employees
and deliver excellent services to the public; [flexibility] [Staff note: wording OK, per
10/7 ABC input]
• The Board will refer to the California Meyers Milias Brown Act (MMBA) to determine
what, if any, criteria factors the law identifies related to determining appropriate
compensation through to be considered in labor negotiations in local public agencies to
determine appropriate compensation. An excerpt from the MMBA, as of the effective
date of this policy and subject to future changes in the MMBA, is provided as an
Attachment 2
Attachment to the policy to partially show factors in the law at this time related to
determining compensation, but is not intended to represent the full extent of the law.
[legality]
• The Board of Directors shall consider the appropriateness of certain benefits between
different groups of employees.
• The Board of Directors shall consider salary and benefits as key , yet different, factors
comprising competitive compensation. Periodically, salaries and benefits may be
evaluated in comparison to benchmark agencies Within the District’s labor market and
within comparison to benchmark agencies (which that are determined through a
combination of factors, typically including organizational type and structure, similarity of
population, staff, and budget, scope of services provided and geographic location, labor
market, and compensation philosophy.) When comparing to benchmark agencies, a
competitive salary is defined as the “median salary” of the comparator agencies, plus or
minus five percent, utilizing comparisons of “top-range” salary when comparing
classifications. Similarly, when comparing to benchmark agencies, a competitive
benefits package is defined as the “median benefits package” value, plus or minus five
percent, [utilizing comparisons of select core benefits as determined by the Board of
Directors.s…]
Median is defined as the midpoint of the data collected, with 50% of the comparators
below and 50% above (when there is an even number of comparators, the mid-point is
half-way between the two middle data points). The plus or minus five percent from the
median is a range that the Board acknowledges as important to give the General
Manager flexibility in achieving internal alignment within the organization on
compensation recommendations, yet still remaining competitive.
[competitioncompetitiveness]
• The Board of Directors also considers one-time and individual monetary benefits (such
as lump-sum merit or longevity pay, tuition reimbursement, deferred compensation
plans or other pre-tax deferrals) and non-monetary benefits (such as meaningfulness of
the District’s mission, job-stability, professional growth opportunities and organizational
future, organizational culture, work environment, and work recognition) as factors in
remaining competitive within the District’s labor market; [competitivenesscompetition]
• The Board of Directors acknowledges that the high Cost of Living in the Bay Area is an
ongoing challenge for public sector recruitment and retention. While the guiding
principles above that relate to maintaining competitive compensation within the
District’s labor market help to partially address the Cost of Living challenges, the District
is willing to explore innovative ideas, alone or in concert with other public agencies, to
improve this regional challenge. [competitivenesscompetition]
• To determine competitive salaries and benefits in the District’s labor market, in
response to unforeseen, dramatic changes in the labor market or as new positions or
Attachment 2
work groups are established, and with the intent of managing potential “drift” of District
compensation, the Board of DirectorsGeneral Manager may periodically direct the
General Manager to conduct direct that a compensation study be performed,
organization-wide or for specific departments, work groups or classifications. When
conducting a compensation study, benchmark comparator agencies will remain as
consistent as possible from study to study.;
- Data results that fall within +/-5% of median are considered competitive and do not
warrant changes.
- Competitiveness of benefits will be periodically evaluated and addressed, typically in
the context of labor negotiations.
Attachment 2
Attachment 1: Meyers Milias Brown Act
The following is an excerpt from the Meyers Milias Brown Act and is intended to partially show
factors in the law as of October 2014 related to determining compensation. This excerpt is not
intended to represent the full extent of the law.
Excerpt from California Government Code section 3505.4:
(1) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer.
(2) Local rules, regulations, or ordinances.
(3) Stipulations of the parties.
(4) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public agency.
(5) Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the employees involved
in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of other
employees performing similar services in comparable public agencies.
(6) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of living.
(7) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct wage
compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and pensions, medical
and hospitalization benefits, the continuity and stability of employment, and all other benefits
received.
(8) Any other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (1) to (7), inclusive, which are
normally or traditionally taken into consideration in making the findings and recommendations.
Attachment 2
DATE: January 9, 2015
MEMO TO: Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager
FROM: Kevin S. Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Candice Basnight, Human Resources Supervisor
SUBJECT: MROSD Recruitment and Retention Analysis Summary
_____________________________________________________________________________
At an Action Plan and Budget Committee meeting on December 10, 2014, the Committee
requested the General Manager provide an analysis of employee recruitment and retention for the
January study session on the Employee Compensation Guiding Principles policy. Within the
timeframe allowed between then and the release of the staff report for the study session, the
District’s Human Resources Division was able to perform a focused analysis on numerous years
of data related to recruitment and retention. This memorandum summarizes the research
findings. The conclusions of this research suggest the District’s recruitment efforts have been
very competitive and successful and that retention of employees has also been very successful.
For the small number of employees that have chosen to leave employment with the District,
Human Resources’ staff did not find information that suggests that employee compensation was
a main reason for their decision.
Scope of Research
The following information was compiled from automated databases as available and manual
pulling of records:
1. Data on staff turnover from one pre-recession year, Fiscal Year 2006-07, and the last five
years, FYs 2009-10 through FY 2013-14;
2. Data on district recruitments over the last five years, FYs 2009-10 through FY 2013-14;
3. Data on staff vacancy rates and turnover rates for one pre-recession year, Fiscal Year
2006-07, one mid-recession year, FY2009-10, and one post-recession year, FY 2013-14.
Research Findings
Recruitments
During FYs 2009-10 through 2013-14, the District conducted 37 recruitments. The size of
applicant pools ranged from 14 to 203 applicants; average size was 82 applicants. Out of these
applicants, each recruitment resulted in a competitive interview pool ranging from 3 to 19
applicants interviewed; average was 7 applicants interviewed.
Attachment 3
Turnover
The rate of employee turnover (number of employees that ended employment with the District
voluntarily, involuntarily, or by retirement compared to the total number of employees) was:
FY 2006-07: 8.3%
FY 2009-10: 3.1%
FY 2013-14: 9.6%
During this research, Human Resources’ staff received turnover rate information from four
nearby public agencies. Their rates ranged from 7% to 10% for FY 2013-14. The District’s
rates appear to be consistent with these agencies.
During FY 2006-07 and FYs 2009-10 through 2013-14, 38 employees ended employment with
the District. Of this total, 14 were involuntary or retirements. Of the remaining 24, based on
Human Resource records from which details are confidential, the following breakdown generally
characterizes the main voluntary reason for leaving:
Promotion: 4
Career Change: 3
Commute/proximity of work to home: 3
Hours (needed part-time hours): 2
Returned to School: 4
Other (moved out of area, didn’t need to
work, returned to previous agency job):
3
Personal Reasons: 5
Based on the available information, it is not possible to derive whether or not compensation was
a factor in the 5 “personal reasons” cases, or a partial or minor factor in any of the other cases.
Conclusion
Based on the scope of the research Human Resources was able to complete during this
timeframe, the District’s turnover rate is consistent with rates experienced by other nearby public
agencies. In addition, the District’s recruitment efforts have been competitive and successful.
Additional research would be necessary to validate these results compared to additional other
agencies’ data.
Attachment 3
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board Policy Manual
Employee Compensation
Guiding Principles
Policy #
Chapter 2 – District Personnel & Board
Support
Effective Date: Revised Date:
Prior Versions:
Attachment 4
Purpose:
The District’s Board of Directors values high-quality employees dedicated to fulfilling the
mission of the District in service to the public. Competitive compensation is one important tool
to attract and retain high-quality employees. By clearly setting forth Employee Compensation
Guiding Principles in this policy, the District’s Board of Directors is establishing its compensation
philosophy for represented and unrepresented employees, through a transparent and public
process, to guide the General Manager’s employee compensation recommendations into the
future. These guiding principles are flexible. Factors may prove to be more or less important in
particular negotiations or situations.
Guiding Principles:
1. As stewards of public funds, the District shall hold accountability to the public as a
cornerstone value in maintaining competitive, fair, and equitable compensation for its
employees for their high-quality and hard work in delivering excellent services to the
public;
2. Employee compensation decisions shall be considered in the context of short and long-
term affordability, and shall not negatively impact the District’s ability to fulfill its
mission with excellent service into the future;
3. The Board of Directors shall always retain flexibility to address circumstances that may
be negatively impacting the District’s ability to attract and retain high-quality employees
and deliver excellent services to the public;
4. The Board will refer to the California Meyers Milias Brown Act (MMBA) to determine
what, if any, factors the law identifies related to determining appropriate compensation
through labor negotiations in local public agencies. An excerpt from the MMBA, as of
the effective date of this policy and subject to future changes in the MMBA, is provided
2
as an Attachment to the policy to partially show factors in the law at this time related to
determining compensation, but is not intended to represent the full extent of the law.
5. The Board of Directors shall consider the appropriateness of certain benefits between
different groups of employees.
6. The Board of Directors shall consider salary and benefits as key factors comprising
competitive compensation. Periodically, salaries and benefits may be evaluated in
comparison to benchmark agencies that are determined through a combination of
factors, typically including organizational type and structure, similarity of population,
staff, and budget, scope of services provided and geographic location, labor market, and
compensation philosophy. When comparing to benchmark agencies using “top-range
salary”, a competitive salary is defined as median to 55th percentile of the comparator
agencies, plus or minus five percent, with no employee’s top-range salary below median
or above 60th percentile unless under the Board’s decision-making flexibility as provided
in this policy. [OPTIONS RE: BENEFITS-RELATED PRINCIPLE PRESENTED HERE FOR BOARD
REVIEW; COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS OPTION C]:
Option A: When comparing to benchmark agencies, a competitive benefits package
is defined as median to 55th percentile benefits package value, plus or minus five
percent, utilizing comparisons of select core benefits as determined by the Board of
Directors, with no employee’s benefits package value below median or above 60th
percentile unless under the Board’s decision-making flexibility as provided in this
policy; OR
Option B: When comparing to benchmark agencies, a competitive benefits package
is defined as median benefits package value, plus or minus five percent, utilizing
comparisons of select core benefits as determined by the Board of Directors, with no
employee’s benefits package value below 45th percentile or above 55th percentile
unless under the Board’s decision-making flexibility as provided in this policy; OR
Option C: Regarding the employee benefits part of compensation, it is the intent of
the Board of Directors to maintain provide a benefits package, when combined with
salary, as well as other benefits described in Principle #7 below, that helps attract
and retain quality employees over the long term.
The plus or minus five percent from the compensation target is a range that the Board
acknowledges as important to give the General Manager flexibility in achieving internal
alignment within the organization on compensation recommendations, yet still
remaining competitive.
7. The Board of Directors also considers one-time and individual monetary benefits and
non-monetary benefits as factors in remaining competitive within the District’s labor
market;
3
8. The Board of Directors acknowledges that the high Cost of Living in the Bay Area is an
ongoing challenge for public sector recruitment and retention. While the guiding
principles above that relate to maintaining competitive compensation within the
District’s labor market help to partially address the Cost of Living challenges, the District
is willing to explore innovative ideas, alone or in concert with other public agencies, to
improve this regional challenge.
9. To determine competitive salaries and benefits in the District’s labor market in response
to unforeseen, dramatic changes in the labor market or as new positions or work groups
are established, and with the intent of managing potential “drift” of District
compensation, the General Manager may periodically direct that a compensation study
be performed, organization-wide or for specific departments, work groups or
classifications. When conducting a compensation study, benchmark comparator
agencies will remain as consistent as possible from study to study.
4
Attachment 1: Meyers Milias Brown Act
The following is an excerpt from the Meyers Milias Brown Act and is intended to partially show
factors in the law as of October 2014 related to determining compensation. This excerpt is not
intended to represent the full extent of the law.
Excerpt from California Government Code section 3505.4:
(1) State and federal laws that are applicable to the employer.
(2) Local rules, regulations, or ordinances.
(3) Stipulations of the parties.
(4) The interests and welfare of the public and the financial ability of the public agency.
(5) Comparison of the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of the employees involved
in the factfinding proceeding with the wages, hours, and conditions of employment of other
employees performing similar services in comparable public agencies.
(6) The consumer price index for goods and services, commonly known as the cost of living.
(7) The overall compensation presently received by the employees, including direct wage
compensation, vacations, holidays, and other excused time, insurance and pensions, medical
and hospitalization benefits, the continuity and stability of employment, and all other benefits
received.
(8) Any other facts, not confined to those specified in paragraphs (1) to (7), inclusive, which are
normally or traditionally taken into consideration in making the findings and recommendations.
December 10, 2014
Board Meeting 14-34
REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
FINANCING AUTHORITY
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
December 10, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
President Harris called the Regular Meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board of Directors to order at 7:11 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Nonette Hanko, Cecily Harris, Larry Hassett, Yoriko Kishimoto,
Curt Riffle, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl
Schaffner, Administrative Services Manager Kate Drayson, Real Property
Manager Mike Williams, Administrative Assistant Lupe Hernandez,
Natural Resources Manager Kirk Lenington, Planner III Cindy Roessler,
and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers present.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 7-0-0
Meeting 14-34 Page 2
V. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY
Introduction of Staff: Lupe Hernandez, Administrative Assistant
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Minutes of the Special and Regular Board Meetings of November 25, 2014.
2. Approve the Claims Report
3. Contract Amendment for Administrative Office Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling
System Repairs (R-14-134)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to amend an existing
contract with ACCO Engineered Systems, increasing the amount by $24,570, which includes a
15% contingency of $3,205, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $31,297, to repair and
recalibrate the Administrative Office Heating, Ventilation, and Cooling System.
Director Hassett expressed his concerns that staff be properly trained on proper use of the
system.
4. Amendments to the District’s Conflict of Interest Code (R-14-137)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution amending the District’s Conflict of
Interest Code.
Motion: Director Hanko moved, and Director Kishimoto seconded the motion to approve the
Consent Calendar.
VOTE: 7-0-0
VI. BOARD BUSINESS
5. Proposed Exchange of Real Property Interests between Ridge Vineyards, Inc.,
located at 18100 Montebello Road, Cupertino, CA (Portions of Santa Clara County
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 351-38-006, -009, -011, and -012) and Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District (District) at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve (Portion of Santa Clara
County Assessor’s Parcel Number 351-39-004), and Approval of the Re-circulated Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (R-14-147)
Real Property Manager Mike Williams presented the staff report describing the location of the
property and various geographic features of the property. Mr. Williams outlined the various
goals of the project including protection of open space, prohibition residential and non-
agricultural development, and reestablishment of historic vineyards compatible with existing
public trail uses. Mr. Williams described in detail the various facets of the proposed
conservation and agricultural easement exchange. Mr. Williams described the history of the
mitigated negative declaration proposed for Board adoption including several meetings with
Meeting 14-34 Page 3
interested parties and neighbors, additional hydrological analysis, and a recirculation of the
initial study and mitigated negative declaration.
Director Kishimoto expressed her concern that land would be closed to public access and
encouraged Ridge Vineyards to promote educational opportunities at the site.
Director Hanko inquired regarding potential closure of trails to public access.
Mr. Williams explained that trail closures may occur only during harvest season with specific
parameters concerning the closures, including mandatory advance public notification of the trail
closures, prohibition against closures on weekend days, etc.
Director Kishimoto inquired if a limit would exist on the maximum amount of water which could
be taken from the wells.
Mr. Williams explained that a pumping rate requirement is included in the transactional
documents.
Public hearing opened at 8:21 p.m.
Lynne Farris spoke in opposition to the proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards stating that the
environmental impact of four potential homes on the site would be less of an impact than that of
Ridge’s agricultural use of the property.
Kazuyo Levitan, resident of Monte Bello Road, shared comments from Rosa Myers a former
District docent and Mark Harmon resident of Monte Bello Road in opposition to the proposed
exchange with Ridge Vineyards.
Howard Levitan spoke in opposition to the proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards.
Tony Rigoni, resident of Monte Bello Road, spoke in support of Ridge Vineyards and in support
of the proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards.
John Schafer, resident of Monte Bello Road, read a letter from Dr. Hans Vogel in opposition of
the proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards. Mr. Schafer also shared his comments in
opposition to the proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards.
Bill Betchart, resident of Monte Bello Road, spoke regarding the proposed wells to be located on
the site and the potential for interference with neighboring wells.
Robin Douglass, resident of Monte Bello Road, spoke in support of the proposed exchange with
Ridge Vineyards.
Mark Vernon, president of Ridge Vineyards, spoke regarding erosion control best management
practices to be used at Ridge Vineyards and spoke in favor or docent led tours on the property.
Mr. Vernon also provided comments regarding current and proposed wells on the site including a
cap on water use from the wells.
Meeting 14-34 Page 4
Paul Draper spoke regarding the building of homes in the area and the historic nature of the
proposed exchange with Ridge Vineyards.
Bob Segalla, District docent, spoke in opposition to the proposed exchange with Ridge
Vineyards.
Lennie Roberts, speaking for the Committee for Green Foothills and as a person involved in the
formation of the District and its subsequent annexations, spoke in support of the exchange with
Ridge Vineyards.
Public hearing closed at 8:57 p.m.
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Hanko seconded the motion to:
1. Approve the Recirculated Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in Accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act, and adopt the findings set out in the draft Resolution.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of the Fee and Easement Exchange
Agreement between Ridge and the District and all other documents needed for the
property exchange with the following additions: institute a cap on the water to be
withdrawn from the two proposed wells as outlined in response A-2 of Attachment 6
to the staff report, and direct District staff to work with Ridge Vineyards to organized
docent led tours of the property.
3. Adopt the Use and Management Plans as recommended, and designate the property
interests conveyed to the District as an addition to Monte Bello Open Space Preserve.
4. Dedicate the fee and easement property interests as public open space pursuant to the
District’s Annual Policy for Dedication of Lands.
VOTE: 7-0-0
The Board recessed at 9:13 pm and reconvened at 9:21 pm with all Directors present.
6. Adoption of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Integrated Pest
Management Program, and Approval of the Integrated Pest Management Program and
Policy (R-14-148)
Cindy Roessler, Senior Resources Management Analyst summarized previous Board actions
related to the Integrated Pest Management Policy and introduced Amanda Olekszulin from
Ascent Environmental who summarized the proposed policy, the public review period and
District’s outreach and noticing process. Ms. Olekszulin summarized comments received in
response to the Environmental Impact Report and summarized various potential impacts of the
Integrated Pest Management Policy.
Public hearing opened at 9:41 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 9:41 p.m.
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to:
Meeting 14-34 Page 5
1. Adopt a Resolution of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District adopting a Final Environmental Impact Report, Findings of Fact, and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act for the Integrated Pest Management Program.
2. Approve the Integrated Pest Management Policy for incorporation into the District’s
Resource Management Policies as a replacement for the Invasive Species Management
chapter.
3. Approve the Integrated Pest Management Program.
VOTE: 7-0-0
VIII. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Director Cyr reported that the Planning and Natural Resources Committee met and discussed the
Bear Creek Stables Site Plan, which will be going to the Committee again before going to the
full Board of Directors. The Committee also discussed removal of automobiles from Long
Ridge Open Space Preserve and proposed bridges along the Stevens Creek Nature Trail.
Director Kishimoto reported that the Action Plan and Budget Committee met earlier this evening
to discuss the Employee Compensation Guiding Principles, which will be going to the full Board
of Directors in January for a Study Session.
IX. STAFF REPORTS
General Manager Steve Abbors provided remarks regarding a proposed new staff Open Space
Technician position.
X. DIRECTOR REPORTS
The Board submitted their compensatory forms to the District Clerk.
XI. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION
President Harris convened the closed session at 9:53 p.m.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
President Harris adjourned the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District at 10:25 p.m.
________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
December 17, 2014
Board Meeting 14-35
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office – Board Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
December 17, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
President Harris called the Special Meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board of Directors to order at 7:00 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Cecily Harris, Larry Hassett, Yoriko Kishimoto, and Pete
Siemens
Members Absent: Nonette Hanko and Curt Riffle
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl
Schaffner, Administrative Services Manager Kate Drayson, Real Property
Manager Mike Williams, Real Property Planner Elish Ryan, Public Affairs
Manager Shelly Lewis, Website Administrator Cydney Bieber, Planning
Manager Jane Mark, Planner III Gina Coony, Natural Resources Manager
Kirk Lenington, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Errol Strider provided comments regarding Hendry’s Creek.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Hassett seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Riffle absent)
V. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY
Meeting 14-35 Page 2
Introduction of Staff: Elish Ryan, Real Property Planner
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
Director Siemens pulled agenda item 2 from the Consent Calendar.
1. Approve the Claims Report
2. Award of Contract for the Web Migration and Development Project (R-14-124)
Agenda Item 2 was heard after the Consent Calendar.
Director Siemens inquired whether the work can be done by District staff.
Website Administrator Cydney Bieber explained that due to the complexity of the District’s
website, the work is best completed by an expert in website design.
Motion: Director Hassett moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to authorize the
General Manager to enter into a contract with Rootid, of El Cerrito, CA, for an amount not-to-
exceed $54,410, which includes the project proposal price of $49,410, and a 10% contingency
amount of $5,000 to provide migration and development services for the District web site.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Riffle absent)
3. Acceptance of a Waterline Easement and Quitclaim Deed from William and
Adriana Chiocchi Living Trust and a Waterline Easement and Quitclaim Deed from Stiles
Family Trust, both at Bear Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve (Santa Clara County
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 558-41-033 and 558-41-028), and Determine that the
Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (R-14-160)
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acceptance of a waterline easement and quitclaim deed
from William and Adriana Chiocchi Living Trust.
3. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the acceptance of a waterline easement and quitclaim deed
from Stiles Family Trust.
4. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program
for the Proposed Harkins Bridge Replacement Project in Purisima Creek Redwoods Open
Space Preserve (R-14-162)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring Program for the Harkins Bridge Replacement Project, in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act, as set out in the draft Resolution.
5. Award of Contract for Environmental Analysis and Design for Stevens Creek
Nature Trail Footbridges (R-14-152)
Meeting 14-35 Page 3
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract
with Environmental Science Associates for an amount not-to-exceed $125,631, which includes a
contract price of $114,210 and a 10% contingency of $11,421, to complete the environmental
analysis and bridge design work for a footbridge replacement and a new footbridge along
Stevens Creek Nature Trail in Montebello Open Space Preserve.
6. Contract to complete the Mount Umunhum Radar Tower Interior Remediation
Project located at Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (R-14-158)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to enter into a contract
with Asbestos Management Group Inc., of Oakland, CA, for a not-to-exceed amount of $43,670,
which includes the base bid amount of $39,700 plus a 10% contingency amount of $3,970, to
complete the Mount Umunhum Radar Tower Interior Remediation Project at Sierra Azul Open
Space Preserve.
7. Authorization to Award Contracts to Three Firms for Biological Consulting
Services (R-14-156)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to award contract
amendments to Biological Monitoring and Assessment Specialists, Biosearch Associates, and
URS Corporation for an amount not-to-exceed $50,000 (each) to provide biological consulting
services to implement biological services for District projects.
8. Revisions to Capital Expenditures and Depreciable Fixed Assets Policy (R-14-161)
Controller’s Recommendation: Approve the proposed revisions to the Capital Expenditures and
Depreciable Fixed Assets Board Policy.
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to approve the
Consent Calendar, with the exception of agenda item 2.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Riffle absent)
VI. BOARD BUSINESS
9a. Midyear Controller’s Report and General Manager’s State of the District Report
for Fiscal Year 2014-15 (April - September 2014) (R-14-154)
9b. Fiscal Year 2014-15 Midyear Controller’s Report (R-14-155)
9c. Fiscal Year 2014-15 Midyear State of the District Report and Recommended Action
Plan and Budget Adjustments (R-14-153)
Director Kishimoto, Chair of the Action Plan and Budget Committee provided comments
regarding the midyear budget and the proposed addition of new staff members.
District Controller Mike Foster provided a brief summary of the District’s current financial
statements as of September 30, 2014, including current spending to date, tax revenue, and grant
Meeting 14-35 Page 4
income. Mr. Foster described the current fiscal year’s spending as compared to spending during
the previous fiscal year at the same time.
Administrative Services Manager Kate Drayson provided the staff report summarizing the
current status of Action Plan projects for FY2014-15, including completed projects, and delayed
and deferred projects.
The Board members asked questions about current and proposed Action Plan projects. They also
suggested future budget reports include information regarding the progress of Action Plan
projects which are ongoing. Staff may also report when previously specified phases of a project
have been completed.
Ms. Drayson provided information on operating and capital expenditures as of September 30,
2014 as compared to budgeted amounts. Ms. Drayson described new staff positions and changes
proposed as part of the midyear budget which includes the addition of five new positions and
making permanent three currently contingent positions to be included in the District
Classification Plan.
Public hearing opened at 8:08 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 8:08 p.m.
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to accept the
attached Fiscal Year 2014-15 Midyear Controller’s Report and accept the Fiscal Year 2014-15
Midyear State of the District Report.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Riffle absent)
10. Contract for the Mount Umunhum Radar Tower Interim Repair Project located at
Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (R-14-159)
Planner III Gina Coony provided the staff report summarizing the previous bids solicited and
received, which were rejected by the Board of Directors in September. Ms. Cooney summarized
the reduced scope of the project and proposed savings for completion of the project.
Director Hassett inquired regarding the replacement of railing on the roof of the structure.
Ms. Coony explained that the railings are unsafe for District staff who are working on the site as
well as any potential donors who may visit the site.
Director Siemens expressed his concern that the repairs to allow for roof access are unnecessary
at this time and would prefer that repairs required for roof access be paid for as a part of
permanent repairs.
Ms. Coony explained that stair railings must replaced and remediation completed to meet
minimum Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements and other
government safety standards.
Meeting 14-35 Page 5
Public hearing opened at 8:43 p.m.
Sam Drake, president of the Umunhum Conservancy, provided comments regarding the
proposed repairs to the structure and the availability of the site for fundraising visits as
previously authorized by the Board of Directors. Mr. Drake also expressed his concern that
work on the building not affect the “historic integrity” of the structure.
Public hearing closed at 8:48 p.m.
Director Cyr left at 8:59 p.m. and returned at 9:01 p.m.
