HomeMy Public PortalAbout20140514 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 14-12
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
SPECIAL MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 P.M.
REGULAR MEETING BEGINS AT 7:00 P.M.
A G E N D A
5:30 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT – CLOSED SESSION
ROLL CALL
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION.
(GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of Case: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District v. Chiocchi
Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 1-12-CV-221622
2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.8)
Property: Santa Clara County APN 562-22-017
Agency Negotiator: Allen Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist
Negotiating Party: Norm Matteoni, Attorney at Law
Under Negotiation: Terms of real property transaction
ADJOURN SPECIAL MEETING
7:00 REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION (IF NECESSARY) (The Board shall publicly state any
reportable action taken in closed session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.1)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS – PUBLIC
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Minutes of the April 23, 2014 Regular Board Meeting
Meeting 14-12
2. Approve Claims Reports
3. Approval of Grant of Access Easement and Quitclaim Deed between James F. Wickett et al.
(San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 081-120-060 and 081-120-070) and
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District across Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve
(Preserve) (San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Number 081-090-020), and Authorize the
General Manager to issue a permit for drilling an agricultural well on the Preserve at Mr.
Wickett’s expense (R-14-75)
Staff Contact: Mike Williams, Real Property Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, as set out in this report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Grant of Access Easement and Acceptance of
Quitclaim Deed between the District and James F. Wickett et al.
3. Authorize the General Manager to issue a permit to drill an agricultural well on the
Preserve to benefit the District’s conservation grazing program.
4.
Purchase of a Prefabricated Vault Restroom for the Bald Mountain Parking Area (R-14-78)
Staff Contact: Lisa Bankosh, Planner III
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to execute a purchase
order with CXT Concrete Buildings, Inc., under the National Joint Powers Alliance contract for a
prefabricated concrete restroom, to be installed at the new Bald Mountain Parking Area, in the
Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, for an amount not to exceed $50,000.
5. Grant Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for Funding Assistance for
the Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project (R-14-77)
Staff Contact: Julie Andersen, Planner II
General Manager’s Recommendation:
1. Adopt a Resolution approving the terms and conditions of the proposed grant agreement
with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for funding assistance for the
Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project;
2. Authorize the General Manager to execute the Grant Agreement prior to submission of a
request to the Grantor for disbursement of grant funds.
BOARD BUSINESS
6. Appointment of Marianne Chance as a District Peace Officer (R-14-27)
Staff Contact: Michael Newburn, Acting Operations Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution appointing Marianne Chance as a
Peace Officer.
7. Adoption of Board Policy 2.02, “Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process” (R-14-79)
Staff Contact: Kevin Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
General Manager’s Recommendation: Adopt Board Policy 2.02, “Board Appointee Performance
Evaluation Process,” as recommended by the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee
INFORMATION ONLY ITEMS
• Letter to California State Senators Beall & Bloom Re: Cap & Trade Investment Plan: Allocations
• Letter to Federal Aviation Administration providing comments on the Draft Environmental
Assessment for the Northern California Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the
Metroplex
• Letter to Santa Clara County Supervisor Mike Wasserman Re: Picchetti Winery Compliance with
Santa Clara County Ordinances
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.
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 Regular Meeting of the MROSD Board of Directors was posted and available for review on May 9, 2014, at the Administrative
Offices of MROSD, 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos California, 94022. Agenda materials are also available on the District’s web site at
http://www.openspace.org.
Signed this 9th day of May, 2014, at Los Altos, California.
April 23, 2014
Board Meeting 14-11
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
April 23, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice President Siemens called the Regular Meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Board of Directors to order at 7:10 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Larry Hassett, Yoriko Kishimoto, Curt Riffle, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: Nonette Hanko and Cecily Harris
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl
Schaffner, Public Affairs Manager Shelly Lewis, Natural Resources
Manager Kirk Lenington, Acting Operations Manager Michael Newburn,
Skyline Area Superintendent Brian Malone, Acting Support Services
Program Administrator Michael Jurich, Contingent Project Manager
Aaron Hébert, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers were present.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Cyr seconded the motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
Meeting 14-11 Page 2
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Minutes of the Regular Board Meeting of April 9, 2014, as amended.
2. Approve the Claims Report
3. Approval of Agreement for Legislative Consulting Services (R-14-71)
General Manager’s Recommendation: Authorize the General Manager to execute a Consulting
Services Agreement with Public Policy Advocates, LLC, to provide California legislative and
advocacy services for an amount not-to-exceed $28,000.
Director Riffle inquired whether the District should research other firms for this service.
General Manager Steve Abbors reported that Ralph’s price is still well below market value and
Mr. Heim is providing more services now than ever.
Public hearing opened at 7:15 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 7:15 p.m.
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to approve the Consent
Calendar.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
VI. BOARD BUSINESS
4. Resolution Supporting Assembly Bill 2193, Habitat Restoration and Enhancement
Act (R-14-74)
Natural Resources Manager Kirk Lenington described the purpose of Assembly Bill 2193 and
introduced Jeremy Dennis of Assemblymember Rich Gordon’s District Office.
Jeremy Dennis, District Director for Assemblymember Rich Gordon, provided a brief history of
the bill and continued efforts at streamlining state permitting processes for projects related to
urban stream restoration, coastal watershed restoration, and inland river restoration. Mr. Dennis
also provided an update on the current status of AB2193 in the State Assembly.
Public hearing opened at 7:26 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 7:27 p.m.
Meeting 14-11 Page 3
Motion: Director Hassett moved, and Director Cyr seconded the motion to adopt a Resolution
supporting Assembly Bill 2193, which would make substantive improvements to the permitting
process for small-scale and voluntary ecosystem restoration projects.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
5. Consideration of Memorial Trail Request for Bo Gimbal (R-14-70)
Skyline Area Superintendent Brian Malone presented the staff report describing the numerous
volunteer hours Bo Gimbal donated to the District making him the most productive volunteer in
the District’s history. Mr. Malone explained that Mr. Gimbal contributed his time and talents to
many projects, especially related to trail construction and maintenance. Finally, Mr. Malone
described the location of the trail proposed for naming after Mr. Gimbal in the Russian Ridge
Open Space Preserve.
Director Riffle inquired if any events are planned to commemorate the naming of the trail.
Mr. Malone commented that if approved by the Board, the District will plan a commemorative
event in the future.
Director Hassett shared comments on the many contributions Mr. Gimbal made to the District
through volunteering time, mentoring District staff, and building many trails.
The members of the Board shared personal experiences and memories of working with Mr.
Gimbal and expressed their great appreciation for his efforts.
Public hearing opened at 7:39 p.m.
Sandy Sommer, Mr. Gimbal’s daughter, thanked the District and Board of Directors for honoring
her father and his contributions to the District.
Public hearing closed at 7:42 p.m.
Motion: Director Hassett moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to approve the
Legislative, Finance, and Public Affairs Committee recommendation to name a trail in Russian
Ridge Open Space Preserve the “Bo Gimbal Trail” as a memorial to Bo Gimbal for his
contributions to the District and the region.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
6. Authorization to Purchase Capital Equipment for the Operations, Public Affairs
and Real Property Departments at a Total Cost Not to Exceed $740,000 (R-14-72)
Acting Support Services Program Administrator Michael Jurich presented the staff report
outlining where the new vehicles proposed for purchase will be utilized and those that will be
replacement vehicles. Mr. Jurich provided a list of the vehicles the District currently owns, the
current uses of those vehicles, and where the vehicles are assigned among the District’s offices.
Finally, Mr. Jurich explained that the District will be using the State of California Department of
Meeting 14-11 Page 4
General Services contracts or other approved cooperative procurement contracts to purchase the
vehicles described in the General Manager’s recommendation.
Director Riffle inquired if the District has investigated purchasing fuel efficient and alternative
fuel vehicles.
Mr. Jurich explained that the District has purchased two hybrid vehicles for administrative staff
use, but currently hybrid vehicles are unable to meet the demands of field staff to frequently
travel off-road and carry heavy loads.
Public hearing opened at 8:00 p.m.
No speakers were present.
Public hearing closed at 8:00 p.m.
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Cyr seconded the motion to:
1. Authorize the General Manager to execute a purchase contract with the State Department
of General Services and associated contract dealers for three patrol vehicles, two
administrative vehicles, and two maintenance vehicles, for a total cost not to exceed
$350,000.
2. Authorize the General Manager to execute a purchase contract with the State Department
of General Services and associated contract dealers for one excavator and one ten wheel
dump truck for a total cost not to exceed $390,000.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
7. Harkins Bridge Replacement (R-14-76)
Contingent Project Manager Aaron Hébert described the current state of the Harkins Bridge, its
current uses and location in the Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space Preserve. Mr. Hébert
described various types of bridges the District could use to replace the Harkins Bridge, including
concrete arch, railcar, I-beam, and prefabricated truss. Mr. Hébert described the next steps for
the project from engineering design, permitting, and construction of the bridge. Additionally
staff will return to the Planning and Natural Resources Committee in approximately six months
with railing alternatives and to provide an update on the project. Mr. Hébert explained that staff
and the Planning and Natural Resources Committee are recommending use of a prefabricated
truss bridge due to the location of the Harkins Bridge site, and it is the environmentally preferred
alternative.
Director Hassett inquired how much engineering design work is required for a prefabricated
bridge.
Mr. Hébert explained that due to the Harkins Bridge being located in an environmentally
sensitive area, engineering services are required to address the site location, the footings, the
hydrology, geotechnical services, permitting process, etc.
Director Riffle inquired if the current Harkins Bridge is useable by vehicles and whether it
should be replaced sooner than initially planned.
Meeting 14-11 Page 5
Mr. Hébert explained that the bridge was examined by an engineer in 2011 and currently has a
6,000 pound rating and is primarily used by hikers, equestrians, and cyclists. Mr. Hébert also
explained that staff has submitted an aggressive schedule for replacement, but delays could occur
during the permitting process involving various regulatory agencies or during the building
process related to weather.
Public hearing opened at 8:30 p.m.
No speakers were present.
Public hearing closed at 8:30 p.m.
Motion: Director Kishimoto moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to approve the
Planning and Natural Resources Committee’s recommendation that a prefabricated truss bridge
is the preferred option to replace the Harkins Bridge in Purisima Creek Redwoods Open Space
Preserve.
VOTE: 5-0-0 (Directors Hanko and Harris absent)
VII. STAFF REPORTS
No staff reports provided.
VIII. DIRECTOR REPORTS
The Board submitted their compensatory forms to the District Clerk.
Director Kishimoto reported that she made a presentation to the Palo City Council earlier in the
week.
Director Riffle reported that he spoke at a Mountain View City Council meeting earlier in the
week.
The Board members thanked staff for their efforts related to the Mt. Umunhum groundbreaking
event earlier in the day.
IX. ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSION
Vice President Siemens adjourned the Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District into a closed session at 8:37 p.m. in the Long Ridge
Conference Room
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION.
(GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of Case: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District v. County of Santa Clara, et
al. (Lehigh Quarry CEQA Matter)
California Sixth District Court of Appeals Case No. H040839
Meeting 14-11 Page 6
X. ADJOURNMENT
Vice President Siemens adjourned a Closed Session of the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District at 10:35 p.m.
________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
1 of 5
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 4/24 & 4/30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
66541 10112 - TIMOTHY C. BEST Mt Umunhum Trail Site Inspection & Construction Documents 04/24/2014 $26,035.00
Mt Umunhum Trail Bridge Designs & Plans - SA 04/24/2014
Review of Erosion Control At Mt Umunhum Demolition Site - SA 04/24/2014
ECdM Oljon Trail Project Updated Drawings & Report III 04/24/2014
ECdM Oljon Trail Project Updated Drawings & Report IV 04/24/2014
Ancient Oaks Trail Erosion Control Plan - Mindego Gateway - RR 04/24/2014
66490 11347 - A&D AUTOMATIC GATE AND ACCESS Upper Purisma Parking Lot Gate Automation 04/24/2014 $17,145.65
66514 11091 - JODI MCGRAW CONSULTING Consulting Services For Vision Plan Jan 1 - Mar 31, 2014 04/24/2014 $15,722.29
66526 11241 - QUESTA ENGINEERING CORPORATION Harkins Bridge Topographic Survey - PC 04/24/2014 $10,390.00
66512 10642 - HMS INC Hazardous Materials Testing On Multiple Structures - SA + MB 04/24/2014 $10,170.00
66534 11219 - SKYLONDA EQUIPMENT Eucalyptus Log Removal At Pulgas Ridge 04/24/2014 $9,995.00
66538 10468 - TANNERHECHT ARCHITECTURE SFO HVAC, Awning, & Shelter Architectural Work 04/24/2014 $8,880.00
66546 *11152 - WELLINGTON PARK INVESTORS AO2 Rent - May 2014 04/24/2014 $8,339.00
66547 *11230 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY-C/O UNITED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE Group #1766-0006 Dental 04/25/2014 $8,031.60
66595 10784 - VIDEOGRAFIX LLC Mt Umunhum Video Documentation 04/30/2014 $6,400.00
66504 10031 - DESIGN CONCEPTS Special Edition Newsletter 04/24/2014 $5,755.21
Brochure - RSA 04/24/2014
ECdM Event Invite & Banner 04/24/2014
Strategic Plan Insert 04/24/2014
Backpack Camp Brochure Redesign - MB 04/24/2014
Mt. Umunhum - Sierra Azul Invitation & Banners 04/24/2014
"Mission Statement" Photo For Front Lobby 04/24/2014
Design & Production Of District Ordinance Booklets 04/24/2014
66570 10626 - KOFF & ASSOCIATES INC 2013 Compensation Survey 04/30/2014 $5,698.59
66517 11158 - MARK CITRET PHOTOGRAPHY Mt Umunhum Demolition Photo Documentation - SA 04/24/2014 $5,082.63
Mt Umunhum Photography Work March 2014 - SA 04/24/2014
66501 10544 - CORELOGIC INFORMATION SOLUTION Real Quest Property Data Access For 2014-15 04/24/2014 $5,000.00
66511 11236 - GRADETECH Retainage Release Mindego Gateway Parking - RR 04/24/2014 $4,952.15
66494 11148 - BALANCE HYDROLOGICS, INC.Construction Support & Consulting For ECdM Staging Area 04/24/2014 $4,949.85
66529 10324 - RICH VOSS TRUCKING INC Trucking Services - Drainage Rock To Mt Umunhum Demolition Site - SA 04/24/2014 $4,123.35
66498 10019 - CENTRAL COAST BAT RESEARCH GROUP Initial Bat Survey At Lobner & Gap Properties - MB 04/24/2014 $3,667.81
Bat Assessments For Multiple Demolitions - MB 04/24/2014
66502 11194 - CREEKSIDE CENTER FOR EARTH OBSERVATION Ordination & GIS Analysis For Russian Ridge 04/24/2014 $2,800.00
66510 10345 - GLOBAL STEEL FABRICATORS INC Gate Modifications At Monte Bello 04/24/2014 $2,779.50
66521 10082 - PATSONS MEDIA GROUP Business Cards - Emily Mello 04/24/2014 $2,618.48
Strategic Plan Insert 04/24/2014
Spring Newsletter Reprint 04/24/2014
Production Of Ordinance Booklets 04/24/2014
66559 10206 - FIRST NATIONAL BANK BAOSC Conference Registration Fees 04/30/2014 $2,393.57
Field Supplies / Memory Cards 04/30/2014
Wifi Access For GM iPad 04/30/2014
Legal Book & CD 04/30/2014
2 of 5
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 4/24 & 4/30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
10206 - FIRST NATIONAL BANK BAOSC Conference Registration Fees 04/30/2014
Prezi Presentation Software for GIS 04/30/2014
California Trails & Greenways District Sponsorship 04/30/2014
66576 11063 - O'BRIEN, PAT Consulting Services For Capital Finance Program 04/30/2014 $2,356.00
66525 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Replace Siren Speaker 04/24/2014 $2,225.08
Install Mini Lightbar & Radio Antenna 04/24/2014
Install Mini Lightbar, Wave Antenna & Radio 04/24/2014
66507 11151 - FASTENAL COMPANY Cordless Drills / Saws 04/24/2014 $2,074.88
66556 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs - M201 04/30/2014 $2,013.88
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs - P43 04/30/2014
66598 *10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE April Janitorial Services - AO 04/30/2014 $1,815.00
66569 10626 - KOFF & ASSOCIATES INC 2013 Compensation Survey 04/30/2014 $1,800.32
66590 10112 - TIMOTHY C. BEST Field Reviews of Purisima Creek Road & Potential SA Demo Sites 04/30/2014 $1,742.50
Erosion Control Plan For Mindego Hill Trail Construction - RR 04/30/2014
66586 10178 - SEARS COMMERCIAL ONE Tool Chest For Shop - FFO 04/30/2014 $1,678.31
66588 *10583 - TELEPACIFIC COMMUNICATIONS District Telephone + SAO Internet (04/2014)04/30/2014 $1,543.89
66528 *10589 - RECOLOGY SOUTH BAY Dumpster & Wood Recycling Service At DHF - RSA 04/24/2014 $1,531.48
Dumpster Service - RSA 04/24/2014
66535 *10952 - SONIC.NET, INC.AO & FFO Internet Service - May 2014 04/24/2014 $1,519.00
66540 10069 - THE WILFRED JARVIS INSTITUTE Leadership & Organizational Effectiveness Consulting 04/24/2014 $1,500.00
66537 10107 - SUNNYVALE FORD Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs 04/24/2014 $1,491.92
66578 10160 - OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies 04/30/2014 $1,424.96
66506 10567 - EXAMINETICS INC Hearing Testing For Field Staff 04/24/2014 $1,395.00
66500 10598 - COONY, GINA California Trails Conference 04/24/2014 $1,293.81
66519 10073 - NORMAL DATA Consulting Services - Training Database 04/24/2014 $1,120.00
Consulting Services - Contact Database 04/24/2014
66565 11212 - GIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA Full Page Ad For Annual Activity Guide 04/30/2014 $1,080.00
66550 10004 - ACCOUNTEMPS Accounting Temp 04/30/2014 $1,067.56
66563 10187 - GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT Safety Equipment 04/30/2014 $916.15
Throttle Trigger For Chainsaw 04/30/2014
66516 10260 - LUND PEARSON MCLAUGHLIN Testing On Fire Sprinkler System 04/24/2014 $910.00
66544 11037 - US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC Medical Services 04/24/2014 $903.00
Medical Services 04/24/2014
66549 11347 - A&D AUTOMATIC GATE AND ACCESS Upper Purisma Parking Lot Gate Automation - PC 04/30/2014 $902.40
66492 10070 - ALVARO JARAMILLO Mt Umunhum Purple Martin Restoration Consulting Work - SA 04/24/2014 $891.50
66496 11064 - CAMERON, ROSEMARY Consulting Services - Public Education Team Meeting March 2014 04/24/2014 $825.00
66491 10004 - ACCOUNTEMPS Accounting Temp 04/24/2014 $820.64
66543 10403 - UNITED SITE SERVICES INC Sanitation Services - Fremont Older 04/24/2014 $745.52
Sanitation Services - Sierra Azul 04/24/2014
66575 10125 - MOFFETT SUPPLY COMPANY INC Janitorial Supplies For Skyline Preserves 04/30/2014 $742.41
66558 11151 - FASTENAL COMPANY Battery Packs & Charger 04/30/2014 $716.86
Safety Gloves 04/30/2014
3 of 5
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 4/24 & 4/30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
66499 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Maintenance & Repair - M42 04/24/2014 $593.29
66583 10140 - PINE CONE LUMBER CO INC Hardware For New Sign At Ravenswood 04/30/2014 $568.29
10140 - PINE CONE LUMBER CO INC Lumber For Ravenswood Preserve Sign 04/30/2014
66592 10403 - UNITED SITE SERVICES INC Sanitation Services For Crew Working -Mindego Area Russian Ridge 04/30/2014 $552.72
66532 11356 - SHAW, ARIEL California Trails Conference 04/24/2014 $538.00
66493 10815 - AMERICAN RED CROSS First Aid Training 04/24/2014 $523.00
First Aid Training 04/24/2014
66542 *11038 - TYCO INTEGRATED SECURITY LLC Alarm Service - FFO 04/24/2014 $492.44
66554 11379 - CALTRANS Encroachment Permit For Access To Evaluate Ravenswood Bay Trail 04/30/2014 $492.00
66522 11144 - PENINSULA MOTOR SPORTS ATV-5 Maintenance & Repairs 04/24/2014 $463.17
ATV-1 Maintenance & Repairs 04/24/2014
66561 10169 - FOSTER BROTHERS SECURITY SYSTEMS Locks & Rings 04/30/2014 $454.42
Locks & Keys 04/30/2014
66584 10265 - PRIORITY 1 Retrofit Old Patrol Truck-M70 04/30/2014 $434.27
66585 10194 - REED & GRAHAM INC Construction Supplies For Mindego Hill Trail - RR 04/30/2014 $433.91
66599 *10050 - JED CYR April Director meetings 04/30/2014 $400.00
66513 10895 - INFANTE, LISA Reimbursement - California Trails Conference in Palm Springs, CA 04/24/2014 $366.00
66530 10136 - SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY Water Service - RSA 04/24/2014 $340.24
66597 *10029 - CURT RIFFLE April Director Meetings 04/30/2014 $300.00
66602 *10084 - PETE SIEMENS April Director Meetings 04/30/2014 $300.00
66603 *10118 - YORIKO KISHIMOTO April Director Meetings 04/30/2014 $300.00
66572 10144 - MCKOWAN, PAUL Reimbursement - Trails & Greenways Conference Expenses 04/30/2014 $292.55
66533 10196 - SHELTERBELT BUILDERS INC Consulting Services - Pest Control Recommendations 04/24/2014 $292.50
66552 10011 - BILL'S TOWING SERVICE Towing Services - Tow Patrol Truck 04/30/2014 $270.00
66589 10121 - THE WORKINGMAN'S EMPORIUM Uniform expenses 04/30/2014 $262.20
66524 10140 - PINE CONE LUMBER CO INC Lumber For Sierra Azul & Jacques Ridge Parking Lot - SA 04/24/2014 $261.24
66539 10307 - THE SIGN SHOP Signs For Purisima Automatic Gates - PC 04/24/2014 $248.04
66509 10169 - FOSTER BROTHERS SECURITY SYSTEMS Keys & Padlocks 04/24/2014 $241.01
Keys & Supplies 04/24/2014
66557 10184 - CONTINUING EDUCATION OF THE BAR Legal Updates 04/30/2014 $224.57
66555 10192 - CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Estimated Annual Prepaid Electric For Monte Bello Rd.04/30/2014 $215.00
66580 10408 - PAPE` MATERIAL HANDLING EXCHANGE Oil & Aniti-freeze For Tractors 04/30/2014 $214.71
Shop Supplies - Fuel & Oil Filters 04/30/2014
66566 *10173 - GREEN WASTE-11089 Garbage Service - SFO 04/30/2014 $206.09