Director Hassett inquired as to the ramifications if the Board voted against the item.
Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz explained that there is an item scheduled to go the Board
on 1/14/15 regarding amenities at the site. Those amenities would have to be rethought if the
interim repairs are not completed.
Motion: Director Hassett moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to continue the
item to a future Board meeting in January.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Riffle absent)
VIII. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Director Cyr reported that the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee met with the Board
appointees, and a Board report will be coming forward to the Board in the upcoming year.
IX. STAFF REPORTS
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse reported that minimal damage occurred at District
preserves during the recent storms.
X. DIRECTOR REPORTS
The Board submitted their compensatory forms to the District Clerk.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
President Harris adjourned the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District at 9:18 p.m.
________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
R-15-06
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY
AGENDA ITEM
Certification of November 4, 2014 Election Results, Board of Directors Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt the Resolution Declaring Canvass of Returns and Results of the Biennial General
District Election held on November 4, 2014.
2. Adopt the Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 2 of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3. Adopt the Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 5 of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
A Biennial General District Election was held November 4, 2014 for the purpose of electing two
Board members for Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6. The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters has
canvassed the returns of the election and on December 2, 2014, the District Clerk received the
Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Certification of Election Results.
In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 5532, the District Board of Directors shall
declare the candidate elected after receipt of the certification of the election by the County
Registrars of Voters. Certificates of election shall be issued, and the Oath of Office shall be
administered within 30 days of the appointment or before the expiration of 15 days before the
commencement of his or her term of office. The Directors’ terms will begin on January 1, 2015.
No other filing is required.
Appointment of Elected Candidates
The attached resolution (Attachment 1) recites the number of votes cast and percentage of the
vote received by each candidate, and declares the following persons elected to respective elective
offices for a term of four (4) years commencing January 1, 2015:
District Ward 1: Pete Siemens
District Ward 6: Larry Hassett
The votes cast and percentage of the vote received by each individual follows in the table below
(Elected Board members names in bold):
R-15-06 Page 2
Ward 1 – Total Votes Cast: 25,805
Candidate Votes Received Percentage of Votes Received
Pete Siemens 14,585 56.52%
Mike Buncic 11,220 43.48%
Ward 6 – Total Votes Cast: 11,412
Candidate Votes Received Percentage of Votes Received
Larry Hassett 8,041 69.16%
Brandon Lewke 3,371 30.84%
Appointment of Unopposed Candidates
Section 5532(e) of the District’s enabling legislation states, in part, that the Board of Directors
shall appoint unopposed candidates who have been nominated. Section 5532(e) specifies that the
Board of Directors shall make the appointment(s) and that the person(s) appointed shall qualify
and take office, and serve exactly as if elected for office. The Board of Directors adopted
Resolution No. 14-23 on June 11, 2014 authorizing the Registrars of Voters to not list any
unopposed candidates for the November 4, 2014 election.
Yoriko Kishimoto is the unopposed candidate nominated for the position of Director in Ward 2.
Nonette Hanko is the unopposed candidate nominated for the position of Director in Ward 5.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts associated with this agenda item.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Board Committee review of this item is not required by the Board Policy Manual.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The proposed resolution does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) (14 Cal. Code. Regs., Section 15378(b)(4)).
NEXT STEPS
The District Clerk will administer the Oath of Office to the appointed and elected Board
members for Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6.
Attachments
1. Resolution Declaring Canvass of Returns and Results of the Biennial General District
Election held on November 4, 2014
2. Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 2 of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District
R-15-06 Page 3
3. Resolution Appointing Director – Ward 5 of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District
Responsible Department Head:
Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
Resolutions/2015/15-__Certify Election Results 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT DECLARING
CANVASS OF RETURNS AND RESULTS OF THE BIENNIAL
GENERAL DISTRICT ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 4, 2014
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
duly called and ordered held in the City on Tuesday, November 4, 2014, a biennial general
district election pursuant to Public Resources Code 5532 to fill seats for Wards 1, 2, 5, and 6;
and
WHEREAS, the Registrars of Voters in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties were
requested to perform all necessary election procedures for the consolidated biennial general
district election; and
WHEREAS, at 5:00 p.m. on the 83rd day prior to the date of said election only one person
had been nominated for the position of Ward 2 to be filled at that election who in accordance
with Section 5532(e) of the Public Resources Code will be appointed by separate resolution; and
WHEREAS, at 5:00 p.m. on the 83rd day prior to the date of said election only one person
had been nominated for the position of Ward 5 to be filled at that election who in accordance
with Section 5532(e) of the Public Resources Code will be appointed by separate resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters did canvass the returns of the
biennial general district election for Ward 1, and did certify to this Board of Directors the results
of the votes cast at said election, which results are attached as Exhibit "A" and incorporated
herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the San Mateo County Registrar of Voters did canvass the returns of the
biennial general district election for Ward 6, and did certify to this Board of Directors the results
of the votes cast at said election, which results are attached as Exhibit "B" and incorporated
herein by reference; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District:
1. The statement of the final results by the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters as
shown in Exhibit "A" and the results of the votes cast at the biennial general district
election are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved.
2. The total numbers of votes cast in the District at the biennial general district election and
the number of votes cast in each precinct for the persons and respective offices to be
filled at the General Municipal Election, are as set forth in the Certification of Election
Results from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters, as shown in Exhibit “A.”
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2015/15-__Certify Election Results 2
3. The statement of the final results by the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters as
shown in Exhibit “B” and the results of the votes cast at the biennial general district
election are hereby ratified, confirmed and approved.
4. The total numbers of votes cast in the District at the biennial general district election and
the number of votes cast in each precinct for the persons and respective offices to be
filled at the General Municipal Election, are as set forth in the Certification of Election
Results from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters, as shown in Exhibit “B.”
5. The names of the persons voted for the offices of Director and the total number of votes
(including absentee votes) given in the respective Wards to each of the persons were as
follows:
Ward 1 – Total Votes Cast: 25,805
Candidate Votes Received Percentage of Votes Received
Pete Siemens 14,585 56.52%
Mike Buncic 11,220 43.48%
Ward 6 – Total Votes Cast: 11,412
Candidate Votes Received Percentage of Votes Received
Larry Hassett 8,041 69.16%
Brandon Lewke 3,371 30.84%
6. The following named persons received the largest number of votes for the offices of
Director and were, therefore, duly elected to the office, and the District Clerk is hereby
directed to issue a Certificate of Election to the persons, certifying each person’s election
to the office appearing after his or her name, and to administer to the elected persons the
oath of office prescribed by the Constitution and the laws of the State of California:
Ward Director
No. 1 Pete Siemens
No. 6 Larry Hassett
7. The District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District hereby is instructed
to enter this Resolution on the minutes of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
as a statement of the results of the November 4, 2014 biennial general district election.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on ____, 2015, at a special meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2015/15-__Certify Election Results 3
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
Attachment 1
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
STATEMENT OF THE VOTE
OF THE
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE MATTER OF THE CANVASS OF
THE VOTES CAST IN THE COUNTY OF
SAN MATEO AT THE STATEWIDE
GENERAL ELECTION HELD TUESDAY,
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
CERTIFICATE OF THE
CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER
I, MARK CHURCH, CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER of the County of San
Mateo, State of California, do hereby certify that the Statewide General Election
was conducted pursuant to law throughout said county on November 4, 2014 ;
and
I HEREBY FURTHER CERTIFY the following facts: that at said Primary
Election 4 75 election precincts were duly established with 350 operating
precinct boards; that the election was conducted thereat pursuant to law; that
pursuant to Division 15, Chapter 4 of the California Elections Code, I have
canvassed the votes cast at all precincts which were 54,056; that 109,419 vote
by mail votes were cast; that 978
early votes were cast, canvassed and included
in the result of the total 164,453
votes cast which is accurately shown in this
Statement of the Result of the Vote as determined by the official canvass of the
returns attached hereto and made a part hereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto affix my hand and official seal of this
office this 1 st day of December, 2014.
MARK CHURCH
Chief Elections Officer &
Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
Exhibit B
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO STATEMENT OF THE VOTE Page 172 of 262
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 6
28
MI
D
P
E
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
LA
R
R
Y
H
A
S
S
E
T
T
BR
A
N
D
O
N
L
E
W
K
E
Tu
r
n
o
u
t
(
%
)
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ba
l
l
o
t
s
C
a
s
t
3001 505 298 124 73 59.0
3002 1,008 557 242 134 55.3
3004 191 127 65 23 66.5
3005 835 474 208 112 56.8
3006 1,035 594 258 124 57.4
3008 1,016 428 164 88 42.1
3009 169 109 62 18 64.5
3010 151 95 37 25 62.9
3331 319 154 1 2 48.3
3340 1,029 604 313 167 58.7
3350 738 352 173 97 47.7
3360 106 52 13 18 49.1
3361 87 52 24 16 59.8
3370 531 291 13 4 54.8
3371 59 33 15 12 55.9
3372 99 64 10 15 64.6
3375 50 30 13 9 60.0
3376 203 115 58 22 56.7
3380 85 52 26 11 61.2
3401 849 472 263 82 55.6
3402 1,373 747 418 126 54.4
3406 101 54 23 18 53.5
3407 202 113 58 22 55.9
3408 95 58 29 9 61.1
3409 0 0 0 0 0.0
3410 1,068 645 316 144 60.4
3412 25 7 1 5 28.0
3420 492 301 171 49 61.2
3421 44 33 23 5 75.0
3450 631 352 152 82 55.8
3451 1,373 883 436 129 64.3
3452 1,215 724 347 102 59.6
3455 1,359 908 433 143 66.8
3457 1,283 872 392 136 68.0
3459 1,112 670 365 115 60.3
3460 1,345 909 440 171 67.6
3463 28 16 9 0 57.1
3464 69 52 27 11 75.4
3711 4 3 1 2 75.0
3801 384 218 0 2 56.8
3802 1,582 919 421 198 58.1
3803 214 119 49 29 55.6
3806 778 416 218 79 53.5
3807 74 31 11 7 41.9
3808 545 281 125 89 51.6
3811 69 24 16 1 34.8
3812 160 102 38 27 63.8
3901 1,124 711 434 98 63.3
3903 969 593 345 102 61.2
3905 1,135 689 365 138 60.7
4412 1,115 663 4 3 59.5
4414 419 222 107 40 53.0
4415 657 396 177 86 60.3
4432 3 0 0 0 0.0
4433 218 133 58 26 61.0
4501 712 171 74 67 24.0
4502 739 266 131 78 36.0
4503 988 518 267 104 52.4
4505 1,189 365 182 119 30.7
4506 864 316 130 103 36.6
Exhibit B
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO STATEMENT OF THE VOTE Page 173 of 262
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 6
28
MI
D
P
E
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
LA
R
R
Y
H
A
S
S
E
T
T
BR
A
N
D
O
N
L
E
W
K
E
Tu
r
n
o
u
t
(
%
)
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ba
l
l
o
t
s
C
a
s
t
4507 131 65 0 0 49.6
4508 99 55 28 14 55.6
4601 870 330 160 93 37.9
4602 980 324 149 101 33.1
4603 479 194 88 73 40.5
4604 1,452 429 199 134 29.5
4606 872 340 168 97 39.0
4607 815 375 137 64 46.0
4608 839 334 50 31 39.8
4615 743 301 99 27 40.5
4616 1,451 639 100 52 44.0
4617 602 270 77 30 44.9
4618 1,463 635 222 123 43.4
4619 510 204 36 21 40.0
4620 904 313 113 77 34.6
4621 802 343 180 81 42.8
4622 1,155 412 199 112 35.7
4625 801 319 153 73 39.8
4626 755 344 186 73 45.6
4627 1,425 747 386 162 52.4
4636 181 106 3 1 58.6
4650 43 17 8 7 39.5
4651 52 28 11 13 53.8
4652 122 50 25 12 41.0
4653 188 54 26 18 28.7
4654 0 0 0 0 0.0
4655 4 3 1 2 75.0
4656 272 134 68 30 49.3
Absentee Totals
Early Voting Totals
Election Day Totals 16.4
Grand Totals
83
8041
3623
11747
44
3371
1823
5238
183
17,969
8,666
52,832
52,832
52,832 0.3
34.0
52,832 26,818 50.8
Exhibit B
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO STATEMENT OF THE VOTE Page 174 of 262
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 6
28
Early Voting Totals
MI
D
P
E
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
LA
R
R
Y
H
A
S
S
E
T
T
BR
A
N
D
O
N
L
E
W
K
E
Tu
r
n
o
u
t
(
%
)
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ba
l
l
o
t
s
C
a
s
t
14TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 8,873 46 15 11 0.5
18TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 43,959 137 68 33 0.3
22ND ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 17,780 79 33 20 0.4
24TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 35,052 104 50 24 0.3
3RD SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 27,918 83 40 21 0.3
4TH SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 24,914 100 43 23 0.4
13TH SENATORIAL DISTRICT 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - DISTRICT 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
CITY OF MENLO PARK 10,827 30 17 2 0.3
CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 17,780 79 33 20 0.4
COASTSIDE FIRE PROTECTION 491 1 0 0 0.2
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
LA HONDA/PESCADERO UNIFIED 1,870 3 1 1 0.2
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
SAN MATEO COMMUNITY COLLEGE 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
SAN MATEO COUNTY HARBOR 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT 51,525 182 81 43 0.4
STATEWIDE DISTRICT 52,832 183 83 44 0.3
TOWN OF ATHERTON 4,910 11 4 6 0.2
TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY 3,228 12 3 5 0.4
TOWN OF WOODSIDE 3,806 11 7 2 0.3
UNINCORPORATED AREA 12,281 40 19 9 0.3
Early Voting Totals 83 44 0.3 183 52,832
Exhibit B
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO STATEMENT OF THE VOTE Page 175 of 262
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 6
28
Absentee Totals
MI
D
P
E
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
LA
R
R
Y
H
A
S
S
E
T
T
BR
A
N
D
O
N
L
E
W
K
E
Tu
r
n
o
u
t
(
%
)
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ba
l
l
o
t
s
C
a
s
t
14TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 8,873 2,496 919 523 28.1
18TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 43,959 15,473 7122 2848 35.2
22ND ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 17,780 4,672 1920 917 26.3
24TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 35,052 13,297 6121 2454 37.9
3RD SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 27,918 11,268 5356 2062 40.4
4TH SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 24,914 6,701 2685 1309 26.9
13TH SENATORIAL DISTRICT 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - DISTRICT 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
CITY OF MENLO PARK 10,827 4,416 1975 659 40.8
CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 17,780 4,672 1920 917 26.3
COASTSIDE FIRE PROTECTION 491 216 8 7 44.0
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
LA HONDA/PESCADERO UNIFIED 1,870 611 311 133 32.7
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
SAN MATEO COMMUNITY COLLEGE 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
SAN MATEO COUNTY HARBOR 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT 51,525 17,512 7603 3152 34.0
STATEWIDE DISTRICT 52,832 17,969 8041 3371 34.0
TOWN OF ATHERTON 4,910 1,986 869 414 40.4
TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY 3,228 1,372 798 222 42.5
TOWN OF WOODSIDE 3,806 1,503 602 315 39.5
UNINCORPORATED AREA 12,281 4,020 1877 844 32.7
Absentee Totals 8041 3371 34.0 17,969 52,832
Exhibit B
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO STATEMENT OF THE VOTE Page 176 of 262
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WARD 6
28
Grand Totals
MI
D
P
E
N
I
N
S
U
L
A
R
E
G
I
O
N
A
L
LA
R
R
Y
H
A
S
S
E
T
T
BR
A
N
D
O
N
L
E
W
K
E
Tu
r
n
o
u
t
(
%
)
Re
g
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
Ba
l
l
o
t
s
C
a
s
t
14TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 8,873 3,615 1259 767 40.7
18TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 43,959 23,203 10488 4471 52.8
22ND ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 17,780 7,245 2844 1507 40.7
24TH ASSEMBLY DISTRICT 35,052 19,573 8903 3731 55.8
3RD SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 27,918 16,403 7745 3091 58.8
4TH SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 24,914 10,415 4002 2147 41.8
13TH SENATORIAL DISTRICT 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION - DISTRICT 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
CITY OF MENLO PARK 10,827 6,800 2947 1044 62.8
CITY OF REDWOOD CITY 17,780 7,245 2844 1507 40.7
COASTSIDE FIRE PROTECTION 491 258 9 7 52.5
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
LA HONDA/PESCADERO UNIFIED 1,870 1,022 500 268 54.7
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
SAN MATEO COMMUNITY COLLEGE 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
SAN MATEO COUNTY HARBOR 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
SEQUOIA HEALTHCARE DISTRICT 51,525 26,175 11115 4882 50.8
STATEWIDE DISTRICT 52,832 26,818 11747 5238 50.8
TOWN OF ATHERTON 4,910 2,682 1160 597 54.6
TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY 3,228 1,993 1144 338 61.7
TOWN OF WOODSIDE 3,806 2,110 878 432 55.4
UNINCORPORATED AREA 12,281 5,988 2774 1320 48.8
Absentee Totals
Early Voting Totals
Election Day Totals 16.4
Grand Totals
83
8041
3623
11747
44
3371
1823
5238
183
17,969
8,666
52,832
52,832
52,832 0.3
34.0
52,832 26,818 50.8
Exhibit B
Attachment 2
Resolutions/2015/15-__Appoint Ward 5 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPOINTING
DIRECTOR – WARD 2 OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, an election for the office of Director – Ward 2 of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District was scheduled to be held on November 4, 2014; and
WHEREAS, at 5:00 p.m. on the 83rd day prior to the date of said election only one person
had been nominated for the position to be filled at that election; and
WHEREAS in accordance with Section 5532(e) of the Public Resources Code, the Board
of Directors, at a regular or special meeting shall appoint to the office the person who has been
nominated, and
WHEREAS, Yoriko Kishimoto was unopposed as a candidate for Director – Ward 2.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District, that, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 5532 of the
Public Resources Code,
YORIKO KISHIMOTO
Is appointed Director – Ward 2 of said District, is duly qualified for the office of Director –
Ward 2 of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and shall take office and serve exactly
as if elected at the November 4, 2014 general district election for said office.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on ____, 2015, at a special meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
Attachment 2
Resolutions/2015/15-__Appoint Ward 5 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
Attachment 3
Resolutions/2015/15-__Appoint Ward 5 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPOINTING
DIRECTOR – WARD 5 OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, an election for the office of Director – Ward 5 of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District was scheduled to be held on November 4, 2014; and
WHEREAS, at 5:00 p.m. on the 83rd day prior to the date of said election only one person
had been nominated for the position to be filled at that election; and
WHEREAS in accordance with Section 5532(e) of the Public Resources Code, the Board
of Directors, at a regular or special meeting shall appoint to the office the person who has been
nominated, and
WHEREAS, Nonette Hanko was unopposed as a candidate for Director – Ward 5.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District, that, pursuant to and in accordance with Section 5532 of the
Public Resources Code,
NONETTE HANKO
Is appointed Director – Ward 5 of said District, is duly qualified for the office of Director –
Ward 5 of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and shall take office and serve exactly
as if elected at the November 4, 2014 general district election for said office.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on ____, 2015, at a special meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
Attachment 3
Resolutions/2015/15-__Appoint Ward 5 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
page 1 of 4
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 15-01
DATE 01-14-2015
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
68390 *10215 - CALPERS-FISCAL SERVICES DIVISION Health Insurance - Customer ID 2857159579 01/06/2015 $119,857.65
68434 11410 - SANTA CLARA CO. REGISTRAR OF VOTERS Costs for November 4, 2014 Election - Ward 1 01/07/2015 $109,880.00
68409 11454 - DECON ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.Sierra Azul Demolitions (SA)01/07/2015 $99,178.23
68325 11460 - ASBESTOS MANAGEMENT GROUP OF CALIFORNIA McDonald and Sherrill Demolitions (LHC/MB)12/23/2014 $96,125.00
68345 11462 - MANAGEMENT PARTNERS FOSM Project Kick-off 12/23/2014 $75,546.00
FOSM Organizational Scan and Research 12/23/2014
Data Analyses and Modeling for FOSM 12/23/2014
68351 11468 - ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP Professional Legal Services - Disclosure Compliance 12/23/2014 $25,000.00
68377 10487 - TKO GENERAL ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION Retainage Release on Bald Mt. Parking Lot (SAU)12/23/2014 $17,797.70
68318 *11230 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY-C/O UNITED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE Dental Insurance - Group #1766-0006 12/23/2014 $11,360.16
68361 11432 - SAN MATEO COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT Maintenance and Operation of the San Gregorio Stream Gauge Station 12/23/2014 $10,000.00
68387 11472 - FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY Deposit for Burton Purchase - #FSBC-0281-400498-MR 01/06/2015 $10,000.00
68354 10086 - PHYTOSPHERE RESEARCH Sudden Oak Death Treatment 12/23/2014 $9,450.00
68418 10304 - LA HONDA PESCADERO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT LHPUSD Semi- Annual Tax Compensation Fee 01/07/2015 $8,357.24
68378 *11152 - WELLINGTON PARK INVESTORS AO2 Rent - January 2015 01/05/2015 $8,339.00
68389 *10124 - ROBERT J. DALOIA Quarterly Interest + Principal Payment - January 2015 - Daloia Property 01/06/2015 $6,192.77
68338 10546 - ECOLOGICAL CONCERNS INC GIS Mapping and Reports for Weed Work 12/23/2014 $6,000.00
68353 *10180 - PG & E
Electric for FO DOM Pump/RSA/CP/AO/AO2/FFO/SFO/LHC-Event Center/Purisima
Electric Gate/MB/Gas for AO/SR Pond 12/23/2014 $5,693.63
68360 11005 - SAN MATEO COUNTY PLANNING & BUILDING DEPT SM County Permit - Harkins Bridge replacement 12/23/2014 $5,348.27
68400 10606 - ASCENT ENVIRONMENTAL INC Hendrys Creek IS/MND CEQA Consulting 01/07/2015 $5,037.50
68388 10578 - OLD REPUBLIC TITLE CO Option Deposit - Riggs Property 12/23/2014 $5,000.00
68393 *10419 - THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY MPOSD-BL-490450 AD&D 01/06/2015 $4,731.82
MPOSD-BL-490450 Life 01/06/2015
MPOSD-BL-490450 LTD 01/06/2015
68364 10585 - SOL'S MOBILE SERVICE Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs - P52/P73/P75/P85/M66/M35/M72/M04/M23 12/23/2014 $4,578.79
68415 10345 - GLOBAL STEEL FABRICATORS INC Gate Hardware for Bald Mountain Gates (SAU)01/07/2015 $4,500.00
68438 10689 - THORNTON ELECTRIC COMPANY AO Parking Lot Light Replacement and Repairs 01/07/2015 $4,372.68
68433 11108 - SAN MATEO COUNTY San Mateo County Fire Service Fee 01/07/2015 $3,136.41
68327 11371 - CALFLORA DATABASE Weed Manager Database 12/23/2014 $2,966.00
68342 11177 - HARRIS CONSTRUCTION McDonald Shed Repair (LH)12/23/2014 $2,754.25
68326 11148 - BALANCE HYDROLOGICS, INC.Stream Gauge Installation - District ponds 12/23/2014 $2,675.47
68398 10240 - ACE FIRE EQUIPMENT & SERVICE INC Annual Fire Extinguisher Service & Maint (SFO/FFO/AO)01/07/2015 $2,540.50
68417 10046 - IHI ENVIRONMENTAL On Call Services - Hazmat Survey & Monitoring 01/07/2015 $2,394.95
68392 *10211 - PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCATES Legislative Advocacy Services 01/06/2015 $2,333.34
68355 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Removal of Equipment from Surveyed Vehicle 12/23/2014 $2,264.97
Installation of Equipment on New Patrol Truck 12/23/2014
68335 11318 - CONFLUENCE RESTORATION Mindego Gateway Planting & Landscape Maintenance 12/23/2014 $2,164.33
68404 11443 - CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION Excavator Rental for Mt. Umunhum Trail Construction (SAU)01/07/2015 $2,006.58
68333 11419 - CHARLES H. ADAMS MUNICIPAL DISCLOSURE 5 Year Disclosure Compliance Review Services 12/23/2014 $2,000.00
68422 11463 - MARLENE EYRE Ranger Academy Accommodations 01/07/2015 $2,000.00
68425 10160 - OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN
Office Supplies - AO/SFO/FFO, Planners, Paper, Calendars, Protector Sheets, Binders,
Tape, Wireless Mouse, Pens 01/07/2015 $1,910.12
page 2 of 4
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 15-01
DATE 01-14-2015
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
68406 11318 - CONFLUENCE RESTORATION Bald Mountain Staging Landscaping Nov 2014 (SAU)01/07/2015 $1,875.00
68381 *10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitorial Services - December 2014 01/06/2015 $1,815.00
68343 10222 - HERTZ EQUIPMENT RENTAL INC Excavator Equipment Rental (GP)12/23/2014 $1,805.26
68436 *10583 - TELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS District Telephone Service + SAO Internet 01/07/2015 $1,659.18
68339 10187 - GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT Pumper Parts/Tools/Small Equpment Parts/Chainsaw Parts 12/23/2014 $1,544.59
Chain Sharp/Repair (Mt Umunhum)12/23/2014
68394 *11003 - UNITED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES GLUG-45Y5 Basic life insurance 01/06/2015 $1,538.90
GLUG-45Y5 Supplemental Life 01/06/2015
68441 11466 - VISTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC.On Call Haz Mat consulting services 01/07/2015 $1,538.00
68391 *10212 - PINNACLE TOWERS INC Crown Communication Lease Site ID 871823 01/06/2015 $1,524.00
68350 11063 - O'BRIEN, PAT Executive Services for November 2014 12/23/2014 $1,500.00
68396 10001 - AARON'S SEPTIC TANK SERVICE Sanitation Services (RR/MB)01/07/2015 $1,450.00
Sanitation Services (DHF)01/07/2015
68365 *10952 - SONIC.NET, INC.AO Internet Service January 2015 12/23/2014 $1,449.05
68368 10706 - THE MERCURY NEWS Request for bids legal ad - Mt. Umunhum Radar Tower 12/23/2014 $1,382.68
Request for bids legal ad - Deck for the Bergman Main House 12/23/2014
Request for bids legal ad - Silva House Repairs 12/23/2014