66596 *10018 - CECILY HARRIS April Director meetings 04/30/2014 $200.00
66581 10209 - PETTY CASH-MROSD Field Supplies 04/30/2014 $197.14
Office Supplies 04/30/2014
Mileage Reimbursement 04/30/2014
Bridge Tolls 04/30/2014
Kitchen Supplies 04/30/2014
Water pump supplies/repair snake tank 04/30/2014
66551 10183 - BARRON PARK SUPPLY CO INC Plumbing Repair Supplies - RSA 04/30/2014 $194.44
4 of 5
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 4/24 & 4/30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
66505 11354 - ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATES McDonald Ranch House Historic Assessment - LH 04/24/2014 $190.00
66497 10170 - CASCADE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY Fire Equipment For New Patrol truck 04/24/2014 $173.30
66545 10685 - WEST VALLEY COLLECTION Garbage Service - SAO 04/24/2014 $171.26
10685 - WEST VALLEY COLLECTION Garbage Service - Rental Residence 04/24/2014
66508 *10186 - FEDERAL EXPRESS Shipping Charges 04/24/2014 $168.93
66574 10288 - MISSION VALLEY FORD TRUCK SALES, INC Operator / Service Manual 04/30/2014 $166.81
66560 10138 - FITZSIMONS, RENEE Reimbursement - Mileage 04/30/2014 $151.37
66515 10492 - LAUSTSEN, GRETCHEN Reimbursement - Environmental Compliance Workshop 04/24/2014 $150.00
66536 10143 - SUMMIT UNIFORMS Uniform Fleece Jacket 04/24/2014 $144.64
Uniform Belt 04/24/2014
66567 10421 - ID PLUS INC Name Tags For Seasonal OSTs 04/30/2014 $136.50
66518 10190 - METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Remove Repeater From Truck 04/24/2014 $132.61
66582 *10180 - PG & E Electric For Daniel Nature Center - SR 04/30/2014 $127.46
66562 10168 - G & K SERVICES INC Shop Towel Service - SFO & FFO 04/30/2014 $119.03
66573 *10664 - MISSION TRAIL WASTE SYSTEMS Garbage Service - AO 04/30/2014 $117.50
66571 10189 - LIFE ASSIST First Aid Supplies 04/30/2014 $109.22
66587 10157 - STAPLES CREDIT PLAN Office Supplies - SFO 04/30/2014 $105.71
66523 *10180 - PG & E Electric For SAO 04/24/2014 $104.45
66591 10200 - TOOLAND INC Tools For SFO 04/30/2014 $101.45
66600 *10057 - LARRY HASSETT April Director Meetings 04/30/2014 $100.00
66601 *10072 - NONETTE HANKO April Director Meetings 04/30/2014 $100.00
66594 *10309 - VERIZON WIRELESS Danielson/Lausten/Patrol vehicle 04/30/2014 $80.89
66564 10548 - GARTSIDE, ELLEN Reimbursement - Volunteer Supplies 04/30/2014 $80.24
66579 10481 - PACIFIC TELEMANAGEMENT SERVICE Pay Phone - Black Mountain - MB 04/30/2014 $78.00
66531 11059 - SAN MATEO COUNTY HEALTH DEPT Tick Testing 04/24/2014 $75.00
66489 *10810 - A T & T Fax Line - FFO 04/24/2014 $45.57
66520 10670 - O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Vehicle Supplies - Mirror & Wheel Cover 04/24/2014 $42.66
66503 *11210 - DATA SAFE Shredding Services - AO 04/24/2014 $40.00
66593 *10165 - UPS Parcel Shipping 04/30/2014 $37.81
66553 *10172 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-3525 Water Service - Windy Hill 04/30/2014 $36.02
66548 *10811 - A T & T Nature Center Telephone - SR 04/30/2014 $32.56
66495 10183 - BARRON PARK SUPPLY CO INC Plumbing Repair Part - AO 04/24/2014 $31.81
66568 11070 - JENKINS, WARREN Reimbursement - Paint Supplies For AO 04/30/2014 $29.90
66527 10134 - RAYNE OF SAN JOSE Water Service - Fremont Older 04/24/2014 $26.25
66577 10670 - O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Vehicle Supplies - Motor Oil 04/30/2014 $16.30
Grand Total $224,071.24
* Annual Claims
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
5 of 5
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 4/24 & 4/30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
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 RH = Russian Hill TH = Teague Hill SFO = Skyline Field Office
FO = Fremont Older PR = Picchetti Ranch SJH = St Joseph's Hill TW = Thornewood SAO = South Area Outpost
CLAIMS REPORT
MEETING 14-12
DATE 05-14-14
CHECK DATES 04/30, 5/1 & 5/7
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Check
Number
Notes Vendor No. and Name Invoice Description Check
Date
Payment
Amount
66606 *10215 - CALPERS-FISCAL SERVICES DIVISION Employee Health Insurance Premium 05/01/2014 $115,617.14
66625 10662 - DAVID J POWERS & ASSOCIATES INC Ridge Vineyard Exchange Environmental Review Services - MB 05/07/2014 $11,438.25
66610 *10419 - THE LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY MPOSD-BL-490450 AD&D 05/01/2014 $4,496.26
MPOSD-BL-490450 LIFE 05/01/2014
MPOSD-BL-490450 Long Term Disability 05/01/2014
66609 *10211 - PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCATES Legislative Advocacy Services 05/01/2014 $2,337.09
66644 10580 - SHARP BUSINESS SYSTEMS Copier Usage - AO (Jan-Mar 2014)05/07/2014 $2,025.63
66616 *10840 - CALIFORNIA PENSION GROUP, LLC Public Retirement Consulting Services - Feb 2014 05/07/2014 $2,000.00
Public Retirement Consulting Services - Mar 2014 05/07/2014
66630 10325 - GILROY MOTORCYCLE CENTER Maintenance & Repairs For Kawasaki Mule 05/07/2014 $1,935.65
66639 *10180 - PG & E Well Pump Electric - SFO 05/07/2014 $1,847.26
Electric - RSA/CP 05/07/2014
Electric - Mora A&B 05/07/2014
Electric - Rental Residence 05/07/2014
Electric - Event Center LHC 05/07/2014
Electric - Annex 05/07/2014
Electric - Rental Residence 05/07/2014
Electric - FO 05/07/2014
Purisima Electric Gate 05/07/2014
Electric - FFO 05/07/2014
66634 10898 - JACK GESCHEIDT Photography For Brochures, Web Site, And Promotional Materials 05/07/2014 $1,550.00
66608 *10212 - PINNACLE TOWERS INC Crown Site ID 871823 - Skeggs Point Tower Rental 05/01/2014 $1,524.00
66605 11186 - CALIFORNIA DEPT FISH AND WILDLIFE - NAPA OFFICE Annual Project Fees for Routine Maintenance Agreement 04/30/2014 $1,473.00
66645 11033 - THE CREATIVE GROUP Temporary Office Help - Public Affairs 05/07/2014 $1,339.20
66640 10140 - PINE CONE LUMBER CO INC Retaining Wall Materials Mt Umunhum Summit Trail - SA 05/07/2014 $1,249.16
66654 11008 - SANTA CLARA COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT Assessment for Santa Clara County Vector Control 05/07/2014 $1,191.41
66621 10352 - CMK AUTOMOTIVE INC Vehicle Maintenance & Service - M46 05/07/2014 $1,184.90
Repair Doors - M70 05/07/2014
Vehicle Maintenance & Repair - M76 05/07/2014
66619 *10018 - CECILY HARRIS Chamber of Commerce Progress Seminar 05/07/2014 $1,096.50
66614 10004 - ACCOUNTEMPS Accounting Temp 05/07/2014 $1,028.93
66612 *10213 - VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA Employee Vision Insurance Premium 05/01/2014 $991.44
66611 *11003 - UNITED ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Basic Life Insurance 05/01/2014 $782.11
Supplemental Life Insurance 05/01/2014
66623 10185 - COSTCO Break Room & Office Supplies / Field Supplies 05/07/2014 $725.27
66648 10561 - ULINE Shop Ladder 05/07/2014 $685.11
66650 11037 - US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL GROUP PC Employee Medical Services 05/07/2014 $563.00
66637 11380 - MIKE ANNUZZI Live Music Entertainment for Mindego Opening - RR 05/07/2014 $500.00
66653 *10180 - PG & E Electric - SFO 05/07/2014 $460.58
66649 10403 - UNITED SITE SERVICES INC Sanitation Services - RR 05/07/2014 $455.20
66618 *10454 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-949 Water - AO 05/07/2014 $419.26
Water - AO 05/07/2014
66651 *10294 - AMERIGAS-SAN JOSE Propane - Rental Residence 05/07/2014 $393.67
66620 11319 - CHANCE, MARIANNE Reimbursement - Santa Rosa Ranger Academy Expenses 05/07/2014 $355.03
66652 10817 - AMICI'S EAST COAST PIZZERIA Community Advisory Committee Dinner 3/19/14 05/07/2014 $346.05
66642 *10093 - RENE HARDOY 04/14 Gardening Services 05/07/2014 $325.00
66607 10032 - DEL REY BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitorial Supplies - AO 05/01/2014 $234.34
66647 10307 - THE SIGN SHOP Preserve Boundary Signs 05/07/2014 $195.79
66627 10187 - GARDENLAND POWER EQUIPMENT Tool Maintenance 05/07/2014 $191.74
Chainsaw Repairs 05/07/2014
Chainsaw Supplies 05/07/2014
66636 10190 - METROMOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Repair Mobile Radio 05/07/2014 $184.81
66604 11186 - CALIFORNIA DEPT FISH AND WILDLIFE - NAPA OFFICE Fees For CDFW Notification and Amendment 04/30/2014 $184.00
66624 10348 - COSTCO MEMBERSHIP Membership Renewal 05/07/2014 $165.00
66646 10338 - THE ED JONES CO INC Replacement Badge - Marianne Chance 05/07/2014 $120.75
66622 10385 - COASTAL SIERRA INC Internet Service - SFO 05/07/2014 $109.00
66615 11187 - CALIFORNIA DEPT FISH AND WILDLIFE-SACRAMENTO Scientific Collection+D30 Permit Renewal Fee MROSD-NRD 05/07/2014 $104.29
66617 *10172 - CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO-3525 Water Service - Rental Residences 05/07/2014 $100.84
66638 10670 - O'REILLY AUTO PARTS Vehicle Supplies - Motor Oil 05/07/2014 $85.05
Vehicle Supplies - Mini Bulb / Graphite Spray 05/07/2014
66643 10136 - SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY Water Service - Rental Residence 05/07/2014 $80.74
66631 10287 - GRAINGER INC HazMat Signs - FFO 05/07/2014 $78.89
HazMat Signs - FFO 05/07/2014
66641 *10261 - PROTECTION ONE Fire Inspection & Monitoring - AO 05/07/2014 $66.85
66632 10267 - HALF MOON BAY REVIEW Legal Advertisement For Bald Mtn Staging Area 05/07/2014 $60.00
66613 *10810 - A T & T Phone For Daniel Nature Center 05/07/2014 $55.99
66635 10189 - LIFE ASSIST First Aid Supplies 05/07/2014 $40.22
66633 10394 - INTERSTATE TRAFFIC CONTROL PRO Stop Sign - RSA 05/07/2014 $33.66
66629 10503 - GIBSON, TERESA Reimbursement - Mileage 05/07/2014 $32.14
66626 10169 - FOSTER BROTHERS SECURITY SYSTEMS Key Rings & Magnetic Hider 05/07/2014 $28.45
66628 10317 - GEMPLER'S INC Volunteer Supplies 05/07/2014 $16.79
Grand Total $162,505.44
* Annual Claims
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
R-14-75
Meeting 14-12
May 14, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 3
AGENDA ITEM
Approval of Grant of Access Easement and Quitclaim Deed between James F. Wickett et al.
(San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 081-120-060 and 081-120-070) and
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District across Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve
(Preserve) (San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Number 081-090-020), and Authorize the
General Manager to issue a permit for drilling an agricultural well on the Preserve at Mr.
Wickett’s expense.
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Determine that the recommended actions are categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, as set out in this report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Grant of Access Easement and Acceptance of
Quitclaim Deed between the District and James F. Wickett et al.
3. Authorize the General Manager to issue a permit to drill an agricultural well on the
Preserve to benefit the District’s conservation grazing program.
SUMMARY
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) has the opportunity to replace an
existing 1949 private access easement that passes through Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve
(Preserve) to access two private parcels owned by James F. Wickett et al (Wickett). Wickett
proposes to quitclaim his rights to this access easement to the District in exchange for a more
limited access easement from the District over the same road that prohibits access for residential
or commercial development of the Wickett properties, and protects the natural open space
condition of the Preserve. This is in lieu of a conservation easement that the District had hoped to
obtain, but will have a similarly protective effect. Similarly, the District had hoped to secure
spring water rights on the Wickett property to support our mutual grazing tenant. In lieu of that,
Mr. Wickett is willing to drill a well on District property for this purpose at his cost with the
District paying for permit fees, water lines, troughs, and other associated infrastructure. In total,
initial transactional costs for the District are estimated at $2,000 and would be covered by the
Real Property New Land Budget.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 2007, the District purchased the 707.48-acre Tunitas Creek property from Peninsula Open
Space Trust establishing the Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve (Preserve) (R-07-19). A ranch
road travels from Tunitas Creek Road, across the interior of the Preserve, and into the
R-14-75 Page 2
pastureland at the eastern Preserve boundary. The District uses this road for patrol, and the
District’s grazing tenant uses the ranch road to manage his livestock operation. This ranch road
also serves as the only deeded access to two undeveloped parcels totaling 100 acres located
beyond the eastern boundary of the Preserve (see attached map). The access easement was
established prior to the District’s acquisition of the property by a 1949 Court Judgment recorded
in 1985 and rerecorded in January 2011. The Preserve is located to the west of the 100 acre
property and the Wickett family ranch is located to the east. The Wickett family ranch is
accessed separately using upper Native Sons Road via Star Hill Road. Given shared property
lines, Wickett also has the ability to access the two undeveloped parcels via his adjoining ranch.
In 2011, the 100 acre property was listed for sale by a Coastside real estate agent. At that time,
the District and Wickett shared concerns about the potential for development of these properties
and discussed partnership opportunities, including a potential conservation easement to protect
this property from future development. The 100 acre property was taken off the open real estate
market in early 2012. Wickett purchased these properties together with the appurtenant access
easement in November 2012. During winter of 2013, the District was approached by Wickett
about using the deeded access road and leasing his 100 acre property for grazing in conjunction
with the grazing on the Preserve. Mr. Wickett reiterated his intention to keep the property
undeveloped, but was not interested in granting a conservation easement to the District. The
District met with Mr. Wickett to look at the road, and negotiated the proposed Quitclaim Deed
and replacement Grant of Access Easement to prevent the access easement from being used in
the future to develop the Wickett parcels by subsequent owners. Staff and Wickett also discussed
ways to improve livestock water distribution on the Preserve.
Quitclaim Deed of 1949 Access Easement
The Preserve is subject to a 1949 Court Judgment establishing an access easement, which was
recorded in 1985 and subsequently re-recorded with “Notice of Intent to Preserve Easement” in
January 2011 by the real estate agent representing the former owner. Wickett has agreed to
convey a Quitclaim Deed to the District releasing all rights to this easement and to replace it with
a new access easement preventing access for the development of his parcels.
Description of Grant of Access Easement
In exchange for the Quitclaim Deed, the District proposes to convey a replacement Grant of
Access Easement to Wickett for the access road quitclaimed to the District. The location of the
access road is unchanged and the road alignment has been accurately surveyed by a licensed land
surveyor. Key business terms of the access easement are as follows:
1. The easement shall be non-exclusive to access the 100 acre Wickett property.
2. The easement shall not be used to access or develop any residential or commercial
development on the 100 acre Wickett property.
3. Wickett will be responsible for repairing and maintaining the access road to a dirt and
gravel standard consistent with the District’s “Policies for Road Maintenance
Agreements”.
4. Vehicle use shall be limited to 4-wheel drive vehicles, All Terrain Vehicles (ATVs), and
agricultural equipment.
5. The maximum speed limit shall not exceed 15 miles per hour.
6. Wickett is responsible for paying all survey, escrow, and recording fees.
7. The road may be rerouted to minimize steep grades, erosion, and sedimentation impacts.
R-14-75 Page 3
Proposed Stock Water Improvements at Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve
On the 100 acre property, Wickett has removed extensive brush, opening up approximately 80
acres of grassland for cattle grazing, which he is leasing to Doug Edwards who is also the
District’s grazing tenant on the Preserve. The Wickett property and the adjacent Preserve are
currently leased for contiguous conservation grazing, concurrently improving the rangeland
connectivity and the viability of grazing in this area.
Mr. Wickett has also developed an existing spring on his property for livestock water, which has
also been extended to the Preserve boundary and is currently being utilized by the District’s
grazing tenant. In 2009, the District unsuccessfully attempted to drill an agricultural well on a
lower area of the Preserve to improve livestock water for the grazing tenancy (R-09-77). Given
the viability of the spring on Mr. Wickett’s adjacent parcel, the District asked Mr. Wickett to
formalize the District’s use of this spring system with a spring water easement. Instead, Wickett
offered to hire a contractor to drill a well on the Preserve. To facilitate this water improvement
proposal, the District has entered into a letter of intent with Mr. Wickett, which provides that the
District will issue a permit to Mr. Wickett’s well contractor to drill a well on the upper eastern
boundary of the Preserve. Mr. Wickett would pay the contractor to drill the well. If well drilling
is successful, the District’s well use would be for livestock, fire protection and road maintenance
of the Preserve. The District would allow Wickett to use the well in emergency situations, such
as for fire protection. Staff believes that the new proposed well location has a greater probability
of providing water because it is located at a higher elevation on the Preserve than the location of
the unsuccessful drilling in 2009. Therefore, the General Manager recommends authorizing the
issuance of a permit to allow the well contractor to drill an agricultural well on the Preserve to
support conservation grazing.
The District would be responsible for obtaining a new agricultural well permit from San Mateo
County at an estimated cost of $1,500. If well drilling is successful, the District would install a
solar pump, two 5,000 gallon water tanks, approximately one mile of water lines, and three 60
gallon troughs to enhance resource grazing on the Preserve as contemplated in the 2009 well
drilling project. These costs for installation are estimated not to exceed $50,000 and this project
would return to the Board for award of a construction contract for the well-related infrastructure
at a future meeting.
If the well drilling is not successful, Mr. Wickett has expressed a willingness to reconsider
granting a spring water easement to the District to serve the resource grazing, fire protection and
maintenance needs on the Preserve. In the event this alternative is needed and agreeable to Mr.
Wickett, staff would return to the Board for acceptance of an agricultural spring easement.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
The project consists of replacing an existing private road access easement through the execution
of a new access easement and acceptance of a quitclaim deed. The roadbed would continue to be
maintained in a rural manner and access limited to standard four wheel drive utility vehicles or
ATVs. The project also includes the drilling of a well and installation of future stock water
infrastructure on the Preserve.
R-14-75 Page 4
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, 15303 and 15304
of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:
Access easement and quitclaim
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 access easement replacement
includes no anticipated expansion of the easement use. Any future minor grading of the road
to be performed by Wickett for maintenance purposes is also exempt under Section 15301.
Water facilities
Section 15303 exempts construction of new, small structures such as the water facilities
proposed.
Section 15304 exempts minor alterations to land, including the minor and temporary
alterations of the proposed project.
The proposed small water delivery structures (solar pump, water tanks, lines and troughs) are
consistent with the agricultural character of the existing landscape. The water storage tank will
be low-profile to minimize adverse aesthetic effects.
Approximately 1 mile of pipeline will be installed along existing ranch roads, and bare soil will
be reseeded to control erosion. The project site is located on a grassy ridge top away from creeks
and springs. Tunitas Creek is located 1 mile down slope from the well site. The work area does
not contain sensitive plant or animal species or known cultural resources. The proposed depth of
the well is at an elevation which is not prone to salt water intrusion, not in a polluted aquifer or
hard rock formation, and is not under the direct influence of a stream or lake.
For the well project, a Certificate of Exemption from Requirements for a Coastal Development
Permit would be obtained by the District. The District has discussed the project with the County
of San Mateo, and would apply for an Agricultural Water Well Permit to allow the contractor to
drill the proposed well on the Preserve. The project is in a non-adjudicated watershed.
FISCAL IMPACTS
The recording and surveying costs associated with the Quitclaim Deed and Grant of Access
Easement would be paid by Wickett. The District would pay for reissuing the District’s policy
of title insurance, which is estimated at $500. Wickett would pay the costs for drilling an
agricultural well on the Preserve. The District would pay the agricultural well permit to the
County estimated at $1,500. District costs would be covered under the FY2014-15 Real Property
New Land Budget.
BOARD COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
There was no Committee review for this agenda item.
PUBLIC NOTICE
R-14-75 Page 5
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. Adjoining property owners and
interested parties have also been mailed a copy of the agenda for this public meeting.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, staff would work to record the easement agreement
and quitclaim deed and would issue a permit to the well contractor and oversee the well drilling
project. If well drilling is successful, Natural Resources staff would return to the Board with
award of a construction contract for stock water infrastructure distribution improvements at a
future meeting.
Attachments:
1. Resolution Approving and Authorizing the President of the Board, General Manager
or Other Officer to Execute Easement Deed with James F. Wickett et al. and
Certificate of Acceptance for the Quitclaim Deed to District, and Authorizing General
Manager to Execute any and all Other Documents Necessary or Appropriate to
Closing of the Transaction (Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve - Lands of Wickett)
2. Location Map
Prepared by
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Graphics prepared by:
Jon Montgomery, GIS Technician
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 14-____
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE
PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD, GENERAL MANAGER OR OTHER OFFICER
TO EXECUTE EASEMENT DEED WITH JAMES F. WICKETT ET AL AND
CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE FOR THE QUITCLAIM DEED TO
DISTRICT, AND AUTHORIZING GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO
CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (TUNITAS CREEK OPEN SPACE
PRESERVE - LANDS OF WICKETT)
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does hereby accept the Quitclaim Deed from James F. Wickett et al. and authorizes the
General Manager, President of the Board of Directors, or other appropriate officer to execute the
certificate of acceptance on behalf of the District.
SECTION TWO. The General Manager, President of the Board or other appropriate
officer is authorized to execute the Grant of Access Easement to James F. Wickett et al.