Request for bids legal ad - McDonald Ranch Fencing Bid 12/23/2014
68407 10023 - CONSCIOUS CREATIVE District Website Design Refresh and IA Design 01/07/2015 $1,325.00
68423 10190 - METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS District Radios Annual Servicing 01/07/2015 $1,276.68
68397 10004 - ACCOUNTEMPS Accounting Temp 01/07/2015 $1,148.98
68429 10195 - REDWOOD GENERAL TIRE CO INC Tires & Installation Of Tires 01/07/2015 $1,132.16
68435 10314 - STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA CA State Bar Member Fees - Sheryl Schaffner 01/07/2015 $1,125.00
CA State Bar Member Fees - Hilary Stevenson 01/07/2015
68323 11170 - ALEXANDER ATKINS DESIGN, INC.Design for Bay Nature Ad - The Heart in the Heart of Silicon Valley 12/23/2014 $1,123.00
Brochure design revision - Explore Your Backyard 12/23/2014
68362 11042 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY-OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF Security Bike Ride (SA)12/23/2014 $1,072.56
68334 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs - M42 12/23/2014 $1,064.82
68328 10840 - CALIFORNIA PENSION GROUP, LLC Consulting Services - November 2014 12/23/2014 $1,000.00
68395 *10213 - VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA 00 106067 0010 Vision Premium 01/06/2015 $990.78
68359 10301 - RUIZ, ANA Conference Expense Reimbursements - APA Conference 12/23/2014 $973.09
Mileage Reimbursement - Apr to Nov 2014 12/23/2014
68437 10307 - THE SIGN SHOP Various Preserve Signs 01/07/2015 $855.56
Signs for Bald Mountain Staging Area (SAU)01/07/2015
Signs (GP)01/07/2015
Trail Sign (LT)01/07/2015
68445 00000 - HARRIS STRIPING SERVICES Parking Lot Striping (EcDM)01/07/2015 $850.00
68322 *10120 - ADT SECURITY SERVICES INC 1st Qtr Security Services (SFO)12/23/2014 $841.68
68317 10578 - OLD REPUBLIC TITLE CO Funds to close Ridge Vineyards land exchange transaction 12/23/2014 $840.00
68408 10185 - COSTCO Office & Kitchen Supplies (AO/FFO/SFO)01/07/2015 $838.44
68320 10004 - ACCOUNTEMPS Accounting Temp 12/23/2014 $757.78
68439 *10403 - UNITED SITE SERVICES INC Sanitation Services (FO/SA)01/07/2015 $745.52
68420 10189 - LIFE ASSIST Replacement respirator masks for District vehicles 01/07/2015 $739.60
page 3 of 4
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 15-01
DATE 01-14-2015
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
68332 10014 - CCOI GATE & FENCE Gate Repair (RSA/CP)12/23/2014 $729.88
68426 *10180 - PG & E Electric - Rentals 01/07/2015 $678.28
68370 10200 - TOOLAND INC Socket Holder, Drill Press (SFO)12/23/2014 $670.33
68331 10723 - CALLANDER ASSOCIATES Bay Trail Concept Plan development at Ravenswood 12/23/2014 $612.95
68373 11037 - US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC Pre-Employment Physical Exams - HR 12/23/2014 $602.00
68337 10770 - DEGREE HVAC INC Furnace Repair (RSA)12/23/2014 $600.23
68419 11376 - LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY Highway 17 Wildlife Connectivity Corridor study 01/07/2015 $595.00
68357 *10589 - RECOLOGY SOUTH BAY Recycling Service (RSA)12/23/2014 $565.92
68324 11457 - ANDREINI BROTHERS INC Water Delivery to 900 Sears Ranch Road 12/23/2014 $549.64
68347 11463 - MARLENE EYRE Deposit for Ranger Academy Housing 12/23/2014 $500.00
68371 *11038 - TYCO INTEGRATED SECURITY LLC 1st Qtr Alarm Service (FFO)12/23/2014 $492.44
68405 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs - M26 01/07/2015 $488.39
68427 *11335 - PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC Postage Meter Lease (AO)01/07/2015 $465.69
68348 10190 - METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Purchase of Portable Radio for District 12/23/2014 $374.06
68369 10121 - THE WORKINGMAN'S EMPORIUM Uniform Items for New Employee (SFO)12/23/2014 $340.43
68443 10237 - WILLIAMS, MICHAEL Mileage Reimbursement (Oct 2014 - Dec 2014)01/07/2015 $339.44
Cell Phone Reimbursement (Oct 2014 - Dec 2014)01/07/2015
68430 *10093 - RENE HARDOY Gardening Services - December 2014 01/07/2015 $325.00
68321 10240 - ACE FIRE EQUIPMENT & SERVICE INC Fire Extinguisher Replacement for New Vehicles 12/23/2014 $311.45
68442 10796 - WEMORPH INC Printing of Cite Amendment forms 01/07/2015 $307.09
68410 10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitorial Supplies (AO/AO2)01/07/2015 $299.93
68341 10267 - HALF MOON BAY REVIEW Request for bids legal ad - work at Rental Residence 12/23/2014 $280.00
68363 10349 - SHELTON ROOFING COMPANY INC Roof Repairs - Rental Residence 12/23/2014 $276.00
68413 10168 - G & K SERVICES INC Shop Towel Service (FFO/SFO)01/07/2015 $275.68
68340 *10173 - GREEN WASTE-11089 Monthly Garbage & Recycle Fee (SFO)12/23/2014 $217.59
68379 *10018 - CECILY HARRIS December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $200.00
68382 *10050 - JED CYR December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $200.00
68383 *10057 - LARRY HASSETT December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $200.00
68385 *10084 - PETE SIEMENS December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $200.00
68386 *10118 - YORIKO KISHIMOTO December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $200.00
68330 *10454 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-949 Water Service (AO)12/23/2014 $189.76
68428 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Repair Code 3 Equipment 01/07/2015 $175.00
68440 11037 - US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC DOT Medical Exam - HR Dept 01/07/2015 $139.00
68376 10243 - DOWNING, BRENDAN Cell Phone Reimbursement (Apr 2014 - Nov 2014)12/23/2014 $138.18
68319 *10810 - A T & T Daniel Nature Center (SR)12/23/2014 $136.89
Fax Line (FFO)12/23/2014
68366 10157 - STAPLES CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies (AO)12/23/2014 $122.22
68424 10670 - O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Drip Pan and Motor Oil for Vehicle Maintenance (SFO)01/07/2015 $115.39
68380 *10029 - CURT RIFFLE December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $100.00
68384 *10072 - NONETTE HANKO December Director Meetings 01/06/2015 $100.00
68432 10301 - RUIZ, ANA Cell Phone Reimbursement (Jun 2014 - Nov 2014)01/07/2015 $100.00
68444 11267 - WOODHOUSE, KEVIN Cell Phone Reimbursement (Jul 2014 - Nov 2014)01/07/2015 $100.00
68399 11467 - AMATO, JULIE Mileage Reimbursement (Sep 2014 - Nov 2014)01/07/2015 $91.28
page 4 of 4
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 15-01
DATE 01-14-2015
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
68421 10135 - MADCO Welding Supplies for (GP)01/07/2015 $80.96
68367 10302 - STEVENS CREEK QUARRY INC Base Rock (AO)12/23/2014 $80.39
68352 10481 - PACIFIC TELEMANAGEMENT SERVICE Campground Phone (MB)12/23/2014 $78.00
68412 10169 - FOSTER BROTHERS SECURITY SYSTEMS Padlocks for Bald Mountain Gates (SAU)01/07/2015 $68.97
68414 10187 - GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT Equipment Parts (GP)01/07/2015 $68.51
68411 11149 - DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES California Vehicle Code Reference Books 01/07/2015 $68.22
68416 10421 - ID PLUS INC Uniform Name Tags 01/07/2015 $62.00
68344 10341 - HOOPER, STAN Cell Phone Reimbursement (Feb 2014 - Apr 2014)12/23/2014 $60.00
68358 10195 - REDWOOD GENERAL TIRE CO INC Tire Balance & Repair 12/23/2014 $60.00
68402 10340 - BARRESI, CHRIS Cell Phone Reimbursement (Oct 2014 - Dec 2014)01/07/2015 $60.00
68372 10561 - ULINE Property Tags 12/23/2014 $58.19
68349 11270 - MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT, INC.Repair Part for Kubota Tractor 12/23/2014 $56.43
1202 **10172 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-3525 Hawthorn Property 12/23/2014 $50.77
68329 *10172 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-3525 Water Service (WH)12/23/2014 $50.41
68431 11426 - RIDGE WIRELESS INC.Internet Service - (FFO)01/07/2015 $50.00
68336 10540 - CRAFTSMEN PRINTING Printing of Business Cards - Lausten 12/23/2014 $48.94
68401 10277 - BAILLIE, GORDON Reimbursement for PRAC Professional Membership 01/07/2015 $37.50
68346 11449 - MARK, JANE Mileage Reimbursement (Oct 2014 - Nov 2014)12/23/2014 $30.24
68356 10134 - RAYNE OF SAN JOSE Water Service (FO)12/23/2014 $26.25
68403 10475 - BELL, GLORIA ROSE Reimbursement Mileage (Dec 2014)01/07/2015 $20.72
68374 00000 - SUPERIOR POOL PRODUCTS Chlorine for Water System (SFO)12/23/2014 $19.52
1203 **10180 - PG & E Hawthorn Property 01/07/2015 $14.36
Grand Total $735,831.19
*Annual Claims
**Hawthorn Expenses
BC = Bear Creek LH = La Honda Creek PR = Pulgas Ridge SG = Saratoga Gap TC = Tunitas Creek
CC = Coal Creek LR = Long Ridge PC = Purisima Creek SA = Sierra Azul WH = Windy Hill
ECdM = El Corte de Madera LT = Los Trancos RSA = Rancho San Antonio SR= Skyline Ridge AO = Administrative Office
ES = El Sereno MR = Miramontes Ridge RV = Ravenswood SCS = Stevens Creek Shoreline Nature FFO = Foothills Field Office
FH = Foothills MB = Monte Bello RR = Russian Ridge TH = Teague Hill SFO = Skyline Field Office
FO = Fremont Older PR = Picchetti Ranch SJH = St Joseph's Hill TW = Thornewood SAO = South Area Outpost
RR/MIN = Russian Ridge - Mindego Hill
R-15-11
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 3
AGENDA ITEM
Award a Contract for the Prospect Road Parking Lot Canopy Structure at Fremont Older Open
Space Preserve
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the General Manager to enter into a professional services contract with Harris Design
for $39,800 with a 15% contingency of $6,200, for a total amount not to exceed $46,000, to
provide design and construction administration services for the Prospect Road Parking Lot
Canopy Structure at Fremont Older Open Space Preserve (OSP).
SUMMARY
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2014-15 Action Plan includes the design and permitting of public safety
improvements for the Prospect Road Parking Lot. A Request for Proposals (RFP) to design and
provide construction administration services for a new canopy structure to shield Preserve
visitors and vehicles from errant golf balls entering the Prospect Road parking lot from the
adjacent Saratoga County Club was issued on November 14, 2014. Based on the results of the
RFP process, the General Manager recommends awarding a contract to Harris Design for a total
amount not-to-exceed $46,000. The FY2014-15 budget includes sufficient funds to cover costs
through the end of this fiscal year. Additional funds will be budgeted next fiscal year to complete
the project.
BACKGROUND
Fremont Older OSP is the second most popular District Preserve and includes a well-used
informal lot that is located adjacent to the Saratoga Country Club (Club) and its fifth hole green.
The proximity of the green to the parking lot has resulted in errant golf balls landing in the lot
and damaging Preserve visitor’s vehicles (see Exhibit A).
Originally, the District considered moving the parking area to another location to address the
errant golf ball issue and potentially increase the available parking space. However, given the
high cost and permit uncertainties associated with the various options for constructing a new lot,
the District modified its approach and opted instead to retain and protect the existing informal
lot. The District and Club have met numerous times and together have identified various
modifications that lead to improved safety: the Club has proceeded to modify the layout of the
fifth hole, which has reduced the number of golf balls entering the lot, and the District hired a
consultant to provide golf ball trajectory analyses and preliminary design recommendations to
explore viable options for a protective barrier structure. The results of this work have concluded
R-15-11 Page 2
that a horizontal barrier or canopy would provide the greatest protection of the informal lot (R-
14-128) and as such, staff recommendation is that the District proceed with the design work
necessary for implementation of a horizontal canopy structure.
DISCUSSION
To complete the design, submit permit applications and provide construction administration
services for a horizontal canopy structure for the Prospect Road parking lot, a Request for
Proposals was released on November 14, 2014 via direct email and posting on the District
website. The due date for proposals was December 12, 2014 and a total of two proposals were
received as shown below:
Firm Location Proposal Amount
Harris Design Berkeley, CA $39,800
Tanaka Design Group San Francisco, CA $38,500
Staff evaluated the proposals to assess the qualifications of each proposer, the quality of the
proposal, the implementation approach, and the overall team expertise. The most qualified firm
for this project was identified as Harris Design. The top reason for the selection was the firm’s
extensive experience designing canopy structures for public park agencies and golf facilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
The FY2014-15 Action Plan and Budget includes $42,000 for the Fremont Older Prospect Road
Safety Structure Project and is sufficient to cover the work that will be completed through the
end of this fiscal year. Additional funding will be included as part of the FY2015-16 budget for
the remaining work.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
The Planning and Natural Resources Committee received an informational presentation on the
proposed design and construction of a safety structure for the Prospect Road Parking Lot on
October 21, 2014 (R-14-128). The Committee directed staff to proceed with the design of a
canopy safety structure and to return to the Committee if the final design recommendation differs
significantly from the conceptual canopy design presented to the Committee.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Retention of design consultants does not constitute a Project under CEQA. The approval of the
canopy structure construction contract by the Board of Directors, which is expected to occur in
FY2015-16, will be subject to CEQA review at that time. This Agenda Item relates only to the
design and construction oversight of the canopy structure, not construction.
R-15-11 Page 3
NEXT STEPS
Upon Board authorization, the General Manager would enter into a contract with Harris Design
to provide design and construction administration for the Fremont Older Prospect Road Safety
Structure project. Following the design and permitting phase of the project, staff will release a
Request for Bids (RFB) and return to the Board of Directors to award a contract for construction
services. Construction is anticipated in the Fall of 2015.
Attachment
1. Site Map of Prospect Road Parking Area, Fremont Older OSP
Responsible Department Head:
Jane F. Mark, AICP, Planning Manager
Prepared by:
Gretchen Laustsen, Planner II, Planning Department
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
: Prospect Road Staging Area, Fremont Older Open Space Preserve
October, 2014
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
F
r
e
m
o
n
t
_
O
l
d
e
r
\
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
_
L
o
t
\
S
a
f
e
t
y
_
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
_
S
i
t
e
_
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
m
c
h
i
l
d
s
0 10050Feet
(MROSD)MROSD Preserve
While the District strives to use the best available digital data, this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features.
Fr e mo n t Old e r Op e n S p a c ePr e se r v e Area ofDetailFremont Older Open Space Preserve
This map was used by G.Laustenfor the October 21, 2014 PNR Committee Meeting.
Prospect Road Staging Area
Saratoga Country Club Golf Course
C o r a O l d e r Tr a i l
ProspectRd
Men's Tee
Women's Tee
R-15-03
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 4
AGENDA ITEM
Approval of First Amendment to Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a Power of Termination, a
Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation of a Right of First Refusal,
an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails at Long Ridge Open Space
Preserve (San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Number 080-410-270), and a Determination that
the Recommended Actions are Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality
Act.
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution approving First Amendment to Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a
Power of Termination, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation
of a Right of First Refusal, an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails
between Thomas L. Anderson/Sharon L. Niswander and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District.
SUMMARY
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) has an opportunity to improve the
terms of a 40 year fee estate sale agreement entered into with Thomas L. Anderson/Sharon L.
Niswander (Anderson-Niswander) in 2000 for a 13.9 acre property that is improved with a
single-family residence at Long Ridge Open Space Preserve. The First Amendment to Grant
Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a Power of Termination, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions
and Restrictions, Reservation of a Right of First Refusal, an Easement for Conservation, Open
Space and Public Trails (Amendment) will improve and update the terms of the original
agreement prior to finalizing a pending sale of the remaining 26 year fee estate term to a private
buyer. To this end, the General Manager recommends the approval of the Amendment. These
actions would have no fiscal impact to the District’s budget.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 1981, the District purchased the 13.9-acre Bean Property as an addition to Long Ridge Open
Space Preserve (R-81-31). At the time of purchase, the property was improved with a new, four-
bedroom, two-bath house. From the date of purchase until 2000, the District leased out the
R-15-03 Page 2
house under its residential rental program. In October of 2000, through a Request for Proposal
process, the District sold a 40-year fee simple defeasible interest (Term Interest) to Thomas
Anderson and Sharon Niswander for $450,000 (R-00-120) via a Grant Deed of Fee Estate
Subject to a Power of Termination, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions,
Reservation of a Right of First Refusal, and an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and
Public Trails (Agreement). Anderson-Niswander used the property as a personal residence until
July of 2014, at which time they retired and moved to the state of Washington to care for a
family member.
Per the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R’s) and the Easement for
Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails, the building envelope on the 13.9-acre Anderson-
Niswander Term Interest was restricted to 3/4 of an acre. The remaining 13.15 acres was
protected as Open Space. The improvements contained within the building envelope are a house,
shop, water tank, and a small shed. The CC&R’s also prohibited Anderson-Niswander from
renting out the house under any circumstances. This restrictive prohibition limited the flexibility
available to Anderson-Niswander in the event of unforeseen life events. Finally, under the
Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails, a portion of the District’s Long Ridge
Trail circles a portion of the Anderson-Niswander property.
In early 2014, the District was approached by Anderson-Niswander to discuss the possible sale
of their remaining 26 year Term Interest to either the District or a private party, as the District
possesses a Right of First Refusal. Over the ensuing months, District staff examined the pros and
cons of purchasing the Term Interest and worked to determine the fair market value of the Term
Interest. Anderson-Niswander listed the Term Interest for sale in October 2014 and they had
several parties that were interested in the property. On November 18, 2014, Andersen-
Niswander received a $612,000 offer to purchase from a viable buyer. Per the District’s Right of
First Refusal, the District had 30 days to match or decline this offer. The District declined to
exercise its Right of First Refusal under the General Manager’s authority for the Anderson-
Niswander Term Interest on November 21, 2014. The Term Interest is now in contract with a
private party and the anticipated close date is late January 2015.
First Amendment
As the Term Interest is in contract and will change owners, District staff and Anderson-
Niswander wanted to take advantage of this opportunity to improve certain terms within the
current Agreement. The following provisions have been amended or added to the Agreement per
the First Amendment:
CC&R’s
1. Anderson-Niswander or future owners shall have the ability to rent out the property with
prior District written authorization. This amendment will grant the owner greater flexibility
in dealing with any unforeseen life events that may occur over the remaining 26 years. This
should help maintain the financial viability of the arrangement through the life of the term
by allowing for adaptation to changing conditions over time.
2. The insurance provision has been amended to increase the liability insurance to $2,000,000.
3. A new section entitled “Loans” was added to cap the loan to value ratio of First Deeds of
Trust to 80% and to prohibit second deeds of trust, equity lines of credit, or any other type
R-15-03 Page 3
of loan or lien. This addition is to prohibit over-encumbering the property with future debt
as the value of the Term Interest is decreasing over time.
4. A new section entitled “Road Maintenance Assessment” was added to memorialize the
understanding that Anderson-Niswander or future owners would be responsible for 6% of
the District’s annual road maintenance assessments from the Portola Park Heights
Homeowners Association for Portola Heights Road.
FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL
The 30-day notice requirement in the current Agreement shall be changed to 60 days per the
First Amendment. This change will give the District more time to consider matching any
future offers to purchase that may be received.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
There was no Committee review for this agenda item. This item came to the full Board in closed
session.
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the Amendment would have no fiscal impact to the District’s budget.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. Adjacent property owners were also
mailed a copy of the meeting agenda.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
The project consists of amending a Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a Power of Termination,
a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation of a Right of First Refusal,
and an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails.
CEQA Determination
The District concludes that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment. The
project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Article 19, Sections 15301 of the CEQA
Guidelines as follows:
Section 15301 exempts operation, repair, restoration, maintenance, permitting, leasing,
licensing or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical
equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that
existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. The approval and execution of the
Amendment does not and will not expand the use on the property.
The project is also exempt under 15061(b)(3), as there is no possibility the actions can have a
significant effect on the environment.
NEXT STEPS
R-15-03 Page 4
Pending Board approval, the Amendment would be executed and delivered for recording. At the
end of the remaining 26 year Fee Estate interest, the subject property will revert to District fee
ownership at no cost to the District.
Attachments
1. Resolution approving and authorizing the President of the Board, General Manager,
or other appropriate officer to approve and execute a First Amendment to Grant Deed
of Fee Estate subject to a Power of Termination, a Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation of a Right of First Refusal, and of an
Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails with Thomas Leroy
Anderson and Sharon Louise Niswander, Trustees of the Thomas Leroy Anderson
and Sharon Louise Niswander Revocable Trust, and authorizing the General Manager
and General Counsel to execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate
to complete the Amendment (Long Ridge Open Space Preserve – Thomas Leroy
Anderson and Sharon Louise Niswander, Trustees of the Thomas Leroy Anderson
and Sharon Louise Niswander Revocable Trust)
2. Location Maps (Regional and Site)
Responsible Department Head:
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager, Real Property Department
Prepared by:
Allen L. Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist, Real Property Department
Graphics prepared by:
Jon Montgomery, Planning Technician
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (DISTRICT) APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD, GENERAL MANAGER,
OR OTHER APPROPRIATE OFFICER TO APPROVE AND EXECUTE A
FIRST AMENDMENT TO GRANT DEED OF FEE ESTATE SUBJECT TO A
POWER OF TERMINATION, A DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,
CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATION OF A RIGHT OF FIRST
REFUSAL, AND OF AN EASEMENT FOR CONSERVATION, OPEN SPACE
AND PUBLIC TRAILS WITH THOMAS LEROY ANDERSON AND SHARON
LOUISE NISWANDER, TRUSTEES OF THE THOMAS LEROY ANDERSON
AND SHARON LOUISE NISWANDER REVOCABLE TRUST, AND
AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL COUNSEL TO
EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR
APPROPRIATE TO COMPLETE THE AMENDMENT (LONG RIDGE OPEN
SPACE PRESERVE – THOMAS LEROY ANDERSON AND SHARON LOUISE
NISWANDER, TRUSTEES OF THE THOMAS LEROY ANDERSON AND
SHARON LOUISE NISWANDER REVOCABLE TRUST)
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. The General Manager, President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute the First Amendment to Grant Deed of Fee Estate Subject to a
Power of Termination, A Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Reservation of
a Right of First Refusal, and of an Easement for Conservation, Open Space and Public Trails
with Thomas Leroy Anderson and Sharon Louise Niswander, Trustees of the Thomas Leroy
Anderson and Sharon Louise Niswander Revocable Trust.
SECTION TWO. The General Manager and General Counsel are authorized to execute
any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transactions approved
in this Resolution. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized to approve
minor or technical revisions to the Amendment that do not involve any substantial changes to
any terms of the Agreement, and which are necessary or appropriate to the closing or
implementation of these transactions.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on ______, 2015, at a Regular Meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
D
o
h
e
r
t
y
R
i
d
g
e
D
o
h
e
r
t
y
R
i
d
g
e
D
D
ee
vviillssCCaannyyoo nn
Long Ridge
Upper StevensCreek Park(S. Clara County)
POST
AlternateTrail
Canyo
n
T
r
a
il
G rizzlyFl a t T r a i l
CanyonTra
i
l
ChestnutTrail
Canyon
T
rail
Charcoal
Ro a d
Peter
s
C
r
e
e
k
T
r
a
i
l
Pe t e r s Creek
Stev ensCreek
S l a te Creek
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
Anderson-Niswander
December, 2014
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
L
o
n
g
_
R
i
d
g
e
\
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
N
i
s
w
a
n
d
e
r
S
i
t
e
\
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
m
o
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
0 0.40.2MilesI
(MROSD)
Other Protected Open Spaceor Park Lands
MROSD Preserves
While the District strives to use the best available digital data, this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Cupertino
Area ofDetail
£¤35
Anderson-Niswander
MROSD ConservationEasement
Land Trust
Private Property
Anderson-Niswander080-410-27013.9 Acres
£¤35
£¤280
£¤85
Open Space Preserve
Po
r
t
olaHei
ghtsRd
Long Ridge Trail
Attachment 2
P
e
t
e
rsCreek
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
Anderson-Niswander Site Map
December, 2014
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
L
o
n
g
_
R
i
d
g
e
\
A
n
d
e
r
s
o
n
N
i
s
w
a
n
d
e
r
S
i
t
e
\
S
i
t
e
m
a
p
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
m
o
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
0 0.050.025MilesI
(MROSD)
While the District strives to use the best available digital data, this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features.
Mo n te Be l lo OS P
Area ofDetail
£¤35
L
o
n
g
R
id
g
e
Trail
Portola
H
eig
h
t
s
R
oad
Anderson-Niswander parcel
Existing Structures Building Envelope
Water Well
Water Well
Sk y li neR id ge OS P
Attachment 2
R-15-05
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 5
AGENDA ITEM
Amend Legal Services Contract with Howard, Rome, Martin & Ridley for a Total Authorized
Amount of $45,000
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Amend the existing contract for legal services to increase the contract amount by $20,000 for a
total not to exceed amount of $45,000, for legal and subject-matter expert support of litigation
settlement efforts, coordination with the County, and related legal issues.