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 transaction approved
in this Resolution. The General Manager and General Counsel are further authorized to approve
minor, or technical revisions to the Grant of Access Easement and Quitclaim Deed that do not
involve any substantial change to any terms of these transactional documents, 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 ______, 2014, 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
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
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
Wickett Access Easement, Tunitas Creek Open Space Preserve
April, 2014
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
T
u
n
i
t
a
s
_
C
r
e
e
k
\
W
i
c
k
e
t
t
\
W
i
c
k
e
t
t
_
a
c
c
e
s
s
_
8
5
x
1
1
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
m
o
n
t
g
o
m
e
r
y
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
0 0.70.35Miles
I
(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.
Area ofDetail
Road
WickettProperty100 acres
Private Property
MROSD Preserves
£¤35
£¤280
Tunitas Creek
Purisima CreekRedwoods
El Cortede Madera
Wickett AccessEasement
TunitasCreek R o a d
Mitchel Creek
E a s t F o r k T u n i t a s C r e e k
ElCorte
de
Madera
C
r
e
e
k
LobitosCreek
LobitosCreekRoad
Entire Wickett Property
Access Portion of Wickett Property
TunitasCreek
N ativ e S o n s Ro a d
StarHill
Road
Attachment 2
R-14-78
Meeting 14-12
May 14, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 4
AGENDA ITEM
Purchase of a Prefabricated Vault Restroom for the Bald Mountain Parking Area
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the General Manager to execute a purchase order with CXT Concrete Buildings, Inc.,
under the National Joint Powers Alliance contract, for a prefabricated concrete restroom to be
installed at the new Bald Mountain Parking Area in Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve, for an
amount not-to-exceed $50,000.
SUMMARY
The General Manager proposes to purchase a prefabricated restroom for the Bald Mountain
Parking Area under the National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) contract for a total cost not-to-
exceed $50,000. The NJPA cooperative purchasing process has proven to be efficient and cost
effective and was utilized for the same type of facility during the Mindego Gateway Staging
Area project. Existing funds allocated to the Mount Umunhum Bald Mountain Parking Area
Project (Project) as part of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2014-15 Budget are sufficient to cover the
restroom costs, which would then be reimbursed by a Coastal Conservancy grant.
DISCUSSION
Construction of the Bald Mountain Parking Area, which the Board of Directors approved in 2012
as part of the Mount Umunhum Environmental Restoration and Public Access Project (R-12-
104), will include installation of a double vault restroom. The Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District’s (District's) ability to purchase a restroom through an existing NJPA contract
with CXT Concrete Buildings, Inc., (CXT) provides a significant cost savings and greatly
streamlines the bidding and purchasing process. NJPA contracts meet the District’s bidding and
purchasing requirements: contracts are widely solicited, competitively bid, and awarded on
behalf of NJPA current and potential government member agencies. Consistent with the Board-
adopted Public Contract Bidding, Vendor and Professional Consultant Selection and Purchasing
Policy, the District can enter into cooperative purchasing agreements to purchase goods or
services at a price established by another entity through a competitive bidding process, consistent
with California public bidding requirements (Section III.C., Cooperative Purchasing).
The total cost of the restroom through the NJPA cooperative agreement, which includes vault
excavation, delivery of the prefabricated concrete structure, and installation, is quoted at
R-14-78 Page 2
$42,242. In comparison, purchase and installation of a similar double vault structure via the
general contractor for the El Corte de Madera Creek Staging Area cost approximately $71,000,
and involved a lengthy, complicated process when the restroom was discovered to be unavailable
within the desired installation timeframe. CXT has confirmed availability of the restroom within
the required construction window for the Bald Mountain Parking Area.
The District recently purchased and installed a single vault CXT restroom under the General
Manager’s purchasing authority using this same cooperative purchasing agreement for the
Mindego Gateway Staging Area. Service provided by CXT was exemplary, and the restroom
meets District quality and maintenance standards.
Given the high quality service, reduced cost, quality product, and streamlined purchasing process
that the District has experienced with working under the NJPA contract and in previously
purchasing a CXT restroom, the General Manager recommends entering into a separate contract
with CXT to purchase a new restroom for the Bald Mountain Parking Area for a total cost not-to-
exceed $50,000 using an our existing NJPA contract.
FISCAL IMPACT
Purchase of the restroom is estimated to cost no more than $50,000, which is included in the
$660,000 FY2014-15 construction budget for the Bald Mountain Parking Area Project. This cost
will be fully reimbursed by a $1M Coastal Conservancy Grant awarded to the Mount Umunhum
Project.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
There was no Committee review for this agenda item.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Construction of the Bald Mountain Parking Area project was analyzed under the California
Environmental Quality Act as part of the Mount Umunhum Environmental Restoration and
Public Access Project (Report R-12-104). No significant effects on the environment will occur
as a result of the project.
NEXT STEPS
If approved by the Board, staff will prepare a purchase order for the restroom utilizing the NJPA
contract.
Responsible Department Head:
Meredith Manning, Co-Acting Planning Manager
Prepared by:
Lisa Bankosh, Planner III
R-14-77
Meeting 14-12
May 14, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 5
AGENDA ITEM
Grant Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for Funding Assistance
for the Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt a Resolution approving the terms and conditions of the proposed grant agreement
with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for funding assistance for the
Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project;
2. Authorize the General Manager to execute the Grant Agreement prior to submission of a
request to the Grantor for disbursement of grant funds.
SUMMARY
In March 2012, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) Board of Directors
authorized an application for grant funding through the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) Fisheries Restoration Grant Program (FRGP) (R-12-34). The District was not
selected for funding during the 2012 grant cycle. District staff worked with CDFW staff and
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) representatives to incorporate suggested changes in
an effort to be more competitive and resubmitted for the 2013 grant cycle. Details of the
resubmitted 2013 grant application can be found in the June 12, 2013 report to the Board (R-13-
58). The District was notified in February of this year that its 2013 proposal was selected for
funding, in the amount of $230,970 for the Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio
Creek Project located in the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. In order to receive these
funds, the granting agency requires a Resolution from the Board of Directors approving the
terms and conditions (Attachment 1) and authorization for the General Manager to enter into the
Grant Agreement to complete the project.
DISCUSSION
The Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project involves watershed
restoration activities that will be undertaken on roads within the Driscoll Ranch portion of the La
Honda Creek Open Space Preserve (Attachment 2). The District acquired the Driscoll Ranch
property in 2005. The existing road network on this portion of the preserve was created as a
result of the more than 100 year ranching history as well as to provide access to the former La
Honda oil field that is located on a portion of the property. Unfortunately, this road network has
not been maintained well since originally constructed, resulting in erosion and sediment delivery
to the adjacent creeks.
R-14-77 Page 2
The project targets a reduction in sediment input from the rural road sources within the
Harrington, Bogess and La Honda Creek drainages, which are tributaries to San Gregorio Creek.
San Gregorio Creek is a sediment impaired watershed that is habitat for two federal and state
endangered fish species: Coho salmon and steelhead. Sediment is a known limiting factor for
these species as it impacts their ability to breed and thrive within a stream. In 2012, the NMFS
issued the Central California Coast Coho Recovery plan and identified core areas (those with
highest priority for immediate action) within the San Gregorio Creek Watershed. A presentation
of this plan and core areas within the District lands was presented to the Board on October 24,
2012 (R-12-105). Project sites are located within these core areas.
The District received notice in February 2014, that its Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San
Gregorio Creek Project was selected for funding in the amount of $230,970. The District has
until March 31, 2017 to complete the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
The total project cost is $354,015, with $230,970 to be provided by the CDFW. Matching funds
required from the District total $123,045 which includes $40,152 in administrative overhead and
staff time as “in-kind” match. The FY2014-15 budget approved by the Board in March, 2014
included $50,000 for this project. In FY2015-16, the remaining project funds will be
recommended for the Board’s consideration to cover the total cost of the project, including grant
matching funds which will be provided as reimbursement to the District.
The following table presents the anticipated cost breakdown for this project over the next 2
years. It is important to note, that these estimates assume completing all of the on the ground
construction in one season. However, it may become apparent that work needs to be spread over
two construction seasons (due to a limited work window due to species concerns, equipment
availability, or other unanticipated issues). In the event this occurs, any unfinished work will be
budgeted for in FY2016-17. This flexibility allows the District to bid and complete the project by
the grant imposed deadline of March 31, 2017.
Table 1.
Fiscal Year Anticipated Total Project
Cost
CDFW FRGP
Share
MROSD Share
Direct Cost “In-kind”
FY2014-15 $50,000 (approved) $1,000 $29,998 $19,002
FY2015-16 $304,015 (to be requested) $229,970 $52,895 $21,150
TOTAL $354,015 $230,970 $82,893 $40,152
In addition to the costs outlined above, in an effort to make the District’s project more
competitive, $25,000 was expended in FY2013-14 to complete important cattle exclusion
fencing along the Harrington Creek riparian corridor and to implement important road erosion
prevention projects. These project components were included in the project proposal when
initially submitted in 2012, however the project was not awarded funding.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
The Planning and Natural Resources Committee previously reviewed the project May 21, 2013 and the
staff proposal to complete important cattle exclusion fencing along the Harrington Creek and to
implement important road erosion prevention projects.
R-14-77 Page 3
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The Resolution approving the terms and condition and authorizing the General Manager to
execute the Grant Agreement are covered by the Mitigated Negative Declaration that was
prepared for implementation of the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve Master Plan that was
approved by the Board in August 2012 (R-12-83).
NEXT STEPS
Upon receipt of a signed grant agreement by the CDFW (anticipated June 2014), staff will begin
to expend the $50,000 allocated in the FY2014-15 budget for this project. These funds are
designated for planning and development of contract documents, including preparation of final
grading plans and specifications, related technical investigations, permitting, and bid package
development. Implementation of the work is anticipated to occur over two construction seasons
(2015 and 2016). Once construction bids are received and evaluated, staff will return to the
Board to obtain approval for the recommended contractor(s). Throughout the grant period, staff
will submit for eligible grant reimbursement of funds. Final grant reporting and dispersal of
funds will be completed by March 2017.
Attachments
1. Resolution Approving the Proposed Terms and Conditions of a Grant Agreement to
Receive Grant Funds from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for the
Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project P1330405
2. Project Map
Responsible Department Head:
Kirk Lenington, Natural Resources
Prepared by:
Julie Andersen, Planner II, Natural Resources
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2014-14-__/CDFW Grant_Driscoll Sediment Reduction 1
RESOLUTION NO. 14-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT APPROVING THE PROPOSED TERMS AND
CONDITIONS OF A GRANT AGREEMENT TO RECEIVE
GRANT FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FOR THE
DRISCOLL RANCH SEDIMENT REDUCTION TO SAN
GREGORIO CREEK PROJECT P1330405
WHEREAS, the Legislature has established the Fisheries Restoration Grant Program
administered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Grantor) to award grants to
public agencies, Indian Tribes, and nonprofit organizations to implement restoration activities
that benefit the preservation and recovery of anadromous salmonids; and
WHEREAS, the District operates the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve including the
former Driscoll Ranch which is located within an area identified in the NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service, 2012 Central California Coast Coho Recovery plan as a core area (highest
priority) for immediate action within the San Gregorio Creek Watershed; and
WHEREAS, the District’s mission includes the protection and restoration of the natural
environment; and
WHEREAS, the District has been selected as a grantee to receive grant funds awarded
under eligibility guidelines adopted by the Grantor; and
WHEREAS, procedures established by the grantor require the grantee to certify, through a
resolution that the grantee approves the terms and conditions of the proposed Grant Agreement
to complete the Driscoll Ranch Sediment Reduction to San Gregorio Creek Project and agrees to
enter into the Grant Agreement prior to submission of a request to the Grantor for disbursement
of grant funds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District hereby:
1. Certifies that the District has reviewed the proposed Grant Agreement and agrees to the
proposed terms and conditions; and
2. Certifies that the District has or will have available the required match and sufficient
funds to complete the funded project; and
3. Certifies that the District has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the
Project; and
4. Delegates the authority to the General Manager, as agent and representative of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, to conduct all negotiations, execute and
submit all documents, including, but not limited to, agreements, amendments, payment
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2014-14-__/CDFW Grant_Driscoll Sediment Reduction 2
requests, and so on, which may be necessary to comply with the Grantor’s grant
requirements and for completion of the Project.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District on May 14, 2014, 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
51
50 49
48
53.1
4746
43
42
58 54 16
13
11
9
6
57 55
54.256
36
15.1
40
·|}þ84
·|}þ84
La Honda
La
H
o
n
d
a
R
o
a
d
41
21
23
22
24
25
26
San Gregorio Creek
Kingston Creek
L a Honda Creek
Pine Tree Gulch
Bogess Creek
Harrington Creek
San Gregorio Creek
L
a
H
o
n
d
a
C
r
e
e
k
Kingston Creek
Alpine Creek
La Honda Creek
Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space District
Project Location
May, 2013
Pa
t
h
:
G
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
L
a
_
H
o
n
d
a
_
C
r
e
e
k
\
C
D
F
_
F
i
s
h
e
r
i
e
s
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
G
r
a
n
t
\
2
0
1
3
D
r
i
s
c
o
l
l
R
a
n
c
h
_
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
_
Q
u
a
d
.
m
x
d
Cr
e
a
t
e
d
B
y
:
j
a
n
d
e
r
s
e
n
LA HONDA
WOODSIDE PALO ALTO
MINDEGO HILL
BIG BASINFRANKLIN POINT
0 0.950.475Miles
I
(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.
Area ofDetail La Honda CreekOpen Space Preserve
!Project Sites
Linear Project Sites
MROSD Preserve
Minor Unpaved Road
Seasonal Unpaved Ranch Road
Minor Paved Road
Major RoadCoastal Zone Boundary
Attachment 2
R-14-27
Meeting 14-12
May 14, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 6
AGENDA ITEM
Appointment of Marianne Chance as a District Peace Officer
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution appointing Marianne Chance as a District Peace Officer.
SUMMARY
Marianne Chance has met all of the requirements for appointment as a District Peace Officer,
including completion of a California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) PC 832 class.
Adoption of the attached resolution is required to complete the process of appointing her as a
District Peace Officer.
DISCUSSION
At its meeting on January 14, 1976, the Board of Directors determined that District rangers were
to be appointed peace officers as classified by California Penal Code Section 830.31(b). The
code specifies that a person is a peace officer if he/she is designated by a local agency as a park
ranger and regularly employed and paid in that capacity, if the primary duty of the officer is the
protection of park and other property of the agency and the preservation of the peace therein
(R-76-2).
Since January 2010 the Operations Manager has been conducting a swearing-in ceremony for all
newly appointed District Peace Officers. The Operations Manager will orally administer the
written oath that all District Rangers sign and have this act performed before the Board of
Directors (R-10-03).
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Training and outfitting costs associated
with this Ranger position were approved by the Board in the FY2013-14 District budget.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
No committee review is required for this action.
R-14-27 Page 2
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and no
environmental review is required.
NEXT STEPS
Once appointed, Ms. Chance will continue with her current training schedule. After her training
is completed, which is anticipated to be in July 2014, she will assume the full spectrum of ranger
duties.
Attachment:
1. Resolution Appointing Marianne Chance as a Peace Officer
Responsible Department Head:
Michael Newburn, Acting Operations Manager
Prepared by:
Gordon Baillie, Management Analyst II
Attachment 1
Resolutions/2014/14-__/Appoint Marianne Chance as Peace Officer
RESOLUTION NO. 14-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
APPOINTING MARIANNE CHANCE AS A
PEACE OFFICER
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does hereby resolve
as follows:
The following person is hereby designated as a peace officer of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District pursuant to Section 830.31(b) of the Penal Code of
the State of California, to enforce the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Land Use Regulations and those city, county, and state regulations related to the
protection and safe use of District land, enforcement of which is specifically
authorized by the District:
MARIANNE CHANCE
********************************************
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District on May 14, 2014, 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
R-14-79
Meeting 14-12
May 14, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 7
AGENDA ITEM
Adoption of Board Policy 2.02, “Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process”
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Board Policy 2.02, “Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process,” as recommended
by the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee.
SUMMARY
Following completion of evaluations for the District’s Board Appointees for the FY2012-13
review period, the Board referred to the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee (Committee) a
review of the current evaluation process. On December 17, 2013, the Committee reviewed and
discussed information regarding various processes available for conducting Board Appointee
Performance Evaluations and directed the General Manager to prepare a draft policy and return
to the Committee for further review. On April 8, 2014, the Committee reviewed and discussed a
draft Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process policy and directed the General Manager
to make several final revisions and to forward the final policy to the full Board for consideration.
The recommended policy, provided as Attachment 1, establishes a clear process and timeline for
appointee evaluations and, if adopted, will help make the evaluation process and timeline
consistent from year to year.
DISCUSSION
The Board’s three appointees – General Manager, District Controller, and General Counsel –
receive annual performance evaluations from the Board of Directors. The Committee was
established to carry out this evaluation process, serve as the District’s negotiator, and meet with
the Board Appointees to discuss their performance and compensation. The previous year’s
evaluation process included several meetings with the appointees, closed sessions with the Board
to discuss performance and compensation, and compensation information researched and
provided by Human Resources staff. The process began in May and took approximately six
months, with the final compensation for the Board Appointees approved in a public meeting on
October 23, 2013.
Upon completion of the Board Appointees’ evaluations, both the Board and the appointees
expressed interest in improving and streamlining the District’s appointee performance evaluation
process. Staff presented alternative evaluation processes and best practices for potential process
improvements to the Committee on December 17, 2013. Staff’s research, which was based on
surveys of seven nearby cities as well as consultant input from BHI Consulting (Brent Ives), a
R-14-79 Page 2
firm that consults with cities as well as many special districts, identified a list of key factors to be
considered in designing an appointee evaluation process (Attachment 2, Committee Report from
December 17, 2013). The process recommended by the Committee incorporates all of the key
factors as follows:
• Annual review: Regular, annual reviews are important to establish expectations and
measure performance.
• Establishing a policy: A written evaluation process policy is beneficial to maintaining a
consistent practice from year to year, particularly as Board members or appointees
change.
• Setting a timeline: Establishing a timeline in the policy is critical in order to complete the
process in a timely fashion, not letting key steps languish. The policy provides for a three
month process (once the appointee summary report is submitted to the Board within six
weeks after the end of the fiscal year).
• Use of a subcommittee: For many steps in the process, use of a smaller committee allows
better adherence to the timeline.
• Appointee summary report: An appointee’s written performance summary memo,
summarizing accomplishments for the past year and goals for the new year, is a key
starting point for the evaluation process.
• Use of an evaluation form: Use of an evaluation form can help provide consistency from
year to year. A recommended form is provided as an attachment to the draft policy.
• Confidentiality: Performance evaluations are to remain confidential.
• Closed Sessions: Appointee evaluations are to be conducted in closed Board and
Committee meetings.
• Use of consultants: The policy provides for an alternative process if the Board was
inclined to use consultant/facilitator expertise in the process in any given year.
• Comparator agency compensation survey: The policy provides for the Board to direct
Human Resources to conduct a compensation survey to inform the compensation part of
the appointee evaluation process.
• Performance goals driven by District goals: Aligning appointee goals with the
organization’s annual goals is critical. Currently, the District’s Strategic Plan and annual
Action Plan are the goal-setting processes/documents that should inform the appointees’
performance goals for the new year.
• Public meetings: After evaluations are complete and compensation for the appointees is
agreed upon in closed sessions, final approval of compensation is to be considered by the
Board in a public meeting.
The process recommended in the policy begins with the Committee chairperson working with
the District Clerk and the General Manager’s Office to establish specific dates for Committee
and Board meetings. Setting these meeting dates well in advance, followed by everyone
involved in the process working diligently to meet the established timeline, is essential in order
to complete the evaluation process within several months. The process entails two to three
Board closed session meetings, two Committee closed session meetings, and one Board open
session meeting at the end for any compensation adjustments.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the General Manager’s recommendation. If an
alternative evaluation process were directed by the Board in a particular year, any potential fiscal
impact related to the alternative process would need to be evaluated at that time.
R-14-79 Page 3
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
On December 17, 2013, the Committee reviewed and discussed information regarding various
processes available for conducting Board Appointee Performance Evaluations and directed the
General Manager to prepare a draft policy and return to the Committee for further review
(Approved minutes provided as Attachment 3). On April 8, 2014, the Committee reviewed and
discussed a draft Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process policy and directed the
General Manager to make several final revisions and to forward the final policy to the full Board
for consideration (Draft minutes provided as Attachment 4).
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This agenda item is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEPS
If the Board adopts the recommended policy, the appointee evaluation process for FY2013-14
performance will begin immediately in order to stay as close to the process schedule as possible
for this year. If the policy is not adopted at this time, the Committee will reconvene immediately
to determine next steps in this year’s evaluation process. Either way, the District Clerk has
begun work on preliminary scheduling and District staff, as well as Board appointees, have
begun work on preparing accomplishments summary documents to inform whatever evaluation
process is implemented this year.
ALTERNATIVES
The Board may wish to consider the following alternatives to the General Manager’s
recommendation:
1. Do not adopt the policy at this time and provide direction to the Committee concerning
additional work on the policy;
2. Adopt the policy contingent on specific revisions to the policy that are approved by a
majority of the Board prior to adoption.
Attachments
1. Draft Board Policy 2.02, “Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process”
2. Committee Report from December 17, 2013
3. Committee minutes from December 17, 2013
4. Committee draft minutes from April 8, 2014
Prepared by:
Kevin S. Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Board Appointee Evaluation Committee Members:
Cecily Harris
Jed Cyr
Pete Siemens
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board Policy Manual
Board Appointee Performance
Evaluation Process
Policy 2.02
Chapter 2 – Personnel & Board Support
Effective Date: Revised Date: Not applicable
Prior Versions: Not applicable
Board Policy 2.02 Page 1 of 3
Purpose
To establish procedures governing performance evaluations for Board appointees – General
Manager, General Counsel, and Controller.
Policy
The Board of Directors shall follow the process described below for evaluating the performance
of its appointees.
1. No later than the last month of the fiscal year1
, the Chairperson of the Board Appointee
Evaluation Committee (BAE), with assistance from the District Clerk and the General
Manager’s Office, shall develop a schedule of specific dates for BAE and Board meetings,
based on the guidance in this policy, for the annual appointee performance evaluation
process. The Committee and appointees shall schedule meetings and accomplish
assigned tasks with the goal of completing the evaluation process within four months of
the end of the previous fiscal year.