SUMMARY
The District has a contract with Howard, Rome, Martin & Ridley (HRMR) to represent the
District’s interests as they relate to a nuisance abatement action on the Gullicksen property
immediately adjacent to the Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve. The original agreement was
executed under the General Manager’s authority on April 7, 2011. Due to long court delays
exceeding the typical five-year time horizon for most lawsuits, and the complexity of this action
which includes multiple defendants, it is necessary to continue to retain HRMR to represent the
District’s interests through to resolution of this litigation. An additional $20,000 is required to
monitor the mediation and litigation, for a total not to exceed amount of $45,000.
DISCUSSION
In 2008, an encroachment was discovered on Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve consisting of
construction waste which was illegally dumped on the unstable hillside of an adjacent private
property. District lands are downhill of the dumped materials, and it appears that a portion of the
illegal landfill is encroaching on District property. An unnamed stream at the base of the hill on
District property is threatened by potential discharges of the waste.
In 2009, Santa Clara County commenced an administrative action against the private property
owner in an effort to require the owner to remove the waste. The District was at one point
named in the County’s administrative action, though we were successful in persuading them to
remove us. The County subsequently filed a nuisance abatement lawsuit against the property
owner (County of Santa Clara v. Gullicksen, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 1-09-
CV141882). A number of construction firms that had dumped material on the property were
brought into the lawsuit as defendants, and it became apparent that the litigation would be
lengthy and the potential effects on the District difficult to abate and resolve.
R-15-05 Page 2
In April 2011, under the General Manager’s spending authority, the District retained the law firm
of HRMR to monitor the ongoing litigation. The contract for legal services was not to exceed
$25,000. Since that time, HRMR has provided very cost-effective services in representing the
District’s interests in the County’s litigation of this public nuisance. Due to a recently
discovered accounting system data-entry error, the current contract has been overspent by
$817.38. This is included in the additional $20,000 requested.
Currently, renewed mediation is ongoing among the parties, there is an upcoming trial scheduled
in 2015, and one of the parties has appealed an initial ruling in favor of the County. The
additional legal services of HRMR will allow the District to efficiently monitor this case until the
matter reaches resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT
The FY2014-15 Real Property Department budget includes $10,000 for this project. The
remaining $10,000 will be included in the Real Property Department’s FY2015-16 budget
request.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
There was no Committee review for this agenda item. This issue has come to the full Board in
the past in closed session.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This item is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.
NEXT STEPS
Upon Board authorization, the General Counsel and General Manager will amend the contract
with HRMR, and will continue to work with outside counsel to monitor the ongoing litigation.
Responsible Department Head:
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Prepared by:
Hilary Stevenson, Assistant General Counsel
Contact person:
Sheryl Schaffner, General Counsel
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 1
R-15-04
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 6
AGENDA ITEM
Lease for Office Space at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Los Altos
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the General Manager to enter into an Office Lease with
Wellington Park Investors.
SUMMARY
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) proposes to execute a four-year Office
Lease with Wellington Park Investors for 1,564 square feet of office space at 4984 El Camino
Real, Suite 100, Los Altos with an annual rental rate of $66,000 and 3% annual increases. The
proposed lease would provide additional administrative office space to address work space needs
resulting from the filling of upcoming vacancies and anticipated future staff growth needed to
implement Measure AA priority projects. The following report provides background
information for the proposed Office Lease terms, conditions, and financial considerations.
DISCUSSION
Need for Additional Administrative Office Space
Average staff growth for the Administrative Office (AO), including interns, part-time,
temporary, contingent, and full-time employees has been approximately two (2) staff positions
per year over the last 12 years. With the five (5) new positions approved as part of the Fiscal
Year (FY) 2014-15 Midyear budget, and the anticipated recommendations from the Financial
and Operational Sustainability Model (FOSM) study, this rate of growth is accelerating. At this
time, there are 69 authorized positions that are assigned to the AO (includes AO2 office space),
some of which are currently vacant and expected to be filled within the next year (FY2015-16).
In addition to the 69 work stations assigned to these positions, the Administrative Office also
maintains eight (8) additional work stations for volunteers, Area Superintendents (who often
work remotely from the Administrative Office), accounting support, legal pro-bono support,
interns, and employees working on light duty.
To address past office space deficiencies, staff leased 3,520 square feet of space in February
2013 at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite 115 (R-13-24). The Real Property and Natural Resources
R-15-04 Page 2
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 2
Departments are currently housed in the leased office space commonly referred to as AO2. In
December 2014, an opportunity to lease additional space at 4984 El Camino Real became
available. With the addition of more administrative staff at the District and the anticipation of
hiring more employees in FY2015-16 based on FOSM recommendations and District needs, the
General Manager felt an urgency to move on the opportunity to lease more space in close
proximity to the AO2 (across the hall).
The current leased office space at AO2 has served the District well. The available Suite 100
space would satisfy the District’s current and future requirements based on its location, layout,
size, and price. Suite 100 is the same distance to the Administrative Office as AO2 (less than a
3-minute walk). It is likely also within reach of the District’s existing Wi-Fi system, which
minimizes IT set up costs. The new space can accommodate 8 to 10 staff, and has sufficient
meeting and private office space.
Office Space Rental Market
The demand for office space in the area surrounding the District’s Administrative Office (330
Distel Circle, Los Altos) is very strong with vacancy levels dropping and rental rates increasing
in the Mountain View/Los Altos submarket. The market has tightened significantly as of the
Board’s approval of the AO2 lease in early 2013. According to the 2014 Third Quarter (Q3) San
Francisco Peninsula Research and Forecast Report prepared by Colliers International, the total
vacancy rate for class B/C office space within the Mountain View/Los Altos submarket is 2.9%
(5.7% drop from 2012 Q4) and the average asking rental rate is $4.36 per square foot ($0.84
increase from 2012 Q4) on a full service basis (includes utilities).
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The General Manager recommends a lease with Wellington Park Investors for 1,564 square feet
of office space at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite 100. The lease area would contain three private
offices, one conference room, general open office space for approximately 8 to 10 work stations,
and first come, first served parking. The proposed lease terms are outlined below:
1. The lease term shall be four years from February 1, 2015 to January 31, 2019, with one
two-year option to extend the term.
2. The rental rate was negotiated to $3.52 per square foot (psf) modified full service (does not
include utilities) or $66,000 per year with 3% annual increases. The utility costs are
estimated to be $600 a month or $7,200 per year ($0.38 psf). The security deposit shall be
equal to one month’s rent or $5,500. The District would be responsible for its pro-rated
share of any increased operating expenses and property taxes over the 2015 base year.
3. The Landlord will be responsible for the following expenses: building maintenance, taxes,
property management, parking lot maintenance/repair, landscaping, and janitorial services.
4. The Landlord will provide for the following tenant improvements: removal of two private
offices to expand the open work station area.
5. Upon execution of the lease, the District will pay the first month’s rent and a security
deposit equivalent to one month’s rent.
R-15-04 Page 3
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 3
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
In order to take timely advantage of the office space opportunity, as time is of the essence, this
item could not be presented to the Planning and Natural Resources Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated total cost of the lease space for the initial four-year term is estimated at $311,295
(including utilities and security deposit). The proposed FY2015-16 Budget, which the Board will
review in late February, will include the majority of funds to cover the monthly lease costs and
utilities, as well as the one-time costs for furnishings and minor improvements. Funds needed to
cover any set up expenses (including equipment/furnishings) between February and end of
March during the current Fiscal Year (FY2014-15) will be covered by cost savings in the
Operating Budget. Future fiscal year budgets will include the yearly rental cost for the lease
space.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
The proposed project consists of executing a new, four-year Office Lease with Wellington Park
Investors for 1,564 square feet of additional office space at 4984 El Camino Real Suite 100, Los
Altos for an existing private structure, which involves no expansion of use.
CEQA Determination
The District concludes that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Article 19, Section 15301, of the CEQA
Guidelines as follows:
Section 15301 exempts operation, repair, restoration, maintenance, permitting, leasing,
licensing or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical
equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond
that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. The office lease agreement
involves the leasing of existing private facilities and there will be no expansion of use.
The project is also exempt under 15061(b)(3), as there is no possibility the actions can have a
significant effect on the environment.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the General Manager will be authorized to enter into a
lease agreement with Wellington Park Investors. District staff will deliver the executed office
lease, first month’s rent, and security deposit to Wellington Park Investors. District staff will
also begin preparing the lease area for occupancy with work station furniture and IT set up.
R-15-04 Page 4
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 4
Attachments
1. Resolution Approving and Authorizing the General Manager, President of the Board or
other appropriate officer to execute a Lease Agreement at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite
100 Los Altos with Welling Park Investors and Authorizing the General Manager and
General Counsel to Execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to
complete the transaction.
2. Location Map
Responsible Department Head:
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Ana Ruiz, Assistant General Manager
Contact person:
Allen L. Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist
Tina Hugg, Senior Planner
Graphics prepared by:
Jon Montgomery, Planning Technician
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (DISTRICT)
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER,
PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OR OTHER APPROPRIATE OFFICER
TO EXECUTE A LEASE AGREEMENT AT 4984 EL CAMINO REAL,
SUITE 100 LOS ALTOS WITH WELLING PARK INVESTORS AND
AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER AND GENERAL
COUNSEL TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS
NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO COMPLETE THE TRANSACTION
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. The General Manager, President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute the lease agreement with Wellington Park Investors for office
space at 4984 El Camino Real, Suite 100, Los Altos.
SECTION TWO. The General Manager or the General Manger’s designee is hereby
authorized to negotiate and approve the exercise of the subsequent two-year lease option as set
forth in the Lease Agreement. The General Manager is further authorized to execute any and all
other documents necessary or appropriate to the completion of such transactions.
SECTION THREE. The General Manager and General Counsel are authorized to
execute any and all other documents necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transactions
approved in this Resolution. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized
to approve minor or technical revisions to the lease agreement that do not involve any substantial
changes to any terms of the agreement, and which are necessary or appropriate to the closing or
implementation of this transaction.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on ______, 2015, at a Regular Meeting thereof, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
Resolutions/2015/15-__AO3 Lease Space 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP,swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Mi d p en in su la Re g io na lOpen S p ac e Di st r ic t
At t a c h m e n t A : A d m in i s t ra t i v e O f f ic e L ea s e
December, 2014
Path: G:\Projects\a_Districtwide\AO_Lease\AO3Lease_BoardPacket_Landscape_8.5x11.mxd
Created By: jmontgomery
0 200100FeetI
(M RO S D )Ad mi ni st r at i ve Of f i ce
While the District strive s t o u se t he best availab le digit al d at a, this data does not rep resent a legal survey an d is mer ely a graphic illustration of geographic featur es.
R a n c h oSan A n t o n i o
Area ofDetail
£¤280
4984 El Camino RealSuite 100
£¤101
£¤85
£¤82
Los Altos
Mountain View
Su nnyvale
Cupertino
ElCaminoReal
Su it e 10 0 - 49 84 E l C ami no Real
Administrative Office
R-15-10
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 7
AGENDA ITEM
Contract to Provide Fence Installation Work at the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement with Southwest Fence and Supply
Company of Patterson, CA, for a total contract amount not to exceed $149,905 to provide fence
installation work at the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve.
2. Determine that the recommended action is consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for Implementation of the La Honda Creek Master Plan,
approved by the Board on August 22, 2012.
3. Authorize the General Manager to move $30,000 from the Land budget to the Capital budget
to cover the additional costs for the contract.
SUMMARY
The Request for Bids for the McDonald Ranch Fence Installation Project at La Honda Creek
Open Space Preserve was issued on November 15, 2014. This was a rebid for the project after
all bids were rejected by the Board of Directors on November 12, 2014. After completing the
Request for Bids process, four (4) bids were received on December 1, 2014, with Southwest
Fence and Supply Company the apparent low bidder. Completion of this fence installation will
protect riparian resources along a tributary to La Honda Creek and complete the fencing
establishing Pastures 2 and 3 to allow conservation grazing identified within the La Honda Creek
Open Space Preserve Master Plan.
DISCUSSION
Background
The McDonald Ranch Fence Installation Project is located in La Honda Creek Open Space
Preserve (Preserve), northwest of the Town of La Honda (See Attachment 1, Project Location).
The project objective is to provide the installation of approximately 8,900 linear feet of a new
five (5) strand barbed wire livestock fence, installation of five (5) livestock gates, and removal of
approximately 100 linear feet of five (5) strand barbed wire livestock fence. Installation of the
fence and gates will restrict livestock access to La Honda Creek and the associated riparian
corridor in pastures two (2) and three (3) of McDonald Ranch (See Attachment 2, Premise Map).
R-15-10 Page 2
The McDonald Ranch Fence Installation Project was initially bid in October 2015 and received
three (3) bids. The apparent low bidder was determined to be non-responsive and the second
lowest bidder was 175% over the engineer’s estimated cost. As a result, the Board rejected all
bids at the Board meeting held November 12, 2014 and authorized the General Manager to
solicit new bids to complete the project (see Report R-14-131).
Bidding Process
The Request for Bids was issued on November 15, 2014 and was sent to five (5) contractors as
well as released to five (5) builders’ exchanges. Legal notices were posted in the Half Moon Bay
Review and San Mateo County Times, and an Invitation to Bid was posted on the District
website. An optional pre-bid site tour was made available to contractors by appointment and one
contractor attended.
Sealed bids were due on Monday December 1, 2014, and four (4) bids were received and opened
with the results as follows:
Bidder Location Total Bid
Price per
Linear Foot
(LF) Bid
Percent
Difference from
Base Bid Estimate
of $90,000
1. Crusader Fence Vallejo, CA $248,000 $27.86 + 175.0%
2. Hammer Fences Tracy, CA $196,280 $22.05 + 118.0%
3. Southwest Fence Patterson, CA $149,905 $16.84 + 66.6%
4. BGV International Fresno, CA $118,400 $13.30 + 31.6%
Upon review of the Bid Proposals, staff determined that the bid from BGV International was
non-responsive because the bidder did not have the required license nor did they have adequate
experience/references listed. Therefore, Southwest Fence was announced as the apparent low
bidder.
Bid Analysis
Historically, fence installation on District lands has ranged between $6.00 and $8.00 per linear
foot depending on steepness of terrain, soil type, and economy of scale. The McDonald Fence
Installation is in extremely steep terrain with areas of rocky ground and dense brush. Staff
included a 30-40% increase of $2.00 to $4.00 per linear foot adjustment over typical fence costs
to account for the difficult terrain, raising the project cost estimate to $10.00 per linear foot,
totaling approximately $90,000. Based on the bids received, initial project cost estimates were
low.
Southwest Fence originally bid the project in October for $88,475 but has since increased their
bid price to $149,905 during the rebid process. District staff inquired about the increase in bid
price and Southwest Fence indicated that they revisited the site and confirmed the project was
more challenging than initially thought; this, including the up-to-date calculation of prevailing
wages as well as unforeseen changes to cost of materials not within their control forced the
reevaluation of their costs to complete the work. When given the opportunity to rebid the
R-15-10 Page 3
project, they adjusted their bid to include prevailing wages and increased material costs which
increased their original bid price by 41%.
FISCAL IMPACT
Award of contract will result in a not-to-exceed contract amount of $149,905 being awarded to
Southwest Fence and Supply Co. for the Project. An additional $60,000 in funding is needed, of
which $30,000 will be moved from the Land budget and the remaining $30,000 from Natural
Resources Capital Budget. These adjustments in capital project budgets are detailed in the table
below:
Project Funds to
Transfer
Notes
Restoration Forestry Demonstration
Project
$30,000 Project deferred to FY2015-16 due to
staff capacity
Rebuild Pond DR05 $15,000 Project completed under budget
La Honda Creek Watershed Protection
Program
$5,000 Funds will not be expended until
FY2015-16
Integrated Pest Management Program $10,000 Project completed under budget
TOTAL $60,000
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Installation of grazing infrastructure at the McDonald Ranch was included in the Natural
Resources Department FY2014-15 Action Plan and Budget, which was reviewed and approved
by the Action Plan and Budget Committee and the full Board of Directors.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The McDonald Ranch Fence Installation Project is consistent with the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Plan for Implementation of the La Honda Creek Open
Space Preserve Master Plan, approved by the Board on August 22, 2012 (see Report R-12-83).
NEXT STEPS
If approved by the Board, the General Manager will be authorized to enter into a contract with
Southwest Fence to perform construction services for the McDonald Ranch Fence Installation
Project. Final contract signature is subject to meeting all District requirements, such as having
all required insurance and bonding in place. The project is scheduled to begin in January and be
completed by March 2015, pending winter weather conditions.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Premise Map
R-15-10 Page 4
Responsible Department Manager:
Kirk Lenington, Natural Resources Manager
Prepared By:
Clayton Koopmann, Natural Resource Specialist I
PageMillRd
Po r t ola Rd
Sa n d H i l l R dTripp
R
d
L
o
s
T
r
a
n
c
o
s
R
d
AlpineRd
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
McDonald Ranch - La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve
October, 2014
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
L
a
_
H
o
n
d
a
_
C
r
e
e
k
\
M
c
D
o
n
a
l
d
_
R
a
n
c
h
_
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
m
o
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
0 21MilesI
(MROSD)Other Protected Open Spaceor Park Lands
Non MROSD Conservation or Agricultural Easement
MROSD Conservationor Agricultural Easement
MROSD Preserves Private Property
Developed Land
While the District strives to use the best available digital data, this data does not represent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illustration of geographic features.
Watershed Land
£¤84
£¤280
£¤35
Other Public Agency Management Agreement
La Honda Creek
El Cortede Madera
WindyHill
RussianRidge
SkylineRidge
MonteBello
TunitasCreek
TunitasCreek
Audubon Society
FoothillsPark(Palo Alto)
HiddenVilla
ArastraderoPreserve
LosTrancos
CoalCreek
La Honda
Wunderlich County Park
JasperRidge
McDonald Ranch
£¤84
Attachment 1
D D D?
??
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
E
EE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
McDonald Ranch Premise Map
""""
"""""Buildings & other facilities
Pond or reservoir
!!!Exterior gate
Interior gate
Roadside Parking
!!!
Pastures
E Spring or well Unmaintained road: width
Minor paved road
Important road
Highway/major road
Minor unpaved road
Trail/ATV
La HondaCreek Open Space Preserve
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
October, 2014
I
(MROSD)
McDonald Ranch Area
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
L
a
_
H
o
n
d
a
_
C
r
e
e
k
\
D
r
i
s
c
o
l
l
\
M
c
D
o
n
a
l
d
_
R
a
n
c
h
_
L
e
a
s
e
\
M
c
D
o
n
a
l
d
_
I
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
1
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
m
o
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
2
3
4
5
New fencing
Fence in need of repair
Proposed Fencing
Fence repaired
?Proposed troughs
Tanks!
Troughs in place?
New Water Lines
La
HondaCreek
£¤84
0 0.40.2Miles
#
1
Glass
1
3 2
4
6
5
7
9
810
#
11
Projects
12
13
.8,884.21 ft
Potential Gates
Fence to be removed by contractor
*Pasture 4 new fencing not part of the project
Attachment 2
R-15-07
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 8
AGENDA ITEM
Election of the Board of Directors Officers for Calendar Year 2015
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Elect Officers of the Board of Directors for Calendar Year 2015.
SUMMARY
Pursuant to Section 1.06 (Board Officers) of the Board Policy Manual, the Board is required to
elect new Officers for the calendar year at its first regular meeting in January. The election will
be held by signed ballot and counted by the District Clerk. After the election, the ballots will be
available for public inspection.
DISCUSSION
The Board’s Rules of Procedure list the order of officers to be elected as follows: President,
Vice-President, Treasurer, and Secretary. Board Policy Manual Section 1.04 (Board
Committees) states that the Treasurer shall be a member of the Action Plan and Budget
Committee (ABC).
Board Officer Election Process
Board Officers will be elected sequentially, starting with Board President and ending with
Secretary. Each Board Officer will be elected by a separate vote starting with a call for
nominations from the Board. Following the close of nominations, election of each Board Officer
will proceed by signed ballot and counted by the District Clerk. The Director receiving a
majority of the vote of the members of the Board will be elected. Each of the four Board
Officers will be elected using this procedure. After the election, the ballots will be available to
the public for inspection.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts for this item.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Board Committee review of this agenda item is not required.
R-15-07 Page 2
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is necessary.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
Following the election of Board officers, staff will prepare a new roster for posting.
Responsible Department Manager:
Steve Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
R-15-08
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 9
AGENDA ITEM
Appointment of Action Plan and Budget Committee Members for Calendar Year 2015
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Board President’s appointments to the Action Plan and Budget Committee for
Calendar Year 2015.
SUMMARY
At the first regular meeting in January, the Board of Directors must appoint new members to the
Action Plan and Budget Committee in accordance with Board Policy Manual Section 1.04
(Board Committees).
DISCUSSION
Per Board Policy 1.04, appointments to the Action Plan and Budget Committee shall normally be
made at the first regular Board meeting in January and that the Board Treasurer shall be one of
the three members of the Committee. The Board of Directors will have elected their Treasurer
for 2015 on January 14, 2015 (R-15-07). Newly appointed members will be the designated
Directors to review and approve related budget business for calendar year 2015.
Per Board Policy 1.04, the Board President shall appoint the Committee members with the
consent of the Board.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Board Committee review of this agenda item is not required.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is necessary.
R-15-08 Page 2
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board, staff will prepare a new roster of Action Plan and Budget
Committee members for posting.
Responsible Department Head:
Steve Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
R-15-12
Meeting 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 10
AGENDA ITEM
Reclassification of Four District Positions and the Addition of One Classification
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the following position changes:
1. Reclassification of an Accountant to a Senior Accountant in the Administrative Services
Department.
2. Reclassification of an Administrative Assistant to a Risk Management Coordinator in the
Legal Department.
3. Reclassification of two Real Property Specialists to Senior Real Property Specialists in
the Real Property Department.
4. Reclassification of a Real Property Assistant to Real Property Specialist I in the Real
Property Department.
5. Addition of a Real Property Specialist II classification to the District’s Classification and
Compensation Plan.
SUMMARY
Changes in the workload and complexity of responsibilities of positions in the Administrative
Services, Legal, and Real Property Departments prompted the General Manager to direct staff to
re-evaluate select positions and their functions within these departments. The evaluation, which
was completed by Koff and Associates, indentified the need to reclassify five existing positions
and a recommendation to create a new classification to create a classification series within one of
the departments. Should these changes be approved by the Board of Directors, the effective date
would be January 19, 2015. There are sufficient salary savings to cover the increase in cost
through the end of the current fiscal year. Future salary costs would be budgeted as part of the
annual budgets starting in FY2015-16.
DISCUSSION
One of the authorities delegated to the General Manager is the ability to direct classification
studies as needed. At the General Manager’s request, Koff and Associates (Consultant)
conducted a classification study of certain positions based on a realization that the workload and
complexities of these positions have changed substantially. The Consultant’s process included:
R-15-12 Page 2
An initial meeting with Human Resources to clarify scope, objectives, process and
deliverables.
Distribution and subsequent review of the Position Description Questionnaires (PDQ)
that were completed by the employees in the selected classifications and reviewed by the
employees’ Department Manager and Assistant General Manager.
Interviews with the incumbents and managers from the various departments.
An analysis of the classification information gathered.
Development of draft class findings and recommendations for management, supervisory
and employee review.
Additional contacts with employees and management as necessary to obtain details and
gain clarification on classification duties.
Preparation of a final report on each classification.
Reclassification of Accountant to Senior Accountant
Over the last five years, the District has experienced an evolution of its accounting and finance
functions. Significant changes include the implementation, use, and maintenance of the
Integrated Accounting and Financial System Software (IAFS) system. Moreover, the recent
passage of Measure AA creates a clear need for a higher level of expertise and oversight to
support the accounting and finance function.
The incumbent in the Accountant position was hired in April 2013. The findings of the
classification study affirmed that the incumbent performs the full spectrum of professional
accounting duties as described in the current class description as well as duties that reflect a
greater role in policy development and regulatory compliance. For example in the case of the
IAFS, the incumbent has been responsible for the regular and ongoing analysis of current
business processes and for implementing complex system configuration changes to ensure that
the system is in compliance with regulations, laws and accounting principles.
The Koff study noted that the recent passage of Measure AA, which allows the District to issue
$300 million in bonds, has further increased the complexity of project cost accounting
requirements. This position will play a key role in working with the bond oversight committee
and ensuring that the District is properly accounting for fund use. Moreover, this position
functions as the Subject Matter Expert (SME) in the accounting function and regularly acts
independently to ensure that the District is in compliance with government accounting standards
and generally accepted accounting principles. In recent years, the District has relied on this
position to closely work with the District Controller to evaluate District financial alternatives and
present financial information, reports and develop new finance and accounting policies.
The advanced skill set required to fulfill the more complex accounting and finance duties that are
now required of the position are more commonly found within a senior level accountant
R-15-12 Page 3
classification and therefore warrant the reclassification of the current Accountant position to
Senior Accountant.
Reclassification of Administrative Assistant to Risk Management Coordinator
Over the last five years, the District has had a tremendous need for staff support in the area of
risk management. The employee in this position has not only performed the variety of office
support work reflective of the administrative position, but has demonstrated considerable
knowledge and technical expertise in the area of risk management and has been performing
critical duties in the area of general liability insurance compliance and monitoring since 2008,
which includes crime, auto, pollution, special events and all risk property. The District’s General
Counsel, who directly supervises this position, affirmed that the incumbent has demonstrated
considerable specialized knowledge in Risk Management and exemplified the ability to identify
potential risks and assist in the development and administration of general liability policies to
manage risk and improve efficiency and effectiveness of operations.
Due to the regular ongoing need of the District to rely upon this position to monitor the risk
management process, a reclassification of this position is recommended to recognize this
ongoing responsibility. The Administrative Assistant classification does not sufficiently capture
the level and responsibility of work the current employee in this position performs and the
position is better classified as a Risk Management Coordinator.
The proposed reclassification also includes a confidential designation for this position. This is
required to ensure appropriate confidentiality in the day to day involvement of this position in
confidential matters handled by the legal office such as litigation, confidential legal advising,
labor negotiations support, and personnel matters.
Reclassification of Real Property Specialist to Senior Real Property Specialist
Koff conducted a detailed analysis of the Real Property Specialists scope and responsibilities.