2. The BAE shall communicate in writing with each appointee individually prior to the end
of the fiscal year to initiate the performance review process. The communication may
include topics such as:
a. The procedures and timeline for the evaluation process, including confirmation
of whether the standard Appointee Evaluation Form should be used (Attachment
2.02a) or whether there are any suggested revisions to the standard form
b. Any particular areas of emphasis the BAE wishes to make an appointee aware of
prior to the beginning of the evaluation process;
c. Any process issues relative to compensation, such as whether Human Resources
will be directed to complete a comparator agency appointee compensation
survey and any details related to the process for conducting such a survey.
d. Any particular areas of discussion and potential change to the appointees’
contracts not specifically related to compensation.
1 Currently March. If the Fiscal Year is changed to July-June, then month references in this policy will be updated
accordingly.
3. Before the end of the second week of May, each Board appointee shall prepare a
memorandum to the Board to include information regarding the following topics:
a. A summary of issues and accomplishments for the past fiscal year. The Action
Plan for the prior fiscal year and the List of Major Accomplishments compiled by
District staff shall serve as a guide to Board appointees in the development of
their summary of accomplishments;
b. A list of goals for the upcoming fiscal year based on the Action Plan adopted by
the Board prior to the beginning of the current fiscal year;
c. Any specific issues an appointee would like to discuss during the evaluation
process;
d. Any particular areas of discussion and potential changes to the appointees’
contracts not specifically related to compensation;
e. Optional: The appointee may also raise compensation issues in this
memorandum. Compensation issues may also be verbally raised during the
Board-Appointee closed session meetings described in Steps 4 and 5 below.
4. The Board shall meet in mid-May in closed session to hear presentations by the Board
appointees regarding their written memoranda. Two closed sessions on different days
may be necessary to allow time for all three appointees. Following the appointee’s
presentation and question and answer and discussion, the appointee will be excused
from the session in order for the Board members to discuss amongst themselves and
provide their verbal input to BAE members to be reflected in the written evaluations. If
follow-up questions are identified for appointee response, the BAE Chairperson will
provide such questions in writing to the appointees as soon as possible.
5. The BAE shall hold a follow-up closed session committee meeting as soon as possible
following completion of Step 4 above to begin discussion and preparation of appointee
evaluations. If follow-up questions were identified for appointee response in Step 4, the
BAE will hear appointees’ verbal responses or will review appointees’ written responses.
6. The BAE Chairperson, with assistance from the other BAE members, shall be responsible
for compiling input from each Board member into a written evaluation and confirm that
the wording of the written evaluation is consistent with the full Board’s input from the
closed session described in Step 4. The BAE Chairperson shall deliver the written
evaluations to appointees by the end of the second week of June.
7. The Board shall meet by the third week of June in closed session to: (1) review written
evaluations with appointees; and (2) provide “financial parameters” to the BAE
Chairperson and BAE members to guide compensation negotiations with appointees.
If the BAE had requested from Human Resources a compensation survey be prepared as
part of Step 2 above, the survey results shall be made available to the Board at this time.
8. The BAE shall meet with appointees individually as soon as possible after Step 7, but no
later than the second week of July to discuss compensation adjustments, as necessary.
Typically, appointees shall receive the Competitive Market Increases provided to other
unrepresented employees. The adjustment is to be implemented at the Board’s
discretion. If further direction on compensation is needed from the Board, another
closed session will be scheduled.
9. If additional compensation adjustments are to be implemented for individual
appointees, the BAE shall instruct Human Resources to prepare Board agenda items on
appointee compensation to be on the Board’s agenda no later than the first regular
Board meeting in August. Salary increases will customarily be retroactive to the
beginning of the current fiscal year. However, retroactivity is not mandatory.
10. Board appointees will also be considered annually for a merit award of up to 5% of base
pay. Such merit awards are intended to recognize exceptional performance during any
given year. This merit pay, if awarded, is a one-time lump sum payment, will not adjust
the salary rate, and will not be added to the appointee’s base salary for the purpose of
computing life insurance coverage or long-term disability wages.
11. Within two weeks following the final closed session regarding compensation, the Board
appointees will be provided a final copy of their evaluation to sign and file with Human
Resources as required by CalPERS. In addition, the Board appointees will be provided a
Board approved contract that includes any amendments or updates negotiated earlier
in the evaluation process for their signature and filing with Human Resources. Once
negotiated, contract amendments typically will be processed by Human Resources, with
consult from the Deputy General Counsel or Assistant General Manager(s) as necessary,
unless third-party legal assistance is necessary.
This policy acknowledges that other formal and informal methods of Board-Appointee
communications, goal-setting and performance evaluations exist. This policy does not preclude
the use of these other methods.
Alternative Process
1. If any member of the Board would like to recommend to the full Board that an
alternative process be implemented, such as utilization of a professional
facilitator/consultant for that year’s evaluation process, then three months before the
end of the fiscal year this suggestion should be raised and discussed in a Board closed
session to determine if a majority of the Board concurs.
2. If a facilitator/consultant is to be utilized, the Board shall identify funding and the BAE
shall carry out a search and selection process for the facilitator, such that a facilitator is
hired before the end of the fiscal year. The BAE shall work with the hired facilitator to
develop a schedule with specific dates and process/steps for the upcoming performance
evaluation process.
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
BOARD APPOINTEE EVALUATION FORM
PART I – EVALUATION OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS
In this section, the planned goals and performance standards listed in the previous year’s
evaluation will be reviewed and accomplishments during the evaluation period related to
those goals and standards are to be highlighted. Unplanned accomplishments may also be
highlighted in this section. The Board Appointee’s Performance Memorandum (as required
by Section 3.a of the Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process Policy 2.02) shall
inform the goals, performance standards and accomplishments reviewed in this section.
PART II – EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE FACTORS
In this section, the performance factors listed in the previous year’s evaluation will be
reviewed and key areas of success, as well as any areas for improvement, are to be
highlighted. Although the intention is not to necessarily rate every performance factor, the
written and verbal discussions can refer to the following rating categories for consistency:
• Consistently exceeded expectations;
• Met expectations and occasionally exceeded expectations;
• Met expectations;
• Occasionally failed to meet expectations;
• Consistently failed to meet expectations
Performance factors for the Board Appointee may vary from year to year, but should
typically address the areas of performance listed in Attachments 1, 2, and 3 corresponding to
each Appointee.
PART III – PLANNED GOALS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR THE NEXT
EVALUATION PERIOD
In this section, goals and performance standards for the next evaluation period will be listed.
The Board Appointee’s Performance Memorandum (as required by Section 3.b of the Board
Appointee Performance Evaluation Process Policy 2.02) shall inform the goals and
performance standards listed in this section, and will typically be based on the Action Plan
adopted by the Board prior to the beginning of the current evaluation period.
PART IV – OVERALL EVALUATION
In this section, an overall evaluating rating shall be given and any final comments. The
ratings shall be as follows:
• Consistently exceeded expectations;
• Met expectations and occasionally exceeded expectations;
• Met expectations;
• Occasionally failed to meet expectations;
• Consistently failed to meet expectations
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
Attachment 1
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
GENERAL MANAGER PERFORMANCE FACTORS
Performance factors are to be addressed in Part II of the Evaluation Form. Performance factors
for the General Manager may vary from year to year, but should typically address the following
areas of performance:
1. How well were goals met?
a. Timeliness
b. Completeness
c. Personal Initiative
2. Relationship with public.
a. District image upheld/improved;
b. Collaboration;
c. Responsiveness
i. Requests/questions from the public were answered in a timely,
informative and respectful manner
ii. Public outreach was emphasized
iii. The perspective of “looking at the District through the eyes of the
public” was emphasized and modeled
3. Overall Results and Organizational Effectiveness
a. Achieves action plan and strategic plan goals;
b. Adjusts organization and staffing to maximize productivity,
c. Cost effectiveness
d. New opportunities/challenges were evaluated and acted upon appropriately
e. The District’s stature in the community was enhanced
4. Professional development
For Staff:
a. Training and hiring reflected in overall improvement of work products and
processes.
b. Models leadership, vision, ethics, mentoring and clear decision-making to
staff
For Self:
c. Meet with key community leaders and groups
d. Develop leadership role, representing District, in local community.
5. Key partner or adjacent agency relations
a. Maintain collaborative relationships with key partners in San Mateo, Santa
Clara and Santa Cruz Counties to advance protection and management of
open space.
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
General Manager Performance Factors (continued)
6. Relationship with Board
a. Responsiveness to Board requests;
b. Promote transparent organization;
c. Manage Board-Staff interface;
d. Dignify Board process by personal example.
7. Fiscal business management
a. Develop long-range financial management capacity;
b. Improve budget monitoring capability;
c. Protect District’s excellent financial position;
d. Keeps expenditures within approved budgets.
8. Relationship with other Board Appointees
a. Establish and maintain trust, collaboration and meaningful working
relationships with other Board appointees;
b. Recognize and support different roles
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
Attachment 2
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
GENERAL COUNSEL PERFORMANCE FACTORS
Performance factors are to be addressed in Part II of the Evaluation Form. Performance factors
for General Counsel may vary from year to year, but should typically address the following areas
of performance:
1. How well were goals met?
a. Timeliness;
b. Completeness;
c. Personal Initiative.
2. Track, oversee, and direct all litigation
a. Provides timely updates to the Board;
b. Seeks Board direction where needed.
3. Professional development
For Staff:
a. Provide training and legal guidance for staff and volunteers in matters
affecting the District;
b. Continue to mentor and oversee Assistant General Counsel and generally
model leadership, ethics, mentoring and clear decision-making to staff
For Self:
c. Continue to pursue collaboration and continuing education opportunities in
field of local government legal practice.
4. Relationship with Board
a. Responsiveness to Board requests;
b. Promote transparent organization;
c. Dignify Board process by personal example.
5. Relationship with other Board Appointees
a. Establish and maintain trust, collaboration and meaningful working
relationships with other Board appointees;
b. Recognize and support different roles.
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
Performance factors are to be addressed in Part II of the Evaluation Form. Performance factors
for the Controller may vary from year to year, but should typically address the following areas of
performance:
1. How well were goals met?
a. Timeliness;
b. Completeness;
c. Personal Initiative.
2. Relationship with Board
a. Responsiveness to Board requests;
b. Promote transparent organization;
c. Dignify Board process by personal example.
3. Relationship with other Board Appointees
a. Establish and maintain trust, collaboration and meaningful working
relationships with other Board appointees;
b. Recognize and support different roles;
c. Effective working relationship with other Board appointees’ staff as necessary
for Controller’s goals
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
Attachment 3
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
CONTROLLER PERFORMANCE FACTORS
Performance factors are to be addressed in Part II of the Evaluation Form. Performance factors
for the Controller may vary from year to year, but should typically address the following areas of
performance:
1. How well were goals met?
a. Timeliness;
b. Completeness;
c. Personal Initiative.
2. Relationship with Board
a. Responsiveness to Board requests;
b. Promote transparent organization;
c. Dignify Board process by personal example.
3. Relationship with other Board Appointees
a. Establish and maintain trust, collaboration and meaningful working
relationships with other Board appointees;
b. Recognize and support different roles;
c. Effective working relationship with other Board appointees’ staff as necessary
for Controller’s goals.
BPM 2.02(a) Evaluation Form
BOARD APPOINTEE EVALUATION COMMITTEE
R-13-121
December 17, 2013
AGENDA ITEM 1
AGENDA ITEM
Information on the Board Appointee Evaluation Process
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Review and discuss information regarding various processes available for conducting Board
Appointee Performance Evaluations and determine next steps for developing a process for the
upcoming evaluation period(s).