Additionally, the Consultant interviewed the incumbents, the Real Property Manager, and the
Assistant General Manager to gather information about the quantity and complexity of the work
performed by the two incumbents. All interviewed parties affirmed that the work of this position
has evolved to include a wide variety of real property issues with more active and complex use
issues than experienced in the past. The interviewees stated that in last five years the number of
issues related to property use has increased tremendously as well as the complexity and political
sensitivity of these issues. Consequently, there has been an increased need for the Real Property
Specialists to solve these complex problems and make decisions and recommendations on how
to resolve the situations.
The current Real Property Specialist classification description does not capture most of the work
that the position now is required to perform and does not emphasize the active use issues that
have increasingly become part of the workload. Nor does the current description describe the
lead responsibilities for staff and/or for the interdepartmental projects required in this position.
The current classification also fails to capture the increasing complexity and higher level of
negotiation skill required for problem resolution. The current Real Property Specialists perform
the full range of duties as assigned, including real estate negotiations, appraisal and property
management. Employees at this level receive only occasional instruction or assistance as new or
unusual situations arise and are fully aware of the operating procedures and policies of the work
R-15-12 Page 4
unit. This position is the SME in the classification structure of the department should reflect the
higher level of expertise this position brings to this classification series.
Additionally it is recommended that the Right of Way (R/W) certification at the journey level
and the Senior Right of Way (SR R/W) certification at the senior level be required of this
classification series. Staff recommends that the District support the incumbents in obtaining this
certification and that new hires be required to obtain the certification.
Based on the level of complexity of the workload assigned to the two existing positions and the
level independent judgment required to complete the day to day work, the General Manager
recommends the reclassification of the two current Real Property Specialist positions to Senior
Real Property Specialist.
Reclassification of Real Property Assistant to Real Property Specialist I and Addition of Real
Property Specialist II Classification
The Real Property Assistant position was recently converted from a contingent position and
added to the District as a permanent position in FY2014-15. At that time there was clearly a
need for the position upgrade to support the growing property management program that had
seen a 20% increase in the number of District rental structures and the expansion of 10,000 acres
of leased grazing lands since 2001. The additional capacity was needed to manage routine tenant
improvement and day-to-day project management needs within the Real Property Department
and to reserve senior level staff capacity to address the increase in more complex real property
issues, encroachments, lease negotiations and sensitive regulatory and/or legal requirements.
However, the conversion to a permanent Real Property Assistant was without the benefit of the
Koff classification study which determined that the more appropriate classification for the
position is Real Property Specialist I. The classification study found that the quantity,
complexity and body of work required had evolved the position to a higher level than the
recently created Real Property Assistant. It is recommended that the Real Property Assistant be
reclassified to Real Property Specialist I to better reflect the work of the position and create a
correctly aligned classification series within the Real Property Department.
It is also recommended that a Real Property Specialist II classification be created and added to
the District’s Compensation Plan, as suggested by the Koff classification study. While the Real
Property Specialist classification will not be filled at this time the addition of the new
classification will complete the series and afford opportunities for expansion of the Real Property
Department in the future.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
This report was not previously reviewed by a Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT
If approved, the reclassifications would take effect January 19, 2015 and result in an additional
$5,000 in salaries and benefits costs this fiscal year. The additional costs would be offset by
R-15-12 Page 5
vacancy savings in the FY2014-15 budget. Future salary costs would be budgeted as part of the
annual budgets starting in FY2015-16.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is necessary.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEP
If approved the reclassifications would take effect January 19, 2015.
Attachments:
1. Resolution amending the classification & compensation plan by adding new
classifications specifications
2. Revised Classification & Compensation Plan
3. Revised District Organizational Chart
Responsible Manager:
Kevin Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Prepared by:
Candice Basnight, Human Resources Supervisor
Ana Ruiz, Assistant General Manager
Resolutions/2015/15-__Amend Classification and Compensation Plan 1
RESOLUTION NO. 15-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AMENDING
THE CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION PLAN BY ADDING NEW
CLASSIFICATIONS SPECIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, the General Manager has proposed an amendment to the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District Classification and Compensation Plan to add the new job
classifications of Senior Accountant, Risk Management Coordinator, Senior Real Property
Specialist, Real Property Specialist I, and Real Property Specialist II, and to add the
classification specifications therefore; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors having considered such proposals and
recommendations;
The Board of Directors of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby
resolve as follows:
1. The Board of Directors hereby amends the Classification and Compensation Plan of
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by adding the new job classification
titles of Senior Accountant, Risk Management Coordinator, Senior Real Property
Specialist, Real Property Specialist I and Real Property Specialist II, and by adding
the classifications specifications to read as set forth in the attached exhibits hereto.
2. Except as herein modified, the Classification and Compensation Plan, Resolution No.
14-14 as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.
3. This resolution shall be effective January 19, 2015.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District on _______, 2015, at a regular meeting thereof, by the following vote:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Secretary
Board of Directors
President
Board of Directors
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2015/15-__Amend Classification and Compensation Plan 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
General Counsel
I, the District Clerk of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, hereby certify
that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors
of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District by the above vote at a meeting thereof duly
held and called on the above day.
District Clerk
Attachment 1
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
SENIOR ACCOUNTANT
DEFINITION
Under general direction, plans, organizes, oversees, coordinates, and reviews the work of staff performing
difficult and complex technical and administrative support related to the processing of financial
transactions and preparing and reconciling financial and accounting records and reports; performs
professional accounting work to ensure regulatory compliance with governmental accounting standards;
maintains and improves the District’s accounting system; administers current and long-term planning
activities; manages the effective use of department resources to improve organizational productivity and
customer service; provides highly complex and responsible support to the Administrative Services
Manager in areas of expertise; and performs related work as required.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives general direction from the Administrative Services Manager. Exercises direct and general
supervision over technical and administrative support staff.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This is a professional classification responsible for managing all accounting activities in the
Administrative Services Department. The incumbent organizes and oversees day-to-day financial
processing, reporting, and record-keeping activities. Responsibilities include performing diverse,
specialized, and complex work involving significant accountability and decision-making responsibility.
The incumbent organizes and oversees day-to-day activities and is responsible for providing professional-
level support to the Administrative Services Director in a variety of areas. Successful performance of the
work requires an extensive professional background as well as skill in coordinating departmental work.
This class is further distinguished from the Administrative Services Manager in that the latter has overall
responsibility for all functions of the Department and for developing, implementing, and interpreting
public policy.
EXAMPLES OF TYPICAL JOB FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only)
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the essential
functions of the job.
Manages and participates in all activities related to the District’s accounting function, including the
integrated accounting and financial system, accounts payable, accounts receivable, processing and
issuance of checks, cash receipts, fixed assets, general ledger reconciliation, and year-end close.
Maintains and reconciles a variety of ledgers, reports, and accounting records; examines accounting
transactions to ensure accuracy; approves journal vouchers to post transactions to accounting records;
performs month-end, fiscal year-end, and calendar year-end accounting system processing.
Prepares and analyzes a variety of complex financial reports, statements, and schedules; prepares
new-year, mid-year, year-end and special reports, including the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report (CAFR).
Participates in the development and implementation of goals, objectives, policies, and priorities for
the unit; recommends within departmental policy, appropriate service and staffing levels;
recommends and administers policies and procedures.
Participates in the development, administration, and oversight of the Accounting unit’s budget.
Exhibit A
Senior Accountant
Page 2 of 4
Participates in the compilation and preparation of District budget, including providing salary and
benefits data, revenue and expense projections, monitoring expenditures, and preparing and updating
cash flow and projections.
Assists in the selection and implementation of new accounting and payroll systems and modification
to existing system; identifies problems, and consults with vendor support to request technical
solutions to specific user needs; provides technical support for departmental software applications as
appropriate. administers changes and adjustments to systems as needed
Develops and standardizes procedures and methods to improve and continuously monitor the
efficiency and effectiveness of the accounting function, service delivery methods, and procedures;
assesses and monitors workload, administrative and support systems, and internal reporting
relationships; identifies opportunities for improvement and makes recommendations to the
Administrative Services Manager.
Participates in the selection of, trains, motivates, and evaluates assigned personnel; works with
employees on performance issues; recommends discipline to the Administrative Services Manager.
Manages the District’s investment and monitors cashflow for all funds.
Manages annual independent audit; schedules, provides information and reporting for audits; ensures
availability and accuracy of required reports and documentation.
Prepares, calculates, and analyzes a variety of financial reports and data in the preparation of the
annual operating and Capital Improvement Program budgets.
Participates in the development, revision, and maintenance of policy and procedure manuals
governing fiscal matters; monitors accounting procedures of all District departments, including
internal audits and checks and balances; ensures that necessary corrective actions are taken.
Provides highly complex staff assistance to the Administrative Services Manager; develops and
reviews staff reports and other necessary correspondence related to assigned activities and services;
presents reports to various commissions, committees, and boards.
Attends and participates in professional group meetings; stays abreast of new trends and innovations
in the field of public agency accounting; researches emerging products and enhancements and their
applicability to District needs.
Monitors changes in regulations and technology that may affect assigned functions and operations;
implements policy and procedural changes after approval.
Receives, investigates, and responds to difficult and sensitive problems and complaints in a
professional manner; identifies and reports findings and takes necessary corrective action.
Performs other duties as assigned.
QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
Principles and practices of public agency finance, including general and governmental accounting,
auditing and reporting functions.
Administrative principles and practices, including goal setting, program development,
implementation, and evaluation, and project management.
Principles and practices of employee supervision, including work planning, assignment, review and
evaluation, and the training of staff in work procedures.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulatory codes, ordinances, and procedures relevant to
municipal financial operations.
Organization and management practices as applied to the development, analysis, and evaluation of
programs and operational needs of the assigned division.
Recent and on-going developments, current literature, and sources of information related to the
operations of the assigned division.
Record-keeping principles and procedures.
Modern office practices, methods, and computer equipment and applications related to the work.
Exhibit A
Senior Accountant
Page 3 of 4
English usage, grammar, spelling, vocabulary, and punctuation.
Techniques for effectively representing the District in contacts with governmental agencies,
community groups, and various business, professional, educational, regulatory, and legislative
organizations.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service by effectively dealing with the public,
vendors, contractors, and District staff.
Ability to:
Recommend and implement goals, objectives, and practices for providing effective and efficient
services.
Manage and monitor complex projects, on-time and within budget.
Plan, organize, assign, review, and evaluate the work of staff; train staff in work procedures.
Interpret, apply, explain, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local policies, procedures,
laws, and regulations.
Evaluate and develop improvements in operations, procedures, policies, or methods.
Prepare clear and concise reports, correspondence, policies, procedures, and other written materials.
Analyze, interpret, summarize and present technical information and data in an effective manner.
Conduct complex research projects, evaluate alternatives, make sound recommendations, and prepare
effective technical staff reports.
Effectively represent the department and the District in meetings with governmental agencies,
community groups, and various businesses, professional, and regulatory organizations, and in
meetings with individuals.
Establish and maintain a variety of filing, record-keeping, and tracking systems.
Organize and prioritize a variety of projects and multiple tasks in an effective and timely manner;
organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.
Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment and specialized software
applications programs.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone, and in writing.
Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal
guidelines.
Establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the
course of work.
Education and Experience:
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to graduation from an accredited four-year college or university with major coursework in
accounting, finance, business or public administration, or a related field and five (5) years of professional
accounting experience, including lead or supervisory experience.
Licenses and Certifications:
None. Certification as a Certified Public Accountant in the State of California is desirable.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer; vision to read printed materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate
in person and over the telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in
work areas and walking between work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter,
Exhibit A
Senior Accountant
Page 4 of 4
and retrieve data using a computer keyboard, typewriter keyboard, or calculator and to operate standard
office equipment. Positions in this classification occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push and pull
drawers open and closed to retrieve and file information.
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions,
and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or
public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
EFFECTIVE: January 2015
REVISED: N/A
FLSA: Exempt
Exhibit A
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
RISK MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR
DEFINITION
Under general supervision, this confidential position performs a wide variety of responsible technical and
office administrative risk management support functions, including providing information and assistance
to staff and insurance administrators; files claims, maintains risk management records, and researches and
compiles a variety of reports; performs special projects for and provides responsible and complex
technical and administrative support to the General Counsel; and performs related work as required.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives general supervision from the General Counsel. Exercises no supervision of staff.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This class is responsible for performing the full range of risk management support work. Positions at this
level receive only occasional instruction or assistance as new or unusual situations arise and are fully
aware of the operating procedures and policies of the work unit. Successful performance of the work
requires the frequent use of and independent judgment, knowledge of departmental and District activities,
and extensive staff, public, and organizational contact.
EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only)
Provides technical expertise, information and assistance to District administration regarding general
liability insurance functions.
Makes recommendations for the development and revision of risk management documents,
procedures, and forms; assists in the development of policies, regulations, and procedures.
Identifies potential risk exposure; advises administration of unusual trends or problems and
recommends appropriate corrective action.
Receives and processes liability claims and incident reports; collects and analyzes appropriate
documentation; submits documentation to third party administrator.
Acts as a liaison with insurance companies, brokers, risk and insurance management associations and
other entities concerning Agency general liability matters.
Verifies and reviews forms and reports for completeness and conformance with established
regulations and procedures; applies policies and procedures in determining completeness of
documents, reports, records, and files.
Reviews and analyzes contractual documents and determine appropriate insurance coverage required.
Issues Certificate of Insurance and maintains logs for departments; contacts insurance administrators
as necessary.
Collects and compiles material for review and analysis; provides recommendations for changes in
programs, policies, or procedures to improve efficiency and cost effectiveness of operations.
Researches, compiles, and organizes information and data from various sources on a variety of
specialized topics related to programs in assigned area; checks and tabulates standard mathematical or
statistical data; prepares and assembles reports, manuals, articles, announcements, and other
informational materials.
Develops, composes, types, edits, and proofreads a variety of complex documents, including forms,
memos, administrative, statistical, financial, and staff reports, and correspondence; inputs and
Exhibit B
Risk Management Coordinator
Page 2 of 3
retrieves data and text using a computer terminal; checks draft documents for punctuation, spelling,
and grammar; makes or suggests corrections to drafts.
Receives and processes subpoenas and requests for documents on behalf of the District; submits to
appropriate department for response.
Performs a variety of special projects.
Interprets, applies, explains, and ensures compliance with Federal, State, and local laws and
regulations and District policy concerning risk management programs.
Receives and screens visitors, telephone calls, and emails, providing a high level of customer service
to both external and internal customers; provides information to District staff, other organizations,
and the public, requiring the use of judgment and the interpretation of policies, rules, procedures, and
ordinances.
Provides general administrative support including preparing correspondence, memoranda, and
reports, performing reception functions, processing mail, performing data entry, and maintaining
schedules and records.
Organizes and maintains various administrative, confidential, reference, and follow-up files; purges
files as required.
Operates standard office equipment, including job-related computer hardware and software
applications, facsimile equipment, and multi-line telephones.
Performs other duties as assigned.
QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
Principles and practices of the risk management function, including theft and accident report
processing, liability claims processing, workers’ compensation, safety training, and hazardous
materials inventory and record keeping processes.
Methods, techniques, and practices of data collection, business letter writing, and report preparation.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulatory codes, ordinances, and procedures relevant to
assigned area of responsibility.
Record keeping principles and procedures.
Modern office practices, methods, and computer equipment and applications related to the work,
including word processing, database, and spreadsheet software.
English usage, grammar, spelling, vocabulary, and punctuation.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service by effectively dealing with the public,
vendors, contractors, and District staff.
Ability to:
Perform responsible risk management support work with accuracy, speed, and minimal direction.
Provide varied and responsible office administrative work requiring the use of tact and discretion.
Interpret, apply, explain, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws, rules, regulations,
policies, procedures, and practices of risk management administration.
Review documents for completeness and accuracy.
Respond to and effectively prioritize multiple phone calls and other requests for service.
Compose correspondence and reports independently or from brief instructions.
Make accurate arithmetic and statistical computations.
Establish and maintain a variety of filing, record keeping, and tracking systems.
Understand and follow oral and written instructions.
Organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.
Exhibit B
Risk Management Coordinator
Page 3 of 3
Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment and specialized software
applications programs.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone, and in writing.
Understand scope of authority in making independent decisions.
Review situations accurately and determine appropriate course of action using judgment according to
established policies and procedures.
Establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the
course of work.
Education and Experience:
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to the completion of twelfth (12th) grade supplemented by college-level coursework and/or
risk management technical training and five (5) years of responsible administrative support experience, or
two (2) years of experience equivalent to Administrative Assistant at the District.
Licenses and Certifications:
Possession of, or ability to obtain, a valid California Driver’s License by time of appointment.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer; vision to read printed materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate
in person, and over the telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in
and walking between work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and
retrieve data using a computer keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions
in this classification occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push, and pull drawers open and closed to
retrieve and file information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials
and objects up to 25 pounds with the use of proper equipment.
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions,
and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or
public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
EFFECTIVE: January 2015
REVISED: N/A
FLSA: Not Exempt
Exhibit B
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
SENIOR REAL PROPERTY SPECIALIST
DEFINITION
Under general direction, leads, oversees, negotiates and performs a variety of complex real property
transactions including purchases, exchanges, and easements. Works in the management of the District’s
rental and leased land programs, including negotiating lease agreements, coordinates capital improvement
projects; resolves encroachments, easement issues and performs title research, appraisal analysis, and
preparation of related documents; conducts studies and develops recommendations for action, policies,
and procedures; responds to requests and inquiries from real property stakeholders and the public and
provides information as necessary; and performs related work as required.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives general supervision from the Real Property Manager Exercises direct supervision over assigned
staff, interns, and/or volunteers and exercises lead technical and functional direction over and provides
training to less experienced staff.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This is the highest-level classification in the professional real property series that provides advanced
specialized expertise in real property issues that is applied to the administration and management of large,
complex, and diverse projects or a focused area of responsibility. Incumbents make decisions of critical
impact involving the development and implementation of policy and/or long- and short-term goals and
objectives in a focused area of responsibility or assigned project area(s). Responsibilities include
performing diverse, specialized, and complex work involving significant accountability and decision-
making responsibility. The incumbent organizes and oversees both day-to-day current and long-term
activities and is responsible for providing professional-level support to assigned management staff in a
variety of areas. Successful performance of the work requires an extensive professional background as
well as skill in coordinating departmental work with and providing technical support to other District
departments and other public agencies. This class is distinguished from the Real Property Manager in
that the latter has overall management responsibility for all Real Property programs, functions, and
activities and for developing, implementing, and interpreting public policy.
EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only)
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the essential
functions of the job.
Manages, directs, and participates in highly complex and specialized real property projects and
activities; designs and conducts studies to develop plans and policies; conducts field inspections of
assigned real property projects to ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws, rules, and
regulations, including the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and local guidelines and
procedures.
Performs a variety of complex professional real property activities involved in the management,
maintenance, and acquisition of District properties and related rental, lease, and land use programs.
Exhibit C
Senior Real Property Specialist
Page 2 of 4
Develops and standardizes procedures and methods to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of
assigned services, projects, and activities; identifies opportunities for improvement and recommends
to District management staff.
Manages and coordinates the development of plans and policies requiring cross departmental and
consultant input enabling the District new types of leasing opportunities.
Manages District rental properties including negotiation and monitoring of rental income for
residential, employee housing, communications, historical, agricultural, and office leases; pursue
alternative lease arrangements.
Oversees staff performing facilities management of the District office building and tenant space
including management of HVAC, janitorial and landscape contractors.
Oversees an effective maintenance and improvement program for District rental properties, employee
residences and District office building.
Assists in the development and oversees the administration of the property management program
budget; monitors and approves expenditures for maintenance and repair of rental structures.
Negotiates and prepares complex purchase and lease documents, easements, permits and other similar
documents relative to real property interests.
Reviews and negotiates the purchase of easements and exchange agreements associated with land use
and development of private lands.
Conducts due diligence on properties being considered for purchase; prepares and presents
acquisition reports to the Board of Directors including title research, zoning and development
potential, code compliance and regulatory investigations.
Participates in a variety of land purchase and planning activities and special projects as necessary.
Resolves conflicts of interest arising from easement and encroachment issues to protect District
property; negotiates settlements with property owner.
Assists in administering the District’s volunteer easement monitoring program; resolve easement
violations reported by staff, volunteers and others.
Initiates and maintains communication with landowners, code enforcement officers, planning officials
and other regulatory agency staff.
Reviews and prepares California Environmental Quality Act compliance documents for land purchase
and protection projects.
Participates in the development and oversees the administration of the land protection budget;
monitors and approves expenditures, recommend adjustments to the land protection budget as
necessary.
Establishes and maintains open communication with other program staff; coordinates activities and
work cooperatively in a professional manner.
Collaborates with management and District counsel to prepare drafts of purchase documents,
residential rental agreements, agricultural leases, communications leases, other lease agreements and
correspondence asserting property rights involving District owned properties and land.
Prepares correspondence, documents, and reports to address issues related to real property
acquisition, property management, and land protection programs.
Perform related duties and responsibilities as required.
QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
Principles, practices, and funding sources for planning and implementing assigned real property
programs and projects.
Principles and practices of project management.
Principles and practices of employee supervision, including work planning, assignment, and the
training of staff in work procedures.
Exhibit C
Senior Real Property Specialist
Page 3 of 4
Real estate practices and laws pertaining to the appraisal, negotiation, and disposition of land as well
as the administration of land use, rental, and leasing agreements.
Procedures and instruments of real estate law and land ownership transactions.
Methods and techniques used in the preparation of legal descriptions of property, appraisals,
agreements, contracts, and other property related documents.
Property values, deed and tract restrictions, zoning ordinances, setbacks, tax and improvement
assessments, easements, and encroachments.
Principles and techniques of conducting analytical studies, evaluating alternatives, and making sound
recommendations.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, codes, and guidelines related to the projects
and programs to which assigned.
Principles and practices of public agency budget development and administration and sound financial
management policies and procedures.
Techniques of contract administration.
Principles and procedures of record keeping and reporting.
English usage, spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service to public and District staff, in person and
over the telephone.
Ability to:
Plan, organize, and coordinate real estate programs, projects, and activities, including appraisal,
acquisition and property management.
Conduct accurate appraisal reviews on complex and large properties, including historical and
agricultural properties.
Effectively represent the department and the District in meetings with governmental agencies,
community groups, and various businesses, professional, and regulatory organizations, and in
meetings with individuals.
Oversee, train, plan, organize, schedule, assign, and review the work of staff.
Analyze financial statements and pro forma statements.
Understand and evaluate financial statements, evaluate appraisals, and market study data.
Conduct negotiations with land owners, potential lessees, outside agencies, and their attorneys to
determine the terms and conditions of contracts and agreements.
Interpret, apply, explain, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws, codes, and
regulations and departmental policies and procedures.
Understand the organization and operation of the assigned department and of outside agencies as
necessary to assume assigned responsibilities.
Prepare clear and effective reports, correspondence, and other written material.
Make accurate arithmetic, financial, and statistical computations.
Effectively conduct meetings and make presentations to various groups.
Analyze situations and identify pertinent problems/issues; collect relevant information; evaluate
realistic options; and recommend/implement appropriate course of action.
Read and interpret legal descriptions, surveys, and maps.
Maintain accurate logs, records, and basic written records of work performed.
Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment and software.
Organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone or radio, and in writing.
Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal
guidelines.
Establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the
course of work.
Exhibit C
Senior Real Property Specialist
Page 4 of 4
Education and Experience:
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to a four (4) year degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in
real estate, real estate law, business administration or a related field, and five (5) years of increasingly
responsible experience in real estate or property management that includes significant public contact,
preferably with a public agency or land trust.
Licenses and Certifications:
Possession of a Senior Right of Way certificate within five (5) years of hire.
Possession of a valid California Driver’s License.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer; to operate a motor vehicle and to visit various District and meeting sites; vision to read printed
materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate in person and over the
telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in and walking between
work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a
computer keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification
occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push, and pull drawers open and closed to retrieve and file
information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials and objects
weighing up to 25 pounds.
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions,
and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or
public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
EFFECTIVE: January 2015
REVISED: N/A
FLSA: Exempt
Exhibit C
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
REAL PROPERTY SPECIALIST I
DEFINITION
Under direct supervision, performs a variety of routine to complex work related to real property
transactions and the management of the District’s rental and leased land programs, including coordinating
the work of contractors involved in the maintenance and repair of District properties; perform title
research; performs varied technical support work for the Real Property division such as service
coordination, word processing, data entry, report preparation, records management, and work order
processing; responds to requests and inquiries from residents and the public and provides information as
necessary; and performs related work as required.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives direct supervision from the Real Property Manager or lead direction from a Senior Real
Property Agent. Exercises no direct supervision over staff.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This is the entry-level class in the real property series. Incumbents at this level are expected to have
limited work experience. Assignments are generally limited in scope and set within procedural
frameworks established by higher-level positions. As experience is gained, incumbents perform with
increasing independence. This class is distinguished from the Real Property Agent II classification in that
the latter is the first fully experienced classification capable of working independently on individually
assigned real property projects, whereas this class is typically assigned to small scale projects or to
support larger scale projects that are managed by more experienced professional real property Agents.
EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only)
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the essential
functions of the job.
Performs a variety of routine real property activities involved in the management, maintenance and
acquisition of District properties and related rental, lease, and land use programs.
Manages District rental properties including negotiation and monitoring of rental income for
residential, employee housing, communications, historical, agricultural, and office leases.
Oversees the facilities management of the District office building and tenant space including
management of HVAC, janitorial and landscape contractors.
Coordinates an effective maintenance and improvement program for District rental properties,
employee residences and District office building including annual residence inspections; obtains bids
from contractors and outside vendors, prepares contracts, ensures compliance to District
requirements, oversees and ensures that work is completed in a timely manner.
Prepares and conducts rental rate surveys for District rental properties; assists in preparation of
documents relating to land value estimates and review of real property appraisal reports.
Participates in a variety of land purchase and planning activities and special projects as necessary.
Assists the land protection program in researching title and real property related issues to help resolve
encumbrance and encroachment issues.
Exhibit D
Real Property Specialist I
Page 2 of 3
Maintains and updates departmental record systems and specialized databases; enters and updates
information with real property activity, inventory files, and report summaries; retrieves information
from systems and specialized databases as required.
Establishes and maintains open communication with other District staff; coordinates activities and
work cooperatively in a professional manner.
Prepares routine correspondence, documents, and reports to assist real property acquisition, property
management, and land protection programs.
Attends meetings, conferences, workshops, and training sessions and reviews publications and
materials to remain current on principles, practices, and new developments in assigned work area.
Perform related duties and responsibilities as required.
QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
Procedures and instruments of real estate law and property rights transactions.
Real estate practices and laws pertaining to the administration of land use, rental, and leasing
agreements.
Methods of describing real property.
Basic principles of public agency real property matters.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, codes, and guidelines related to the projects
and programs to which assigned.
Techniques of contract administration.
Principles and procedures of data collection, record keeping and reporting.
English usage, spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service to public and District staff, in person and
over the telephone.
Ability to:
Organize and coordinate real estate activities, including property management.
Apply, explain, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws, codes, and regulations and
departmental policies and procedures.
Understand the organization and operation of the assigned department and of outside agencies as
necessary to assume assigned responsibilities.
Prepare clear and effective reports, correspondence, and other written material.
Make accurate arithmetic, financial, and statistical computations.
Read and interpret legal descriptions, surveys, and maps.
Maintain accurate logs, records, and basic written records of work performed.
Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment and software.
Organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone or radio, and in writing.
Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal
guidelines.
Establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the
course of work.
Exhibit D
Real Property Specialist I
Page 3 of 3
Education and Experience:
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to a four (4) year degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in
real estate, real estate law, business administration or a related field, and one (1) year of increasingly
responsible experience in real estate or property management that includes significant public contact,
preferably with a public agency or land trust.
Licenses and Certifications:
Possession of a valid California Driver’s License.
Possession of an International Right of Way Association (IRWA) Right of Way-Asset Management
Certification desired.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer; to operate a motor vehicle and to visit various District and meeting sites; vision to read printed
materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate in person and over the
telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in and walking between
work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a
computer keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification
occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push, and pull drawers open and closed to retrieve and file
information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials and objects
weighing up to 25 pounds.
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions,
and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or
public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
EFFECTIVE: January 2015
REVISED: N/A
FLSA: Non-Exempt
Exhibit D
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
REAL PROPERTY SPECIALIST II
DEFINITION
Under general supervision, performs a variety of work in Real Property Transactions such as purchases,
exchanges and easements. Works in the management of the District’s rental and leased land programs,
including negotiating lease agreements, coordinates the work of contractors involved in the maintenance,
and repair of District properties; resolves encroachment and easement issues and perform title research,
appraisal analysis, and preparation of related documents; conducts studies and develops recommendations
for action, policies, and procedures; responds to requests and inquiries from residents and the public and
provides information as necessary; and performs related work as required.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives general supervision from a Real Property Manager. Exercises no direct supervision over staff.
CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This classification performs the full range of duties required to plan, develop, and coordinate the District’s
real property programs. Positions receive only occasional instruction or assistance as new or unusual
situations arise and are fully aware of the operating procedures and policies of the department. Successful
performance of the work requires coordinating work with other District departments and public agencies
as well as frequent interaction with tenants, land owners, contractors, consultants, and the general public.
This class is distinguished from Senior Real Property Specialist in that the latter provides lead direction to
real property staff and/or advanced specialized expertise in real property issues that is applied to the
administration and management of large, complex, and diverse projects or a focused area of
responsibility.
EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only)
Management reserves the right to add, modify, change, or rescind the work assignments of different
positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the essential
functions of the job.
Performs a variety of routine to complex professional real property activities involved in the
management, maintenance, and acquisition of District properties and related rental, lease, and land
use programs.
Manages District rental properties including negotiation and monitoring of rental income for
residential, employee housing, communications, historical, agricultural, and office leases; pursue
alternative lease arrangements.
Coordinates an effective maintenance and improvement program for District rental properties,
employee residences and District office building; obtains bids from contractors and outside vendors,
prepare contracts, oversee and ensure that work is completed in a timely manner.
Assists in the development and oversee the administration of the property management program
budget; monitors and approves expenditures for maintenance and repair of rental structures.
Negotiates and prepares purchase and lease documents, easements, permits and other similar
documents relative to real property interests.
Reviews and negotiates the purchase of easements and exchange agreements associated with land use
and development of private lands.
Exhibit E
Real Property Agent II
Page 2 of 4
Conducts due diligence on properties being considered for purchase; prepares and presents
acquisition reports to the Board of Directors including title research, zoning and development
potential, code compliance and regulatory investigations.
Participates in a variety of land purchase and planning activities and special projects as necessary.
Assists the land protection program in researching title and real property related issues to help resolve
encumbrance and encroachment issues.
Resolves conflicts of interest arising from easement and encroachment issues to protect District
property; negotiates settlements with property owner.
Assists in administering the District’s volunteer easement monitoring program; resolve easement
violations reported by staff, volunteers and others.
Initiates and maintains communication with landowners, code enforcement officers, planning officials
and other regulatory agency staff.
Reviews and prepares California Environmental Quality Act compliance documents for land purchase
and protection projects; negotiate remediation cost agreements; prepare and submit claims for
reimbursement of acquisition costs to State agencies.
Participates in the development and oversees the administration of the land protection budget;
monitors and approves expenditures, recommend adjustments to the land protection budget as
necessary.
Establishes and maintains open communication with other program staff; coordinates activities and
work cooperatively in a professional manner.
Collaborates with management and District counsel to prepare drafts of purchase documents,
residential rental agreements, agricultural leases, communications leases, other lease agreements and
correspondence asserting property rights involving District owned properties and land.
Prepares correspondence, documents, and reports to assist real property acquisition, property
management, and land protection programs.
Perform related duties and responsibilities as required.
QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
Real estate principles, practices and laws pertaining to the appraisal, negotiation, and disposition of
land as well as the administration of land use, rental, and leasing agreements including property
values, deed and tract restrictions, zoning ordinances, setbacks, tax and improvement assessments,
easements, and encroachments.
Procedures and instruments of real estate law and property rights transactions.
Principles and techniques of conducting analytical studies, evaluating alternatives, and making sound
recommendations.
Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, codes, and guidelines related to the projects
and programs to which assigned.
Basic principles and practices of public agency budget development and administration.
Techniques of contract administration.
Principles and procedures of record keeping and reporting.
English usage, spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and punctuation.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service to public and District staff, in person and
over the telephone.
Ability to:
Plan, organize, and coordinate real estate programs, projects, and activities, including appraisal,
acquisition and property management.
Exhibit E
Real Property Agent II
Page 3 of 4
Conduct accurate appraisal reviews on complex and large properties, including historical and
agricultural properties.
Analyze financial statements and pro forma statements.
Understand and evaluate financial statements, evaluate appraisals, and market study data.
Conduct negotiations with land owners, potential lessees, outside agencies, and their attorneys to
determine the terms and conditions of contracts and agreements.
Interpret, apply, explain, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local laws, codes, and
regulations and departmental policies and procedures.
Prepare clear and effective reports, correspondence, and other written material.
Make accurate arithmetic, financial, and statistical computations.
Effectively represent the department and the District in meetings with governmental agencies,
community groups, and various businesses, professional, and regulatory organizations, and in
meetings with individuals.
Analyze situations and identify pertinent problems/issues; collect relevant information; evaluate
realistic options; and recommend/implement appropriate course of action.
Read and interpret legal descriptions, surveys, and maps.
Maintain accurate logs, records, and basic written records of work performed.
Operate modern office equipment including computer equipment and software.
Organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.
Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone or radio, and in writing.
Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal
guidelines.
Establish, maintain, and foster positive and effective working relationships with those contacted in the
course of work.
Education and Experience:
Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills, and
abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:
Equivalent to a four (4) year degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in
real estate, real estate law, business administration or a related field, and three (3) years of increasingly
responsible experience in real estate or property management that includes significant public contact,
preferably with a public agency or land trust.
Licenses and Certifications:
Possession of an International Right of Way Association (IRWA) Right of Way Certification relevant
to assignment within eighteen (18) months of hire.
Possession of a valid California Driver’s License.
PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a
computer; to operate a motor vehicle and to visit various District and meeting sites; vision to read printed
materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate in person and over the
telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in and walking between
work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter, and retrieve data using a
computer keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification
occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push, and pull drawers open and closed to retrieve and file
information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials and objects
weighing up to 25 pounds.
Exhibit E
Real Property Agent II
Page 4 of 4
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions,
and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or
public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.
EFFECTIVE: January 2015
REVISED: N/A
FLSA: Exempt
Exhibit E
Time
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Base
Seasonal Open Space Technician 18.392 22.967 3,188 3,981 38,256 47,772 Part-time
Farm Maintenance Worker 25.263 31.546 4,379 5,468 52,548 65,616 Full-time
Open Space Technician*25.263 31.546 4,379 5,468 52,548 65,616 Full-time
Administrative Assistant 25.881 32.313 4,486 5,601 53,832 67,212 Full-time
Accounting Technician 27.167 33.929 4,709 5,881 56,508 70,572 Full-time
Human Resources Technician 27.167 33.929 4,709 5,881 56,508 70,572 Full-time
Lead Open Space Technician*27.854 34.783 4,828 6,029 57,936 72,348 Full-time
GIS Technician 27.854 34.783 4,828 6,029 57,936 72,348 Full-time
Volunteer Program Lead 27.854 34.783 4,828 6,029 57,936 72,348 Full-time
Risk Management Coordinator 28.529 35.631 4,945 6,176 59,340 74,112 Full-time
Senior Administrative Assistant 28.529 35.631 4,945 6,176 59,340 74,112 Full-time
Ranger 29.244 36.519 5,069 6,330 60,828 75,960 Full-time
Equipment Mechanic/Operator 29.244 36.519 5,069 6,330 60,828 75,960 Full-time
Public Affairs Program Coordinator 29.244 36.519 5,069 6,330 60,828 75,960 Full-time
Information Technology Technician 29.244 36.519 5,069 6,330 60,828 75,960 Full-time
Senior Accounting Technician 29.954 37.408 5,192 6,484 62,304 77,808 Full-time
Executive Assistant 30.704 38.348 5,322 6,647 63,864 79,764 Full-time
Real Property Specialist I 31.454 39.277 5,452 6,808 65,424 81,696 Full-time
Resource Management Specialist I 32.238 40.258 5,588 6,978 67,056 83,736 Full-time
Planner I 32.238 40.258 5,588 6,978 67,056 83,736 Full-time
Docent Program Manager 33.029 41.244 5,725 7,149 68,700 85,788 Full-time
Volunteer Program Manager 33.029 41.244 5,725 7,149 68,700 85,788 Full-time
Planner II 33.854 42.271 5,868 7,327 70,416 87,924 Full-time
Management Analyst I 33.854 42.271 5,868 7,327 70,416 87,924 Full-time
Accountant 33.854 42.271 5,868 7,327 70,416 87,924 Full-time
Resource Management Specialist II 35.538 44.388 6,160 7,694 73,920 92,328 Full-time
Public Affairs Specialist 35.538 44.388 6,160 7,694 73,920 92,328 Full-time
Community Outreach Specialist 35.538 44.388 6,160 7,694 73,920 92,328 Full-time
Training and Safety Specialist 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
Real Property Specialist 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
30
30
31
31
31
33
33
33
35
35
29
23
23
23
24
25
25
24
28
25
25
26
27
29
22
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District - CLASSIFICATION & COMPENSATION PLAN
Fiscal Year 2014/2015 - Effective 01/19/2015
Last revised: 7/01/2014, 7/01/2013, 4/25/2013, 11/26/2012, 6/27/12, 4/01/12
Classification Title
Step Hourly Range $Monthly Range $Annual Range $
Range #
6
19
19
20
22
Attachment 2
Real Property Specialist II 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
Management Analyst II 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
Supervising Ranger 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
Maintenance, Construction &
Resource Supervisor 37.315 46.604 6,468 8,078 77,616 96,936 Full-time
Website Administrator 38.233 47.746 6,627 8,276 79,524 99,312 Full-time
Information Technology Administrator 38.233 47.746 6,627 8,276 79,524 99,312 Full-time
Planner III 41.146 51.381 7,132 8,906 85,584 106,872 Full-time
GIS Administrator 42.150 52.638 7,306 9,124 87,672 109,488 Full-time
Senior Real Property Specialist 42.150 52.638 7,306 9,124 87,672 109,488 Full-time
Senior Accountant 43.200 53.954 7,488 9,352 89,856 112,224 Full-time
Senior Management Analyst 43.200 53.954 7,488 9,352 89,856 112,224 Full-time
District Clerk 43.200 53.954 7,488 9,352 89,856 112,224 Full-time
Media Communications Supervisor 44.256 55.269 7,671 9,580 92,052 114,960 Full-time
Senior Resource Management
Specialist 44.256 55.269 7,671 9,580 92,052 114,960 Full-time
Area Superintendent 45.363 56.654 7,863 9,820 94,356 117,840 Full-time
Human Resources Supervisor 45.363 56.654 7,863 9,820 94,356 117,840 Full-time
Senior Planner 45.363 56.654 7,863 9,820 94,356 117,840 Full-time
Assistant General Counsel I 48.790 60.940 8,457 10,563 101,484 126,756 Full-time
Assistant General Counsel II 51.237 63.981 8,881 11,090 106,572 133,080 Full-time
Administrative Services Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Natural Resources Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Operations Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Planning Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Public Affairs Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Real Property Manager 55.137 68.862 9,557 11,936 114,684 143,232 Full-time
Assistant General Manager 67.021 83.706 11,617 14,509 139,404 174,108 Full-time
* OST will receive an additional 1% stipend for Class A or B license; Lead OST 1% for Class A.
Board Appointee Group
Compensation
Hourly
Salary
Monthly
Salary
Annual
Salary
Effective
Date
Last
Revised
General Manager $99.963 $17,327 $207,924 4/1/2013 10/23/2013
Controller - Part-time position $63.756 $11,051 $132,612 4/1/2013 10/23/2013
General Counsel $89.860 $15,575 $186,909 4/1/2013 10/23/2013
51
51
59
46
48
51
51
51
51
43
35
36
36
39
40
41
40
41
41
42
42
43
43
35
35
35 Attachment 2
BOARD
OF
DIRECTORS
Sheryl Schaffner
General Counsel
Hilary StevensonAsst. General Counsel
Mike Foster
Controller
Steve Abbors
General Manager
Ana Ruiz
Assistant General Manager
Kevin Woodhouse
Assistant General Manager
Maria SoriaExecutive Assistant
Jennifer WoodworthDistrict Clerk
PLANNING
Jane Mark, Manager
REAL PROPERTY
Mike Williams, Manager
ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES
Kate Drayson, Manager
PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Shelly Lewis, Manager
Gloria IsonAdministrative Assistant
Benny HsiehIT Administrator
VACANTManagement Analyst
Andrew TaylorSr. Accountant
Owen SterzlIT Technician
Warren ChanSr. Accounting Technician
Michelle KneierAccounting Technician
Elaina CuzickSr. Real Property Specialist
Allen IshibashiSr. Real Property Specialist
Elish RyanPlanner III
Jean ChungReal Property Specialist I
Amanda KimMedia Comm.Supervisor
Jenny GibbonsAdminstrative Assistant
Paul McKowanVolunteer Program Manager
Renee FitzsimonsDocent Program Manager
Peggy KoenigPublic Affairs Specialist
Julie AmatoCommunity Outreach Specialist
Cydney BieberWeb Administrator
Jennifer WilliamsPA Program Coordinator
Ellen GartsideVolunteer Program Lead
OPERATIONS
Michael Newburn,
Manager
NATURAL RESOURCES
Kirk Lennington, Manager
HUMAN RESOURCES
Candice Basnight,
Supervisor
VACANTHR Management Analyst I
Lisa BeaulieuHR Technician
Pamela MullenHR Management Analyst II
April FuniestasTraining & Safety Specialist
Matt BaldzikowskiPlanner III
Cindy RoesslerSr. Resource Mgmt. Specialist
Christina YunkerResource Mgmt. Specialist I
VACANTResource Mgmt. Specialist II
Clayton KoopmanResource Mgmt. Specialist I
VACANTNatural Resources Intern
Julie AndersenPlanner II
Tom LaustenArea SuperintendentFoothills
Brian MaloneArea SuperintendentSkyline
Tina HuggSenior Planner
Meredith ManningSenior Planner
Casey HiattGIS Adminstrator
Michele ChildsGIS Technician Jon MontgomeryGIS Intern
Gina CoonyPlanner III/Project Manager
Lisa BankoshPlanner III
Gretchen LaustsenPlanner II
VACANTPlanner I
Brendan DowningSupervising RangerSat - Wed
Stan HooperMaint/Construction& Resource Sup.
Mike PerezSupervising RangerWed - Sun
Craig BeckmanMaint/Construction& Resource Sup.
Brad PenningtonSupervising Ranger
Jim MortMaint/Construction& Resource Sup.
Chris BarresiSupervising Ranger
Michael BankoshMaint/Construction& Resource Sup.
Frances ReneauRanger
Steve GibbonsRanger
John LloydRanger
Andrew VerbruggeRanger
Loro PatersonRanger
Dennis HeimerRanger
Alex HapkeRanger
Chris FurnissRanger
VACANTRanger
Marianne ChanceRangerSteve DavisonOST
Rich HoppOST
Rick ParryLead OST
Brennon McKibbinOST
Brendan DolanLead OST
Eric StantonEMO
Scott CotterelOST
Grant Kern EMO
Steve ReedOST
Ken BolleEMOJeff SmithRanger
Ken MillerRanger
Natalie HannaRanger
Kristin JohnsonRanger
Tracy HammondRanger Peter CookRanger
Elisa StantonRanger
Kerry CarlsonRanger
Anthony CorreiaRanger
Greg SmutnakRanger
Ignacio ZavalaOST
Sal CermenoOST
Vince HernandezLead OST
Warren JenkinsOST
Michael GormanEMO
Amanda Mills OST
Brian FairOST
Don MackessyLead OST
Cody FickesOST
Holden NealEMO
Steve NeighborsOST
Arline AbarrAdministrative Assistant
PUBLIC
Zachary AlexanderPlanner II
Lupe HernandezAdministrative Assistant
Jeannie BuscagliaAdminstrative Assistant
Sue VoissRisk Management Coordinator
Gordon BaillieManagement Analyst II
Michael JurichManagement Analyst II
Aaron HebertProject Manager
Modified/Light Duty Staff
Carmen LauPublic Affairs Assistant
Jaime VillarrealFarm MW
January 8, 2015Updated:
Jennifer KavanaghAdministrative Assistant
Admudha SankarSr. Administrative Assistant
Leslie WrightAdministrative Assistant
Raymond YuenIT Intern
VACANTCapital Project Manager
VACANTCapital Project Manager
VACANTIPM Coordinator
VACANTSr. Management Analyst
LEGEND
New Positions
Reclassified Positions
VACANTOST
Attachment 2
R-15-02
Meeting 15-01
January 15, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 11
AGENDA ITEM
Priority Conservation Areas in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties (Informational Presentation)
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Receive an informational presentation on the Association of Bay Area Governments’ Priority
Conservation Area program revised and adopted on July 17, 2014.
SUMMARY
In July 2013, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Executive Board and the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) approved Plan Bay Area, a long-range,
integrated transportation and land-use/housing strategy through 2040 for the San Francisco Bay
Area. Plan Bay Area includes the designation of Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) to balance
housing and transportation demands with the need to preserve the region’s diverse farming,
recreational, and resource lands for future generations. The PCA program was updated in July
2014 to provide a public process for nominating new PCAs and confirming existing PCAs that
were created in 2007. This report summarizes the background of Plan Bay Area, the PCA
program, and the nomination process for new PCAs. The General Manager anticipates bringing
a recommendation in April to the Board of Directors for the nomination of seven (7) new PCAs
in San Mateo County and nine (9) new PCAs in Santa Clara County. The benefits for PCA
inclusion include: (a) building broad consensus among local jurisdictions and park/open space
partners on key open space areas; (b) increasing the District’s ability to apply and qualify for
future grant funding opportunities that incorporate PCAs as part of their evaluation criteria; (c)
highlighting the Board-approved Vision Plan priority actions and Measure AA projects within
these areas; and (d) emphasizing the importance of PCAs in maintaining the economic, social,
and natural vitality of the Bay Area.
BACKGROUND
Plan Bay Area
Plan Bay Area is a regional, long-range integrated transportation and land use/housing strategy
for the San Francisco Bay Area that tackles pressing issues such as accommodating population
growth while keeping the region affordable to all residents, preserving open spaces, protecting
the environment, accommodating transportation needs, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Plan Bay Area was jointly approved by ABAG Executive Board and the MTC in July, 2013 and
is an outgrowth of Senate Bill (SB) 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection
R-15-02 Page 2
Act of 2008, which requires the state’s 18 metropolitan areas to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
from cars and light trucks.
Plan Bay Area provides a strategy for meeting 80 percent of the region’s future housing needs in
Priority Development Areas (PDAs). During the development of Plan Bay Area, efforts of
conservation organizations and open space land managers elevated the importance of Priority
Conservation Areas (PCAs) as integral for the overall success of Plan Bay Area.
Priority Conservation Area Program
The PCA program was initiated in 2007 to identify Bay Area open spaces that (1) provide
regionally significant agricultural, natural resource, scenic, recreational, and/or ecological values
and ecosystem functions; (2) are in urgent need of protection due to pressure from urban
development or other factors; and (3) have broad local support.
Subsequently ABAG updated the PCA program in July, 2014 in order to provide clearer
specificity about the types, characteristics, and functions of PCAs, and also provide a process to
confirm existing PCAs and to create new ones with greater public notification. The program
now limits nominating entities to city and county jurisdictions, and park and open space special
districts. Thus, non-governmental entities are no longer able to sponsor a PCA, but can still
partner with a jurisdiction or open space and park district.
The program identifies four categories of PCAs that recognize the role of different kinds of
PCAs in supporting the vitality of the region's natural systems, rural economy, and human health.
1. Natural Landscapes – Areas critical to the functioning of wildlife and plant habitats,
aquatic ecosystems and the region's water supply and quality.
2. Agricultural Lands – Farmland, grazing land and timberland that support the region's
agricultural economy and provide additional benefits such as habitat protection and
carbon sequestration.
3. Urban Greening – Existing and potential green spaces in cities that increase habitat
connectivity, improve community health, capture carbon emissions, and address
stormwater.
4. Regional Recreation – Existing and potential regional parks, trails, and other publicly
accessible recreation facilities.
As a result of the 2007 PCA process, there are currently 101 existing PCAs throughout the nine-
county Bay Area. The District nominated the following four PCAs and has now assumed a lead
sponsor agency role for a fifth PCA originally nominated by Peninsula Open Space Trust
(POST) (see Attachment 1):
1. Gateway to the San Mateo County Coast
2. Upper San Gregorio Creek Headwaters
3. Upper Stevens Creek Watershed Area
4. Upper Los Gatos Creek Watershed
5. Lobitos Ridge Corridor (originally nominated by POST)
DISCUSSION
PCA designations serve to identify regionally significant open spaces and to position agencies to
attract potential grant funding (see Attachment 2). In addition, the four categories give the PCAs
R-15-02 Page 3
flexibility and eligibility for a variety of funding sources that may either be targeted or broad in
their scope. In 2014, the pilot PCA Grant program distributed $12.5M in grant monies to a
variety of projects throughout the Bay Area.
The current PCA process requires that nominating agency send notifications to all of the
jurisdictions in which the PCA is located. If a jurisdiction opposes the PCA, they will have 90
days from receipt of the notification to adopt a resolution of opposition. A resolution of
opposition would invalidate the nomination. Applications are due to ABAG on May 30, 2015
and require the following items be included.
1. An adopted resolution by City/Town Council, Board of Supervisors, or Open Space or
Park District Board, from the lead nominating jurisdiction in which the PCA is located.
2. A map and text describing the general area and boundaries of the PCA.
3. Selection of one or more of the PCA designations described below with supporting text
and data.
4. Discussion of the regional and local importance of the PCA.
In order to build broad consensus and support for the new PCAs, District staff began analysis,
coordination, and outreach efforts to jurisdictions, partner agencies, and conservation
organizations shortly after the updated PCA program was adopted this past July by the ABAG
Executive Board. The potential new PCAs in San Mateo County and Santa Clara County (see
Attachment 3) are based on the 2014 Board-approved Vision Plan conservation, resource
management, and public access priorities. The stars on the map indicate the general location of
each PCA; more definition on the proposed PCAs will be brought to the Board at a subsequent
meeting in April.
In San Mateo County, District staff initiated outreach and communications with staff from San
Mateo County Parks, San Mateo County Planning, Bay Area Ridge Trail Council, Greenbelt
Alliance, Town of Woodside, City of Menlo Park, City of East Palo Alto, and City of Palo Alto
(see item #6 below). The following are potential new PCAs in San Mateo County.
Map
Key
Potential New
PCAs (names to
be confirmed)
Open Space
Preserves
Affected
Jurisdictions
Vision Plan
Priority #s
Proposed
Designations
SM1 Gateway to the
Coast
Miramontes
Ridge
San Mateo
County 1, 27 & 28
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes,
Agricultural Lands
SM2
Menlo Park & East
Palo Alto (Menlo
Park to be Lead
Agency)
Ravenswood
Menlo Park
and East Palo
Alto
2 & 38
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes,
Urban Greening
SM3 Woodside Open
Space Teague Hill Woodside 34
Regional
Recreation,
Natural landscapes
SM4 North Skyline
Purisima and El
Corte de
Madera Creek
San Mateo
County 3, 4 & 33
Regional
Recreation,
Natural landscapes
R-15-02 Page 4
SM5 Southern San
Mateo Coast
Tunitas Creek &
La Honda
San Mateo
County
7, 13, 14, 32,
39, 42, 43, 44
& 48
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes,
Agricultural Lands
SM6 Portola Valley Open
Space
Windy Hill &
Coal Creek Portola Valley 6, 8, 10 & 40
Regional
Recreation,
Natural landscapes
SM7 South Skyline
Russian Ridge,
Skyline Ridge,
and Long Ridge
San Mateo
County 15, 16, & 46
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes,
Agricultural Lands
In Santa Clara County, District staff initiated outreach and communications with staff from Santa
Clara County Parks, Santa Clara County Planning, Santa Clara County Open Space Authority,
Santa Clara Valley Water District, The Nature Conservancy, POST, Bay Area Ridge Trail
Council, Greenbelt Alliance, City of San Jose, City of Palo Alto, Town of Los Altos Hills, and
City of Cupertino. The following are potential new PCAs in Santa Clara County.
Map
Key
Potential New
PCAs (names to
be confirmed)
Open Space
Preserves
Affected
Jurisdictions
Vision Plan
Priority #s
Proposed
Designations
SC1 Palo Alto Open
Space
Los Trancos
and Monte
Bello
Palo Alto 47
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC2 Los Altos Open
Space
Rancho San
Antonio
Los Altos
Hills 11 & 41
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC3 Rancho San
Antonio
Rancho San
Antonio
Santa Clara
County N/A
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC4 Cupertino Open
Space
Rancho San
Antonio Cupertino 41
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC5 Stevens Creek Monte Bello Santa Clara
County 17 & 47
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC6 Saratoga-to-the-
Sea N/A Saratoga 18
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC7 Los Gatos Open
Space
El Sereno and
Sierra Azul Los Gatos 19, 24, & 53
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
R-15-02 Page 5
SC8 Critical Wildlife
Linkage
El Sereno,
Bear Creek
Redwoods,
and Sierra
Azul
Santa Clara
County
5, 20, 21,
22, 23 & 54
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
SC9 San Jose Open
Space Sierra Azul San Jose 19
Regional
Recreation,
Natural
landscapes
As required by the PCA application, each PCA would include a recommended designation(s). Of
the four (4) possible designations, the three (3) categories that are most fitting for the open space,
public access, ecological and ecosystem values that the District stewards include: Natural
Landscapes, Agricultural Lands and Regional Recreation, where one PCA may contain more
than one designation. In more urban locations such as Cooley Landing, the Urban Greening
designation could also be appropriate. Having more than one designation may allow the District
to be eligible for a broader array of future grant opportunities.
Each new PCA will require a resolution from the District’s Board of Directors. In addition,
District staff will need to notify affected jurisdictions and provide 90 days for their elected
bodies to consider the nominations. A resolution of opposition will invalidate the nomination
and impede the District’s ability to submit an application for that PCA. It is staff’s hope that
early coordination and collaboration with jurisdictions will result in broad support for the
nominations to ensure a successful PCA application is submitted.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact related to providing an informational report on the Priority
Conservation Area program and application process.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
This item is being presented to the full Board as an informational item.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and no
CEQA analysis is therefore required.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will continue coordination with partners and jurisdictions, and anticipates bringing this item
to the Board for the adoption of resolutions in April 2015. With the Board’s adopted resolutions,
staff would be able to submit applications for each of the nominated PCAs to ABAG.
R-15-02 Page 6
Attachments
1. Existing MROSD Sponsored Priority Conservation Areas
2. Priority Conservation Area Concept Paper
3. Potential New Priority Conservation Areas
Responsible Department Head:
Jane Mark, AICP, Planning Manager
Prepared by:
Tina Hugg, Senior Planner
Jane Mark, AICP, Planning Manager
Casey Hiatt, GIS Administrator
Graphics prepared by:
Jon Montgomery, GIS Technician
San Gregorio CreekHeadwaters
Upper Stevens Creek Watershed
Upper Los Gatos Creek Watershed
TOP FIVE NEAR TERMCONSERVATION PRIORITIES
Los Gatos
#
#
#
#
##
@
Half Moon Bay
@
@
San Jose
0 5 102.5 Miles
Saratoga
@
#
#
Lo
n
g
T
e
r
m
O
p
e
n
S
p
a
c
e
92
84
280
101
17
17
#
#
GR
E
E
N
B
E
L
T
#
#To Mount Madonna
SanFrancisco
Oakland
San JoseLong Term Greenbelt
P a c i f i c
O c e a n
S . F .B a y
@ City centers
MROSD boundary
MROSD preserves
Private watershed, land trust, and academic lands
Major city, county, and state parks,open space preserves, and publicly owned watershed lands
Urban
Other trail connections
Conservation Priorities
Privately owned
Bay Area Ridge Trail Gap
Bay Area Ridge Trail
#
#
Gateway to theSan Mateo County Coast
Purisima to the Sea Corridor(Lobitos Ridge)
T
o G
G
N
R
A La
n
ds MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT@
Palo Alto
MountainView@
Prepared by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, August 2007
I
Bay Trail
Attachment 1
ContraCosta
Solano
Alameda
SantaClara
SanMateo
SF
Marin
Sonoma
Napa
Priority
Conservation
Areas
Bay Area's Greenbelt Lands
Priority Conservation Areas
THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA IS UNIQUE AMONG
AMERICAN METROPOLISES. Parks and trails support our health
and quality of life. Watersheds and other natural areas contribute
to our clean water and air and help to protect us from disasters.
The region’s farms and ranches give us fresh, healthy local food.
Together our open spaces define the identity of the Bay Area and
are a magnet for the innovators that drive its $535 billion economy.
PRIORITY
CONSERVATION AREAS
SAFEGUARDING THE BAY
AREA’S ONE-OF-A-KIND
LANDSCAPE WILL REQUIRE A
REGIONAL CONSERVATION
STRATEGY BASED IN
CONSERVATION SCIENCE
AND RIGOROUS DATA.
PRIORITY CONSERVATION
AREAS ARE A CORNERSTONE
OF THAT STRATEGY.
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS
BAY AREA GREENBELT
Attachment 2
VOTER & ELECTED
LEADER SUPPORT
FOR LANDSCAPES
24 BOND MEASURES
& TAX INCREASES
$1.6 BILLION IN
PRESERVATION,
WATER QUALITY &
PARKS
2 MILLION ACRES
PROTECTED BY
POLICY
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p2
OUR CHERISHED LANDSCAPE
We are lucky to live someplace so special. The San Francisco Bay Area is unique among
American metropolises in the stunning beauty of its landscape. Parks and trails support our
health and quality of life by giving us the opportunity to get outside. Watersheds and other
natural areas contribute to our resilience by providing us with clean water and air and help to
protect us from disasters like flooding and landslides—threats that will only grow with climate
change. The region’s farms and ranches give us fresh, healthy local food. Together our open
spaces define the identity of the Bay Area and are a magnet for the innovators that drive its
$535 billion economy.
The people of the Bay Area clearly cherish our special
landscape. Through 24 bond measures and tax increases
since 1988, voters across the region have approved close
to $1.6 billion to preserve critical habitat, protect farm-
land, improve water quality, and create new parks. Of
the region’s 3.6 million acres of open space—our green-
belt—1.3 million acres have been preserved through land
purchases and easements. An additional 2 million acres
are protected through a range of growth management
policies that have been put in place by voters and elected
leaders.
Despite our region’s success in protecting open space, the
risks to our greenbelt are profound. Over 322,000 acres
are at risk of development in the next 30 years. The Bay
Area will add 2 million new residents by 2040 and this
growth could create pressure to weaken the growth man-
agement policies that protect 60 percent of the greenbelt.
Effectively safeguarding the Bay Area’s one-of-a-kind
landscape will require a regional conservation strategy
based in the latest conservation science and rigorous data.
Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) have the potential to
be a cornerstone of such a strategy.
Attachment 2
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p3 Attachment 2
SB375 PLAN BAY AREA
PDA
PROMOTES DEVELOPMENT IN THE RIGHT PLACES
REDUCES GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
PROMOTES HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
EFFICIENT INVESTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDS
PCA
Priority Conservation Areas and Priority Development Areas complement each other in many ways. For example, each contrib-
ute to the above goals.
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p4
CONSERVING THE LANDSCAPE: KEY
TO PLAN BAY AREA
The preservation and stewardship of the Bay Area’s
greenbelt is key to implementing Plan Bay Area. Under
Plan Bay Area, the region’s next generation of growth
is to be focused in Priority Development Areas (PDAs)
within our cities and towns; no development is envi-
sioned beyond existing urban boundaries. Because this
focused growth will require Bay Area residents and work-
ers to drive less, greenhouse gas emissions from personal
vehicles are expected to drop 16% per capita by 2035.
Development in the greenbelt that is isolated from public
transit and other services and amenities requires more
driving and could cause the region to fall short of Plan
Bay Area’s greenhouse gas pollution reduction expecta-
tion. Farms, ranches, and natural areas also function as
carbon sinks. Trees, plants and crops growing on the
landscape remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere
and store them away. Allowing development that paves
over the Bay Area’s greenbelt degrades this carbon storage
function.
Additionally, if development does occur beyond existing
urban boundaries it will require significant expenditures
to build new roads, sewer lines, and other infrastructure.
Such infrastructure costs would be in addition to the
substantial infrastructure investment needs within the
region’s PDAs. Development in the greenbelt would result
in the region’s infrastructure funds being spread too thin.
A robust regional conservation strategy for the Bay Area
is a win-win approach. It will guide the protection of the
unique open spaces that make the Bay Area so special—
our parks and trails, farms and ranches, watersheds and
other components of the greenbelt. Such a strategy will
also serve as a driver of focused growth, ensuring that
urban infrastructure dollars are spent wisely and that we
achieve the ambitious greenhouse gas pollution reduction
goals envisioned in Plan Bay Area.
Attachment 2
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p5
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS:
WHAT ARE THEY?
In 2008, local governments, special districts and conser-
vation organizations worked together to establish the Bay
Area’s original Priority Conservation Areas. These PCAs
consist of regionally significant open spaces about which
there is broad consensus for long-term protection. The
PCAs are diverse and include everything from recreation
areas that help Bay Area residents live healthy active
lifestyles, to watersheds that provide the region with high-
quality drinking water, to farmland from which we get
fresh, local food. The PCAs serve to attract funds to sup-
port the long-term protection of these areas. Through the
Plan Bay Area process, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission (MTC) established a $10 million pilot grant
program to help fund the protection of the PCAs.
Community leaders embraced the PCA concept; cur-
rently there are nearly 100 PCAs spread across the nine
Bay Area counties. The PCAs not only serve to indicate
what land should be protected, they also help to articulate
where urbanized development is most appropriate and
where it is not. In doing so, the PCAs help to define the
holistic vision of Plan Bay Area. They serve as the under-
pinnings of a “greenprint” to complement the region’s
blueprint for how our cities and towns should grow.
Since 2008, our understanding of the Bay Area’s one-of
a-kind landscape has improved. Research and analy-
sis now gives us a much better sense of how our farms,
ranches, and working lands benefit our health and quality
of life. This research and analysis also helps us understand
how conservation of the landscape can contribute to our
economy as well as the resilience of natural systems that
do everything from protect us from floods, to ensure the
long-term viability of plants and animals that also call
the Bay Area home. Using this information to update the
PCA program will improve the program’s ability to serve
as a cornerstone of the region’s conservation strategy.
THE PCA PROGRAM UPDATE
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is
now in the process of revising the PCA program. This
update will result in greater specificity about the qualities
and functions of different types of PCAs. To achieve this
specificity, ABAG has developed a new set of designa-
tions for different PCA types (similar to the “place types”
developed for PDAs during the Plan Bay Area process).
Additionally, a science-based method has been developed
for evaluating nominated PCAs. The revised PCA pro-
gram also seeks to address the need for urban parkland
and providing green space in growing PDAs.
These modifications will greatly enhance the ability of
PCAs to contribute effectively to a regional conservation
strategy.
By June 2014, ABAG will have adopted modifications to
the PCA Program and opened an application window that
will last through May 2015. As currently recommended,
nominations will be accepted to transition existing PCAs
into the revised program as well as for new PCAs. PCA
applications will be accepted on a rolling basis with two
adoption points over the course of the year.
THE PRESERVATION AND STEWARDSHIP
OF THE BAY AREA’S GREENBELT IS KEY TO
IMPLEMENTING PLAN BAY AREA.
Attachment 2
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p6
ANALYZING THE UPDATE: REASONS
TO BE EXCITED
ABAG’s proposed revision to the PCA program is a signif-
icant positive step toward ensuring the program realizes
its potential to serve as an effective guide for a regional
land conservation strategy. The four “designations”
(again, similar to the “place types” for PDAs)—Natural
Landscapes, Agricultural Lands, Regional Recreation and
Urban Greening—provide a simple typology that helps
to communicate how the Bay Area’s open spaces provide
benefits to the quality of life, economy, and resilience of
the region. The new application process explicitly requires
applicants to use data from a rich set of information
sources to articulate the benefits of proposed PCAs. This
commitment to an evidence-based approach will help to
ensconce conservation-science and an understanding of
conservation priorities into land-use planning across the
Bay Area.
The addition of the Urban Greening designation is an
exciting recognition that nature in urban areas matters.
To most effectively contribute to the region’s conserva-
tion strategy, Urban Greening PCAs should contribute
to regionally significant functions; functions such as
contributions to regional agricultural, natural resource
conservation, ecosystem protection, or the enhancement
of scenic or recreational values.
Transitioning the existing PCAs into the new program is
critical. These areas are a solid foundation upon which
an even better program will be built. The original PCAs
demonstrate the shared values regarding our landscape
that exist across the Bay Area and a broad recognition of
the many benefits our natural and working lands provide
(maps at the end of the document demonstrate how cur-
rent PCAs overlap with open space benefits). The original
PCAs were adopted without requiring resolutions from
city councils or boards of supervisors. A testament to the
level of consensus that exists around the original PCAs is
that none have been challenged since they were adopted.
Since existing PCAs did not require approval from city
councils or boards of supervisors when they were initially
approved, such resolutions should not be necessary to
transition existing PCAs into the revised program.
MAKING IT HAPPEN
The Priority Development Areas and the Priority Conser-
vation Areas are two essential pillars in the effort to make
the Bay Area a sustainable, thriving region in the decades
ahead. These two programs knit together the region’s land
use and transportation priorities and provide clear guid-
ance on how to best focus limited intellectual and finan-
cial resources. Both programs help local leaders ensure
that our cities and towns are healthy and thriving and are
supported by the amazing assets nature provides. Effec-
tive implementation of the Priority Conservation Area
program must be prioritized in order to fully achieve the
vision of a sustainable and thriving region articulated in
Plan Bay Area. The conservation community, from land
trusts to special districts to local and regional non-profits,
is ready to work with local leaders to effectively imple-
ment the PCA program, as well as use the plethora of
data and analysis that now exists regarding the Bay Area’s
landscape to help make land-use decisions with conserva-
tion in mind.
PRIORITY
DEVELOPMENT
AREAS AND PRIORITY
CONSERVATION
AREAS ARE
ESSENTIAL PILLARS
TO A SUSTAINABLE,
THRIVING BAY AREA.
Attachment 2
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p7
The following are recommendations for how both local
leaders and the Association of Bay Area Governments
can ensure the implementation of the PCA program is
successful—not only in the near-term as the program
is updated and new PCAs are nominated and reviewed,
but over the long-term as the PCAs anchor the region’s
conservation strategy.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LOCAL
LEADERS
The first thing local leaders can do to maximize the suc-
cess of the PCA program is to support the immediate
inclusion of existing PCAs into the new framework.
Additionally, local leaders should work with land man-
agement agencies and public health groups to identify
new PCAs and make sure they are adopted.
Also, local leaders should feel empowered to take the con-
servation science that will be used to modify and create
PCAs and use those tools broadly in land-use decision
making. Steps can be taken such as:
• Factor in the impacts/benefits of natural resources,
working lands, and parks as a baseline for infrastruc-
ture plans, programs, and project decisions.
• Consider “green infrastructure” as a viable solution
to infrastructure challenges, such as water quality
control and sea-level rise adaptation.
• Establish agricultural land preservation strategies
that ensure a critical mass of land for the production,
processing, and distribution of local food.
• Ensure conservation best practices are integrated into
the implementation of development and infrastruc-
ture projects.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ABAG
ABAG should continue to play a leadership role by
providing support and guidance to local leaders as they
submit PCA applications. As the PCA program is imple-
mented ABAG can take the specific following actions to
help ensure that conservation strategies are effectively
implemented throughout the region.
• Facilitate access to online data that will allow users to
identify the specific benefits a particular geographic
area contains.
• Develop a system to track how well communities
across the region are achieving conservation goals.
• Provide technical assistance to facilitate connection
of conservation funds with appropriate projects.
• Support policy innovation as a strategy to pro-
tect PCAs and implement regional conservation
strategies.
• Continue to support the State Coastal Conservancy’s
management of the region-wide OBAG conservation
grant program.
• Scale local efforts to map urban greening benefits to
produce a regional strategy.
Attachment 2
ContraCosta
Solano
Alameda
SantaClara
SanMateo
SF
Marin
Sonoma
Napa
Natural
Landscapes
Values:
Land and Water Habitat, Recreation
and Tourism
Strategy:
Safeguarding and restoring natural
ecosystems.
Sources: Bay Area Open Space Council, SC Wildlands
Conservation Lands Network
Wildlife Habitat that is Essential, Important,
Fragmented and For Further Consideration;
Critical Linkages
Priority Conservation Areas
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p8 Attachment 2
ContraCosta
Solano
Alameda
SantaClara
SanMateo
SF
Marin
Sonoma
Napa
Values:
Food Production, Jobs,
Rural Character
Strategy:
Ensure agricultural lands remain in
production.
Agricultural
Lands
Source: CA Department of Conservation
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Farmland and Grazing Land
Priority Conservation Areas
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p9 Attachment 2
ContraCosta
Solano
Alameda
SantaClara
SanMateo
SF
Marin
Sonoma
Napa
Regional
Recreation
Values:
Health, Recreation, Tourism, Land Value
Strategy:
Provide residents with access to parks
and recreational open space.
Sources: SF Bay Trail, SF Ridge Trail, PCA Trails, Protected Areas Database, National ConservationEasement Database
Regional Trails and Parks
Publicly Accessible Protected Lands
Existing SF Bay Trail and SF Ridge Trail
Proposed Regional Trail Inside PCA
Proposed Regional Trail Outside PCA
Priority Conservation Areas
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p10 Attachment 2
PRIORITY CONSERVATION AREAS | p11
CONTACTS
Jeremy Madsen, Executive Director
Greenbelt Alliance
jmadsen@greenbelt.org | 415-543-6771 x310
Jennifer Fox, Executive Director
Bay Area Open Space Council
jenn@openspacecouncil.org | 510-809-8009 x254
Elizabeth O’Donoghue, Director of Infrastructure and Land Use
The Nature Conservancy
eodonoghue@tnc.org | 415-281-0436
Ed Thompson, California Director & Senior Associate
American Farmland Trust
ethompson@farmland.org | 530-564-4422
Attachment 2
TOGETHER OUR
OPEN SPACES DEFINE
THE IDENTITY OF
THE BAY AREA AND
ARE A MAGNET FOR
THE INNOVATORS
THAT DRIVE ITS $535
BILLION ECONOMY.
Attachment 2
Potential Priority Conservation Areas
Potential New Priority
Conservation Areas*
*Represents generalized locations, nal area
boundaries to be determined in conjunction
with partner organizations
SC3: Rancho San Antonio
SC4: Cupertino Open Space
SC2: Los Altos Open Space
SC1: Palo Alto Open Space
SC6: Saratoga-to-the-Sea
SC9: San Jose Open Space
SC7: Los Gatos Open Space
SC8: Critical Wildlife Linkage
SC5: Stevens Creek
SM7: South Skyline
SM4: North Skyline
SM3: Woodside Open Space
SM1: Gateway to the Coast
SM6: Portola Valley
Open Space
SM2:Menlo Park
& East Palo Alto
SM5: Southern San Mateo Coast
Attachment 3
R-15-01
Meeting No. 15-01
January 14, 2015
AGENDA ITEM 12
AGENDA ITEM
Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion Policy
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Approve the new Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion Policy, as reviewed and revised
by the Planning and Natural Resources Committee.
SUMMARY
The goal of the Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion (C&D WD) Policy is to establish
capital project guidelines for contracted construction and demolition projects to divert 100% of
all recyclable materials away from landfills, the minimum of which is described in Exhibit 2,
Section 2 of this policy. Exhibit 2 may be updated administratively by the General Manager
from time to time to include materials that become recyclable.
BACKGROUND
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) has conducted multiple demolition
projects in the past year and will be completing more demolition and construction projects in the
future. Past projects have included contract requirements for waste diversion on a project to
project basis. Rather than continuing with this approach, the Board recently directed the General
Manager to draft a waste diversion policy for Board consideration that reflects the District’s
mission of environmental stewardship and ensures that all capital projects involving contracted
demolition or construction work consistently adhere to Board-approved policy guidelines.
At this time, California Special Districts are not required to comply with specific C&D WD
requirements. State law AB 939 mandates cities and counties to divert 50% of all solid waste, not
just C&D debris, and requires each city and county to prepare a Waste Management Plan. AB
341 raises the goal to source-reduce, recycle, or compost 75% of solid waste generated by 2020.
As part of the background research for the development of a draft C&D WD policy, other open
space districts, cities, and agencies were contacted. Some agencies have no ordinances, policies
or practices in place; others require the diversion of a specific percentage of C&D waste.
Furthermore, the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) green building
certification program credits one point to projects that achieve 50% diversion and two points for
75% diversion based on total weight or volume. LEED has various levels for certification, from a
minimum of 40 points for a “certified” project to 80 points for a “platinum” rated project. The
R-15-01 Page 2
County of San Mateo requires that C&D projects recycle 100% of inert solids and 50% of
remaining project waste. Currently, the County of Santa Clara does not have a C&D WD policy.
DISCUSSION
Limitations on Using Minimum Percentage Requirements
Most local jurisdictions that possess a C&D WD policy utilize a “minimum percentage”
diversion requirement that is calculated by either total weight or volume. Only a few District
projects generate large quantities of heavy waste (e.g. asphalt or concrete removal) that would be
able to meet minimum percentage requirements for waste diversion as measured by weight.
Most District demolition projects involve basic wood structures with minimal foundations.
Wood that is stained or painted cannot be recycled, making it difficult to reach the “minimum
percentage” requirement as measured by either weight or volume. Moreover, given that most
structures on District lands tend to be from the 1930s-80s, it is typical to find lead-painted and
asbestos-containing materials throughout these structures, further limiting the District’s ability to
meet minimum percentage requirements. Debris that contains hazardous materials cannot be
recycled. Given these real constraints regarding what percentage of the waste materials can
actually be reused, salvaged, or recycled, setting minimum waste diversion percentages for
District projects may not be suitable or practical for the District. Another drawback to
establishing minimum thresholds for diversion is that these requirements do not address the
potential for onsite salvage or re-use of materials because these requirements measure
compliance by the quantity (or volume) of materials that are hauled off-site to recycling
facilities.
Recommendation
The goal of the District C&D WD policy is to support the District’s regional environmental
stewardship efforts by diverting as many materials from landfills as possible. Rather than setting
minimum percentage requirements for projects, the District C&D WD policy proposes a simple
and sustainable approach for evaluating each site independently to ensure that the maximum
amount of waste is diverted from the landfill.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Following review and discussion of staff’s proposed District C&D WD policy, the Planning and
Natural Resources Committee (Committee) recommendation is to divert 100% of all recyclable
materials, the minimum of which is described in Exhibit 2, Section 2 of this policy. The
Committee further recommended that Section 2 of Exhibit 2 of the District C&D WD policy be
administratively amended from time to time to ensure it remains updated to reflect advances in
recycling and salvage opportunities, with the ultimate goal to divert additional salvaged items, as
feasible. The Committee also recommends that, where applicable, the District identify sites
where there are items with high salvage value, and expedite cleanup and demolition projects to
facilitate salvage of these materials before they deteriorate beyond salvage value.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adoption of a District C&DWD policy should not have an impact on project costs, since it is
more costly (in the Bay Area) to send debris to the landfill than it is to send debris to a waste
handling facility for recycling. The proposed C&DWD policy would promote 100% diversion of
all recyclable materials, and would require project managers to obtain a separate cost for the
R-15-01 Page 3
salvage of any other materials on a project by project basis to evaluate the fiscal impact of any
additional waste diversion costs.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The proposed policy is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Future construction and demolition projects will be evaluated for CEQA compliance
prior to implementation.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board, the District’s Board Policy Manual will be updated with the new
policy and the policy would be put into effect.
Attachment
1. Draft C&D WD Policy
Responsible Department Head:
Jane Mark, AICP, Planning Department
Prepared by:
Gina Coony, Planner III, Planning Department
Aaron Hébert, Project Manager, Operations Department
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board Policy Manual
Construction and Demolition
Waste Diversion
Policy X.XX
Chapter 4 – Acquisition and Maintenance of
District Lands
Effective Date: Revised Date: Not applicable
Prior Versions: Not applicable
Attachments:
1 - Construction Demolition Waste Diversion Worksheet
2 - Definitions, Materials Identification & Waste Diversion Strategies
3 - Construction Demolition Waste Diversion Policy Resource Directory
4 - Sample District waste handling specifications
Board Policy X.XX Page 1 of 3
Attachment 1
Purpose
The goal of the Construction and Demolition Waste Diversion (C&D WD) Policy is to establish
capital project guidelines for contracted construction and demolition projects to divert waste
away from landfills. Minimally, the goal for all contracted construction and demolition projects
shall be to divert 100% of all recyclable materials.
Existing Policy
The District’s “Policies Regarding Improvements on District Lands”, last amended in 2007,
requires preliminary Use and Management (U&M) Plans to consider the “cost and practicality
of salvaging materials being removed” when the U&M plan proposes demolition.
Policy
For every contracted District Capital construction or demolition project, the following waste
diversion guidelines shall be followed:
1. SURVEYS
Surveys shall be completed prior to the commencement of the project to identify
existing conditions. Minimally these shall include:
a. Hazardous Materials Surveys – to identify all hazardous materials.
b. Historic Resource Evaluation – to evaluate potential historical significance on
structures over 50 years old or containing known historical resources.
c. Bat / Biological Surveys - to determine presence of bat roosting, bird nesting,
woodrat nesting or any other wildlife. Also to determine the presence of any
sensitive habitat or wildlife corridors in the area of the proposed project work.
d. Plant Surveys – confirm whether the site has any trees or other plant
communities that need to be protected. Also, identify any invasive species that
might be present in the project area to ensure that project work does not further
spread the invasive species around or off the site, and keep invasive species
separated from the plant materials that are being recycled as mulch.
Board Policy X.XX Page 2 of 3
2. C&D WD EVALUATION FORM
Staff shall evaluate and document all the materials, fixtures and equipment at a site and
determine the best diversion strategy for all items. (Refer to Attachments 1 & 2).
a. Fill out a project specific Structure C&D WD Worksheet (Attachment 1).
i. Construction Projects
1. List construction materials that will be used on site and describe
what, if any, waste materials will be generated. Examples include:
a. Packaging - cardboard, styrofoam, plastics, paper products
b. Crates (unpainted wood pallets, crates and other
packaging made of lumbered or engineered wood)
c. Scrap metal, wood
d. Excess concrete
e. Tile, brick trimmings
f. Drywall scraps
g. Roofing materials
h. All other materials (carpets, linoleum, sheet products,
glass, laminates, etc.)
2. Indicate diversion strategy. Refer to Attachment 2 for a list of
common diversion strategies, which include:
a. Salvage
b. Recycle
c. Reuse on site
d. Reuse off site
e. If uncertain, refer to Attachment 3, list of recyclers, waste
handlers, salvage companies and demolition contractor
who may be able to assist.
3. Include any pertinent comments related to the desired diversion
strategy or constraints to implementing diversion for each
material
ii. Demolition Projects
1. List all materials on site that will be demolished, including:
a. Trees, landscaping
b. Roads, patios, paving, flatwork
c. Roofing
d. Exterior enclosure – walls, paneling, stucco, brick
e. Interior finishes, flooring, wall paneling, etc.
f. Fixtures (lighting, plumbing)
g. Appliances
h. All other materials (carpets, linoleum, sheet products,
glass, laminates, etc.)
2. Indicate diversion strategy. Refer to Attachment 2 for a list of
common diversion strategies, which include:
a. Salvage
b. Recycle
c. Reuse on site
Board Policy X.XX Page 3 of 3
d. Reuse off site
e. If uncertain, refer to Attachment 3, a non-exclusive list of
recyclers, waste handlers, salvage companies and
demolition contractor who may be able to assist.
3. Include any pertinent comments related to diversion strategy or
constraints to implementing diversion for that material (for
example, presence of hazardous materials.)
3. C&DWD SCOPE DOCUMENTS
a. Include C&D WD requirements in the Project Scope and Contract Specifications
(see sample specification, Attachment 4).
4. BOARD REPORT
Reference C&DWD strategies for each project as part of each Board report prepared for
award of construction and demolition contracts. Include description of material salvage
opportunities, any additional associated costs, and if applicable, reasons why 100% of
recyclable materials cannot be recycled.
∗ Attachments may be updated administratively to reflect changes and advances in recycling
and salvage practices. The C&D WSD process outlined in the Policy would not be affected
by updates to the Attachments. Any proposed revisions in the Policy shall be brought to
Board for review and approval.
CONSTRUCTION DEMOLITION WASTE DIVERSION WORKSHEET Attachment 1
Board Policy XX.X
Material Description Diversion Strategy Remarks
Project:Preserve:
CONSTRUCTION DEMOLITION WASTE DIVERSION WORKSHEET Attachment 1
Board Policy XX.X
Material Description Diversion Strategy Remarks
Project:Preserve:
C&D WD – Exhibit 2
Page 1
Construction and Demolition
Waste Diversion
Attachment 2
Definitions, Materials Identification & Waste
Diversion Strategies
1. Definitions
Waste Diversion The practice of directing waste away from landfills and into re-use, recycle or
salvage opportunities.
Construction Waste Building and site improvement materials and other solid waste resulting
from construction, remodeling, renovation, or repair operations. Construction waste includes
(but is not limited to) wood, concrete, drywall, masonry, roofing, siding, structural metal, wire,
insulation, asphalt, and packaging materials.
Demolition Waste Building and site improvement materials resulting from demolition
operations.
Hazardous Material Any material that is regulated as a hazardous material in accordance with
49 CFR 173, requires a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.1200,
or which during end use, treatment, handling, storage, transportation or disposal meets, has
components which meet, or have the potential to meet the definition of a Hazardous Waste in
accordance with 40 CFR 261.
Debris Non-hazardous solid waste generated during the construction, demolition, or renovation
of a structure that exceeds 2.5 inch (60 mm) particle size and is: a manufactured object; plant or
animal matter; or natural geologic material (e.g. cobbles and boulders). A mixture of debris and
other material such as soil or sludge are also subject to regulation as debris if the mixture is
comprised primarily of debris by volume, based on visual inspection.
Inert solids
Asphalt, concrete, rock, stone, brick, sand, soil and fines.
Remainder/Composite Inerts and Other
Inerts and other material that cannot be put in any
other type. This type may include items from different types combined, which would be very
hard to separate. Examples include brick, ceramics, tiles, toilets, sinks, and fiberglass insulation.
This type may also include demolition debris that is a mixture of items such as plate glass, wood,
tiles, gypsum board, and aluminum scrap.
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Materials that are made mostly of plastic but combined with
other materials. These items are usually recognized by their optical opacity. Examples include
auto parts made of plastic attached to metal, plastic drinking straws, foam drinking cups,
produce trays, foam packing blocks, packing peanuts, cookie trays found in cookie packages,
plastic strapping, foam plates/bowls, and new Formica, vinyl, or linoleum.
Deconstruction The process of careful demolition to remove materials in a manner that they
remain intact for the purpose of salvaging the materials.
C&D WD – Exhibit 2
Page 2
Salvage The recovery of intact demolition or construction materials for the purpose of reuse or
storage for later sale or reuse in another facility.
Recycle
Recovery of demolition or construction waste for subsequent processing (for example,
grinding or melting) in preparation for re-use.
Re-Use The process of taking demolished materials and re-using (often in the same place of
demolition) with minimal intervening processing. For example, concrete being broken up and
buried on site as fill or wood being ground up and used as mulch.
Re-Purpose Removing demolition or construction waste and re-purposing for another use
without any intervening processing. For example, wood siding being re-purposed as planter
boxes.
Source (On-site) Waste Segregation The process of segregating demolition or construction
waste materials on site (i.e: concrete, bare drywall, wood, steel) for offhaul to recycling facilities.
Comingled Waste Demolition or construction waste that is mixed together and brought to the
recycling facility.
2. Construction & demolition waste materials typically diverted
Much of the waste materials derived through demolition or construction can be diverted from
the landfill. Specific materials include:
Inert Materials Concrete, brick, stone, rock, asphalt paving, sand from demolished building
slabs, sidewalks, walls, etc.
Metals
Wood materials Any and all dimensional lumber, fencing or construction wood that are not
chemically treated, creosoted, pressure treated, contaminated or painted.
Vegetative materials Trees, tree parts, shrubs, stumps, logs, brush or any other type of plants
that are cleared from a site for construction or other use.
Roofing materials Wood shingles and shakes as well as asphalt shingles, stone and slate based
roofing material.
Salvageable materials and structures Doors, windows, fixtures, cabinets, hardwood flooring,
sinks, bathtubs and appliances, etc. (see Salvage below).
All steel, aluminum, copper, bronze, tin, etc., found in scraps, piping, wiring, structural
steel, partition framing, door and window frames, building siding or roofing.
Miscellaneous recyclable materials Glass, carpets, plastics, linoleum, etc.
Salvage Typical salvaged materials include:
• Cabinets (kitchen, bath, built-in woodwork) that are in very good condition and/or have
unique workmanship
C&D WD – Exhibit 2
Page 3
• Appliances that are in new to almost new condition (older appliances are not energy
efficient and are recycled)
• Hardwood flooring
• Wood panels – interior or exterior – if they are in very good condition or of unique
material – for example, redwood
• Doors and windows in good condition
• Fixtures
• High value materials such as old-growth redwood
3. Waste Diversion Strategies
Concrete
• Can be broken down on site, to approximately 12” or less (12” minus) and utilized as fill
material to fill voids / holes / vaults on site.
o 12” minus materials should be used in 24” lifts and compacted.
o If 12”-minus is used to fill large areas, or as part of fill for grading and re-contouring,
a geologic engineer should be consulted.
• Can be shipped offsite to a recycling facility to be ground up for use as class 2 baserock
material.
• If the project is large, a concrete grinder can be brought onto the site and the concrete can
be ground onsite and either re-used as class 2 fill or shipped offsite to be re-purposed as
class 2 fill at another relocation
• NOTE: Painted concrete must have lead content evaluated; contractor shall conduct waste
profiles to determine if concrete painted with lead paint can still be recycled or re-used
(buried) on site.
Masonry / Brick / Stone
• Most masonry is difficult (if not impossible) to deconstruct and salvage intact.
• Most masonry can be sent to a recycling facility and crushed.
• On District sites where there are areas that can be filled, most masonry can be combined
with crushed concrete and used as fill.
o If large areas are to be filled or fill is to be used as part of grading and re-contouring,
a geologic engineer should be consulted.
• NOTE: Painted masonry must have lead content evaluated; contractor shall conduct waste
profiles to determine if masonry painted with lead paint can still be recycled or re-used
(buried) on site.
Asphalt Paving
• Asphalt Paving can be demolished, removed from the site, and recycled for use in new AC
paving.
Metals
• Can be source-separated on site and sent directly to a metals recycler or be comingled and
sent to a recycling / waste handling facility that accepts, separates and recycles the
materials.
• Typically metals can be painted, even with lead based paint, and still be recycled.
Wood Materials
C&D WD – Exhibit 2
Page 4
• Wood materials should be evaluated for potential salvage value. If there is potential salvage
value, wood materials should be carefully removed or deconstructed to salvage intact.
o Typical wood items that may be suitable* for salvage include:
Large dimensional lumber (beams, posts)
Hard wood flooring
Wood windows
Wood cabinetry
Wood siding / paneling
*Suitability should be evaluated. If hazardous materials survey indicates there is
lead paint on wood, it shall not be salvaged due to concerns of potentially
hazardous materials being funneled back into the marketplace.
Wood framing members cannot be reused for framing, as they are not
graded. Unless the wood framing is exceptionally unique (for example,
redwood) there is little actual value in salvage.
o Wood that is not painted or treated can be recycled and made into a variety of mulch
products.
Wood can be source-separated on site and transported to a recycling center or
be co-mingled and sent to a recycling site that separates demolition debris for
recycling.
Wood can also be ground on site and used as mulch to aid in site stabilization
and erosion control.
• Wood materials can be grounded for mulch with tree and vegetation
materials as long as there are no invasive weed concerns.
Thickness and location of mulch should be discussed with District biologist.
Trees / Plant Materials
• Trees and other plant materials removed from the site for a construction or demolition
project can be recycled with other wood products.
• Care shall be given to ensure that no invasive weeds are recycled.
• Invasive plants may need to be removed or treated in compliance with the District’s
Integrated Pest Management program.
Salvage Strategies
Salvage of materials can be difficult and costly, as it usually requires careful deconstruction,
often by hand. District construction contracts require contractors to pay prevailing wage, and
the result may be that salvage of materials could be considerably more expensive than recycling
the material. Often, materials that have incurred costly labor-hours to salvage ultimately end up
being recycled. Therefore, clear identification of the salvage potential of any materials is critical.
The following outlines steps for identifying the potential salvage of items slated for demolition:
1. In filling out Exhibit 1, identify any materials, appliances, fixtures, cabinetry, etc., that
may have salvage value.
2. Photograph items, and e-mail photos to a minimum of two salvage companies to obtain
their opinion as to the potential salvage value of the items.
3. If the items have a clear strong salvage value (gauged by response from salvage
companies interested in the materials), staff may opt to follow one of the two following
options:
a. Prepare a separate Request for Quotes for Salvage of items.
C&D WD – Exhibit 2
Page 5
i. Salvage work must be evaluated against remediation work required. If
any of the salvage work could disturb hazardous materials, then the
hazardous materials remediation must take place before salvage
operations.
ii. Salvage, remediation and demolition work shall be managed as
separate contracts.
b. Include salvage requirements within the construction or demolition bid package
i. Place the responsibility for salvage of materials on the contractor.
ii. Invite salvage companies/subcontractors to attend the pre-bid
meetings and have them submit their bids to the prime contractors for
inclusion with the bid packages.
iii. This approach transfers coordination of salvage work to contractor.
4. For all salvage activities, the salvage company shall identify the end use for the salvaged
item(s). Minimally salvage company shall issue a letter stating:
a. Which materials will be salvaged;
b. Where the salvaged materials will be taken;
c. What the salvaged materials will be used for; and,
d. Confirmation that the salvaged items shall be retained, in their intact state, and
will not be recycled.
e. Acknowledgement that receipts shall be provided for the off-site disposition of
the salvaged materials.
Construction Demolition Waste Diversion Policy
Resource Directory*
Attachment 3
Company Name Discipline Contact E-mail Phone Communications / Info
Reuse Network PM / Expeditor for Salvage Projects Lorenz Schilling lorenz@reusenetwork.org 562-307-6065
City of Palo Alto Jurisdiction / City Planner Scott McKay Planner who enforces City-mandated
deconstruction for single family homes
The Re Use People Salvage Company / Deconstruction / Non-
profit info@TheReUsePeople.org 510-383-1983
501.c.3 non-profit, do deconstruction 7 salvage.
Do not do prevailing wage projects. Can work as
sub to prime contractor.
Driftwood Salvage Salvage Company Same as Wholehouse Building Supply & Salvage
Habitat for Humanity Re-store / Salvage Retailer 650-847-4000 Non-profit retail store that sells salvaged and
donated items
Green Earth Appraisals Appraisal for deconstruction/Salvage David Xepoleas info@greenearthappraisals.com 650-455-6683
Firewood Farms Salvage Company James Harper 650-726-1702 Specialize in old growth redwood, large timbers
and large slabs of lumber.
WholeHouse Building Supply & Salvage Salvage Company; demo contractor; Non
profit gardner@batnet.com 650-558-1400
Same as Driftwood Salvage - appears to do
demolition, appraisals, salvage, and have a non-
profit for raising funds for east Palo Alto.
Rebuild Green Deconstruction Contractor Roderick Cooper rebuildgreen@gmail.com 650-670-5907
Makoni Construction Deconstruction Contractor Lisi Makoni lisi@makonideconcompany.com 650-533-2124
Zanker Road resource Management Waste Handling / recycling Michael Gross michael@zankerrecycling.com 408-263-2384
Local large recycling center; has demolition waste
line that sorts & separates co-mingled waste from
demolition/construction projects
*This directory is not comprehensive and may not include all available resources in the region; Listing herein does not imply any endorsement or guarantee of the listed entity.
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 1
of Construction Debris
Construction & Demolition
Waste Diversion
Attachment 4
SECTION 01115 HANDLING, TRANSPORT AND DISPOSAL OF CONSTRUCTION
DEBRIS
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 2
of Construction Debris
(Page left intentionally blank)
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 3
of Construction Debris
SECTION 01115
HANDLING, TRANSPORT, AND DISPOSAL
OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS
PART 1 -GENERAL
1.1 SUMMARY
A. This Section of the Specifications to specify project requirements for:
1. Handling, transport, and disposal of building and site materials as construction debris
that do not contain asbestos, lead, or other hazardous materials.
2. Handling, transport, and disposal of building and site materials as construction debris
that contain asbestos and/or lead.
3. Handling and storage of all construction debris after its removal.
4. A waste-stream diversion plan for all non-hazardous materials.
5. Transportation of all construction debris.
6. Disposal of all construction debris.
7. Additional procedures related to the handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous
materials are described in Specification Section 01110.
B. Additional sampling and analyses to the extent required by the disposal facility is the
responsibility of the Contractor. Contractor shall be responsible for all costs and schedule
impacts associated with additional sampling requirements.
C. The Contractor is solely responsible for Source-Separation and shall not permit construction
debris which is intended to be disposed of as non-hazardous waste to be commingled with
hazardous substances or hazardous materials. The District will not pay any additional costs the
Contractor incurs if construction debris designated to be disposed of as non-hazardous waste is
commingled with hazardous substances or hazardous materials.
D. The Contractor is solely responsible for the handling, storage, transportation, and disposal of
all construction debris in strict accordance with applicable Federal, State, regional, and local
statutes, laws, regulations, rules, ordinances, codes, and standards.
E. The Contractor shall develop and implement a waste-stream diversion plan for all materials
that are not classified as hazardous waste. This may include recycling, salvage, or re-use of the
materials on site.
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 4
of Construction Debris
1.3 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
A. See REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Section.
B. Compliance with regulatory requirements:
1. Perform all handling, storage, transportation, and disposal of construction debris in
compliance with all applicable Federal, State, regional, and local statutes, laws,
regulations, rules, and ordinances.
2. Obtain all Federal, State of California, State in which disposal facility is located if not
in California, regional, and local permits and any other approvals from agencies and
authorities required to perform the Work.
3. Submit all required notifications to Federal, State of California, and local agencies
with regulatory responsibilities associated with the work activities that are included in
the project. All notifications shall be served in the form required by the agency
requiring notification, and in a timely manner so as not to negatively impact the
project schedule. Submit copies of all notifications as actually served to agencies to
the District.
1.4 LICENSES
A. Licenses:
The Contractor shall be currently licensed by the State of California to perform demolition work,
and removal, handling, storing, and transportation of construction debris, and shall also maintain
current any additional registrations and certifications required by Federal, State of California,
regional, or local governmental or quasi-governmental agencies, or other entities having
jurisdiction.
1.5 SUBMITTALS
A. Submit copies of current valid permits required by Federal agencies, the State of California,
and regional and local regulations, including arrangements for storage and transportation of
asbestos containing materials, lead containing materials, PCB containing materials, and other
hazardous waste materials.
B. Pre-demolition construction debris characterization:
1. Prior to demolition work the Contractor shall complete material sampling and
material characterization, and shall establish the physical characteristics of the
various waste streams the Contractor will generate.
2. Prior to any demolition work the Contractor shall obtain preliminary letters of
commitment from disposal facilities based on the physical characteristics of the
various waste streams the Contractor will generate.
3. Demolition work shall not commence until the District has reviewed the results of the
physical characteristics of the various waste streams the Contractor proposes to
generate and the preliminary letters of commitment from disposal facilities.
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 5
of Construction Debris
C. Characterization of waste generated by demolition:
1. While executing demolition work the Contractor shall undertake material sampling
and material characterization to verify that the physical characteristics of the waste
from demolition work is similar to the waste streams the Contractor identified in the
Contractor’s pre-demolition waste characterization.
2. If the sampling and waste characterization during demolition work indicates that the
various waste streams being generated are substantially different from those the
Contractor submitted for pre-demolition waste characterization, the Contractor shall:
i. Temporarily stop work;
ii. Inform the District;
iii. Undertake additional material sampling and material characterization to
establish the revised physical characteristics of the various waste streams
the Contractor will generate, and;
iv. Inform the proposed disposal facilities of the revised physical
characteristics of the waste streams the Contractor is generating, and
obtain new letters of commitment from disposal facilities.
D. Waste-Stream Diversion.
The Contractor shall prepare a waste-stream diversion plan describing how all non-hazardous
demolished materials will be handled. Waste-stream diversion plan (WSDP) shall list all
materials that will be sent to the landfill, with an explanation of why they cannot be recycled or
salvaged. Contractor shall provide receipts for all materials disposed of offsite including a
certified recycling center or salvage company.
• On-site recycling: concrete and concrete block may be re-used on site as fill (if material
is painted characterization is required). Un-treated wood can be ground and used as
mulch.
• Off-site recycling: Contractor is required to recycle 100% of all concrete, non-treated
wood, steel, metal, appliances, and cabling.
• Salvage: Contractor shall explore any opportunities for salvage of materials. If salvage of
materials is proposed, WSDP shall indicate what items shall be salvaged, and where they
will be transported to.
E. Disposal facilities compliance and commitment: Prior to off-site transport of any construction
debris, submit copies of letters of commitment from all proposed disposal facilities. Each letter
shall state the following:
1. Confirmation that the facility and its operations are in compliance with all
Federal, State in which the disposal facility is located, regional, and local
requirements.
2. Confirmation that the facility has reviewed applicable material characterization
reports and is licensed to accept the materials, and will accept the materials
proposed for disposal at the facility.
3. Any restrictions of the disposal facility that may cause rejection of transported
materials.
4. Additional sampling and characterization of materials required prior to delivery of
materials to the disposal facility.
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 6
of Construction Debris
5. Any restrictions on delivery schedules.
6. Full disclosure concerning any existing, imminent or pending corrective action
programs which may impact the ability of the facility to accept materials from the
Project Site during performance of this Contract.
F. Submit copies of all manifests, weight receipts, material analyses, waste profiles, disposal
facility receipts, and all other documents and records pertaining to the sampling,
characterization, transport, and disposal of all construction debris required to be removed and
disposed of in accordance with the requirements specified in the Contract Documents.
G. Review by the District of the above required submittals is intended only to be for general
conformance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The District assumes no
responsibility for permits, licenses, notices, materials and methods, equipment, or temporary
construction required to execute the Work. The implementation of these procedures is the sole
responsibility of the Contractor.
1.6 HEALTH AND SAFETY
A. The Contractor shall determine the level of hazard resulting from actual conditions at the
work site, and shall ensure that safety procedures employed and protective gear provided to
workers are appropriate for the conditions and in compliance with all applicable regulations and
standards
B. The Contractor shall provide protection for personnel in accordance with the Contractor's
Health and Safety Plan, in compliance with all OSHA and all other Federal, State of California,
regional, and local statutes, laws, regulations, rules, and ordinances, and take all additional
precautions necessary to safely execute the Work.
C. Enforcement of personnel protection requirements and compliance with NIOSH and OSHA
requirements are the sole responsibility of the Contractor.
D. The Contractor shall comply with applicable OSHA CCR requirements.
E. EPA and CAL-EPA requirements:
1. The contractor is solely responsible for compliance with all applicable EPA and
CAL-EPA statutes, laws, regulations, rules, and ordinances relating to waste disposal.
2. Waste from demolition and abatement activities must be evaluated for the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Toxicity Characteristics. The contractor
shall comply with RCRA requirements as defined in Subtitles C and D, and other
State of California waste management requirements.
F. During all phases of work Contractor shall comply with all applicable sections of State of
California Code of Regulations (CCR), Industrial Safety Orders (Title 8), as well as Federal and
State of California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations,
including the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response regulation (Title 8, Section
5192 and 29 CFR 1910.120).
1. Prior to commencement of any work, the Contractor shall instruct all workers regarding
the hazards involved in removal of each specific building material, and ensure that all
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 7
of Construction Debris
workers are properly trained in the methods and work procedures to be employed and in
the operation of all equipment to be used.
2. The Contractor shall provide all workers with appropriate protective clothing, including
appropriate headgear, non-skid foot coverings, gloves, and respiratory protection as
required in this Section of the Specifications, other Sections of the Specifications, and the
requirements of applicable Federal, State, regional, and local statutes, and laws.
PART 2 - PRODUCTS
(not used)
PART 3 - EXECUTION
3.1 HANDLING OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS
A. Accomplish all demolition and removal with the minimum production of airborne dust and
debris.
B. Monitor airborne dust/particle emissions as required to comply with all applicable regulations
and standards. If monitoring indicates that emissions exceed those allowed by applicable
regulations and standards, or the District's representative determines that emissions are greater
than acceptable exposure levels (or standards), the Contractor shall modify removal methods
and/or dust suppression methods as required to reduce emissions to an acceptable level.
C. Execute all work using equipment and methods that prevent the spread and/or migration of
dust and flying particles and the accumulation of dust and/or debris on adjacent surfaces,
adjacent materials, and/or adjacent property.
D. Remove materials using methods that will minimize splintering, shattering and creation of
dust and fine debris. Do not permit removed materials to drop on unprotected soil.
3.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRANSPORT OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS
A. Comply with all applicable Federal, State, regional, and local statutes, laws, regulations, rules,
and ordinances regarding packaging, labeling, and transport.
B. Cover all trucks hauling construction debris to eliminate the emission of dust and airborne
particulate matter.
3.3 GENERAL DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS
A. Disposal facilities shall be in compliance with all applicable Federal, State in which disposal
facility is located, regional, and local laws, rules, regulations or other entities having jurisdiction
at the disposal facility.
B. Disposal of construction debris containing asbestos, lead, or other hazardous materials: In
addition to the disposal requirements specified herein, comply with all Federal, State in which
disposal facility is located, regional, and local laws, rules, and regulations regarding the disposal
of construction debris containing asbestos, lead, or other hazardous materials. Applicable
01115 0 - Handling, Transport & Disposal 8
of Construction Debris
regional and local laws, rules, and regulations shall be those of the governmental or quasi-
governmental agencies, or other entities having jurisdiction at the disposal facility.
End of Section 01115
DATE: January 9, 2015
MEMO TO: MROSD Board of Directors
THROUGH: Stephen E. Abbors, General Manager
FROM: Ana Ruiz, Assistant General Manager
CC: Andrew Taylor, Accountant; Shelly Lewis, Public Affairs Manager
SUBJECT: Donation from the Estate of Mr. Robert Schauer
_____________________________________________________________________________
This memorandum serves to inform the Board that the District received a $25,000 donation from
the estate of late Mr. Robert Schauer, a former resident of Palo Alto, on December 23, 2014.
Prior to this transfer of funds, the District was contacted by Mr. Schauer’s financial advisor in
September 2014 to say that Mr. Schauer had bequeathed a $25,000 donation to the District from
his IRA account. Due to the complexities of the Tax Code, the funds could not be directly
transferred from Mr. Schauer’s IRA to the District. After multiple exchanges of information and
added research, it became apparent that in order to allow for the transfer of funds, the District
would need to submit detailed information, forms, and paperwork, which was completed in early
December 2014.
Public Affairs will reach out to Mr. Schauer’s widow shortly to formally recognize this generous
donation at a future Board meeting.