SUMMARY
Following completion of evaluations for the District’s Board Appointees for FY2012-13 review
period, the Board referred to the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee (Committee) a review of
the current evaluation process. In preparation for the Committee’s review and to inform the
Committee’s consideration of whether to recommend changes to the process to the full Board,
District staff surveyed numerous local agencies and reviewed information submitted by BHI
Management Consulting to gather information on various processes for conducting appointee
evaluations. This report provides a summary of information gathered from these local agencies and
identifies key factors for consideration when developing an evaluation process.
DISCUSSION
The Board’s three appointees, the General Manager, the District Controller, and the General
Counsel receive an annual performance evaluation and potential compensation adjustment.
The Committee was established to carry out this evaluation process, serve as the District’s
negotiator, and meet with the Board Appointees to discuss their performance and compensation.
This year’s evaluation process included several meetings with the appointees, closed sessions with
the Board to discuss performance and compensation, and compensation information researched and
provided by Human Resources staff. The process began in May, lasted approximately six months,
with the final compensation for the Board Appointees approved in a public meeting on October 23,
2013.
Upon completion of the Board Appointees’ evaluations, both the Board and the appointees
expressed interest in improving and streamlining the District’s performance evaluation process.
Staff was directed to research and return to the Committee with alternative methods and best
practices for potential process improvements.
Attachment 2
R-13-121 Page 2
Survey of Other Agencies’ Processes
District staff conducted a survey of seven nearby cities to determine best practices for appointee
evaluations. The cities surveyed included Campbell, Los Altos, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Santa
Clara, Sunnyvale and Palo Alto. The survey included gathering data by emailing survey questions,
conducting interviews with Human Resources staff and Council appointees in the survey agencies,
reviewing policies from the survey cities, and information from other HR professionals.
All of the surveyed cities conduct an evaluation process for their appointees and all of the
appointees report directly to the City Council. In almost all of the cities the Board Appointee group
consists of the City Manager, the City Attorney and the City Clerk. In the case of some of the
smaller agencies in which the City Attorney is a contract position or the City Clerk reports to the
City Manager, the City Council does not evaluate them.
Key Process Factors for Consideration
The following is a list of key factors staff identified from its research, in addition to factors
discussed in a summary report from BHI Consulting (Brent Ives), provided as Attachment 1.
Annual Review: Each agency conducts an annual review of the appointees. Some agencies
determine from year to year that the reviews may be more limited in scope, depending upon
external factors such as limited budget or time constraints.
Performance Review Policy for Appointees: Only the larger agencies surveyed, such as
Mountain View and Sunnyvale, have a formal written policy which details the process for
appointee performance review. Sunnyvale is in the process of reevaluating their current
processes. The other agencies surveyed rely on past practices to guide the appointee
evaluation process instead of a written policy.
Setting an Annual Time frame and Schedule for Evaluation and Review: In the larger
agencies, the appointee review process begins by confirming the time frame and key
milestones in the process. Mountain View also sets a schedule that identifies when closed
sessions and various Council meetings will be devoted to evaluation.
Subcommittees: Several of the agencies utilize a subcommittee which may, for example,
consist of the Mayor and Vice Mayor to facilitate the evaluative process, work directly with
the appointees, give the evaluation to the appointees and negotiate the compensation. These
subcommittees also serve to establish and drive the timeline for the evaluation process.
Appointees prepare a summary report for Council to serve as a tool for evaluation: In
almost all cases, the appointees are required to prepare a report to provide details of issues,
significant accomplishments and goals for the upcoming performance year. In some
agencies the City Manager directs the Executive Team (typically Department Heads) to
provide information on their significant accomplishments and upcoming goals and this
information is then included in the City Manager’s report to Council.
Performance Evaluation Form: The larger agencies use an evaluation form for the
appointee to complete for Council review. In the case of one city, the evaluation is given to
the appointee, and each Council member also completes an evaluation form on the
appointee’s performance. Other agencies rely on the appointees’ summary report for the
evaluation.
Attachment 2
R-13-121 Page 3
Question and Answer Session with the Appointees: In one agency the Council works with
their evaluation subcommittee to develop specific questions to ask the appointees after the
Council has received the appointees’ own report or performance evaluation. In a closed
session Q&A with the Council and facilitated by the subcommittee members, each appointee
has the opportunity to answer Council members’ questions. This Q&A session is factored
into the evaluation process timeline and allows for open dialogue with the Council and the
appointees in a structured format.
Confidential Evaluation Report: In all cases the Council prepares and presents a
confidential report to the appointees. And in all cases, this report is placed in the
appointees’ confidential file. In some agencies these files are maintained by Council, and no
other staff has access to the file. In other agencies the files are maintained by other
confidential agency staff.
Consultants: Half of the cities reported using a consultant to facilitate the evaluation
process, particularly with a new appointee. Consultants are used in some agencies to
implement 360-degree reviews of the appointee (usually the City Manager). Also,
consultants are used to assist the appointees and Councils with setting performance goals for
the upcoming year. One city has written into their policy that a consultant will be permitted
to facilitate the more in-depth performance review process every three years.
Goal Setting Process: Agencies report using a consultant to work with Council in goal
setting processes for the agency and thereby determine the performance goals for the
appointees as of result of the goal setting process.
Closed Sessions: In all cases, closed sessions were set up with the evaluation subcommittee
and/or the full Council and the appointees to discuss their performance.
Salary Surveys: In all agencies the Council is provided with compensation information,
which is used after the evaluation to help determine the appropriate compensation
adjustment to make for the appointees. Usually Human Resources staff conducts
compensation surveys or provides survey date based on agreed upon local comparator
agencies.
Public Meetings to approve compensation adjustments: In all cases after the evaluation is
complete and the compensation for the appointees is agreed upon, the final approval for
compensation is presented in a public Council meeting.
Many of these factors related to appointee evaluation processes are also emphasized in the BHI
report provided as Attachment 1. One point emphasized by BHI is the creation of a process guide
to clearly articulate the process that will be used year after year and achieve longer-term
consistency. Some agencies adopt a formal Council/Board policy to articulate the process.
FISCAL IMPACT
If a Board Appointee Evaluation process is developed that includes utilizing a consultant to assist
with developing the process, or actually facilitating the process during appointees’ evaluations,
there will be a fiscal impact. The cost of consultant expertise in developing the process would
depend on the scope of work; staff would need to perform additional research following the
Attachment 2
R-13-121 Page 4
Committee’s direction to determine this potential cost. Based on other agencies’ experiences, the
cost of utilizing a consultant to facilitate evaluations could range from $15,000 to $25,000,
depending on the scope of the process.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Review of this information is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality
Act and no environmental review is required.
NEXT STEPS
Review and discuss the various factors for Board Appointee Performance Evaluation processes and
determine next steps toward possible revisions or enhancements to the present Board Appointee
Evaluation process.
Attachment
1. BHI Report on the Development of an Appointee Performance Evaluation Process
Prepared by:
Candice Basnight, Human Resources Supervisor
Responsible Department Head:
Kevin Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Attachment 2
-- BHI Management Consulting --
(209)740-6779
Report on the Development of a Appointee Performance
Evaluation Process for the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Los Altos, CA
December 6, 2013
The process of evaluating a general manager or any appointee of a public
agency provides opportunities for the assessment of performance, professional
growth and appointee conduct, based on clearly outlined position related
expectations and goals. It is clearly the role of the elected or appointed Board to
perform this process with efficiency and professionalism.
To assure that an evaluation process moves through the right steps, with the
right set of people involved, with the right outcomes, the resultant process must
be allotted the proper amount of time. Those involved with the administration of
the process should budget the time needed. The process can take several
weeks from beginning, to the filing of the completed documents. The time needed
often has to do with assuring that the whole Board is properly involved and that
this confidential process is conducted as such.
Part of any evaluation of an executive level employee is for the expectations and
goals to be centered on results and achievements. Thus the evaluation must be
integrated with the results and achievements set by the Board of Trustees.
Therefore, the Board of Directors must consider critical aspects of performance
and success within their District, then send clear messages to the appointee
regarding these performance relative to those critical performance aspects.
Many of the performance aspects of a general manager are clearly spelled out in
a strategic plan with some are commonly expected professional expectations and
still others are very specific goals set by the Board. The Board should have a
high degree of clarity regarding how this process will be conducted each year.
A number of approaches can emerge in establishing the process. The key factors
are listed below.
1. The evaluation year must be established (one year within which the
performance will be judged)
2. Creating a set schedule within which the process is administered
3. Developing a process for the creation of a set of clear Board goals,
expectations and objectives for each appointee.
4. Selecting an evaluation instrument/form.
Attachment 2
Appointee Performance Evaluation Process – MROSD November 29, 2013
-- BHI Management Consulting --
(209)740-6779
5. Ensuring a process for allowing each appointee to provide input on their
annual performance
6. Deciding upon who will facilitate the annual process
7. Outlining the Board’s role in each step of the process toward forging a
collective evaluation of each appointee’s performance
8. Developing the process for providing opportunity for each appointee to hear
from the Board both verbally and in writing regarding their performance, then
providing the opportunity for the appointee to discuss the performance and
participate in the development of goals and expectations for the upcoming
evaluation year.
9. Clarifying the process for how the final signatures will be gathered, and who
and where these personnel confidential documents will be filed, and who has
access, when and under what circumstances. These criteria should be
memorialized in Board policy.
10. Establishing clarity on how this evaluation process does or does not have
direct bearing on the compensation of each appointee. This could potentially
vary with the contract of each appointee.
All of these factors should be addressed in the development of a new Appointee
evaluation process. At the outcome of this effort, the Board should create a
“Board Process Guide for Performance Evaluation of District Appointees”. It is
the process of creating of the guide that forces start-to-finish thought to be allied
to the overall evaluation process. This recommendation is a best practice for the
District.
Options exist for the Board as they decide on how to deal with each factor above
(1-10), how to construct and administer the process in the initial year and how to
administer the process each year after the initial year.
Action options regarding the development of a new appointee performance
evaluation process are:
1. Commission the development of the guide mentioned above to a
committee of the Board to develop the steps, resulting in a guide
document - without assistance.
2. Ask same Board committee to work through the process with assistance
from appropriate inside confidential employee. This should not be any
employee where their performance is determined by one of the
appointees, contracted only to the Board. Instead one of the appointees
with appropriate knowledge of such systems may be able to assist the
Attachment 2
Appointee Performance Evaluation Process – MROSD November 29, 2013
-- BHI Management Consulting --
(209)740-6779
Board committee.
3. Board committee secure outside assistance to develop the process.
The nuances between the contracts with each appointee is also a consideration
for the Board as they decide between options. The differences should be
factored in where need be to assure that each appointee is properly evaluated. It
is recommended that all of the options above include the development of a
“Board Process Guide for Performance Evaluation of District Appointees”. With
this goal in mind, this effort will be a concentrated, “once and for all” effort, and
outline the proper steps for this and future Boards. It also forces the professional
start-to-finish thought necessary for such an important effort.
It is also recommended that the first year evaluation process using the newly
developed Board guide above is facilitated by outside help the first year, thereby
providing the facilitated example and providing a running start that the Board
needs to assure success of the process developed.
I invite your thoughts or questions on this report and am available to the
committee as needed.
Sincerely,
12/6/13
Brent H. Ives, Principal Date
BHI Management Consulting
Attachment 2
Board Appointee EvaluationCommittee
December 17, 2013
*Approved by the Board Appointees Evaluation Committee on April 8, 2014
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD APPOINTEE EVALUATION COMMITTEE
Administration Office – Long Ridge Conference Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
APPROVED MINUTES*
December 17, 2013
I. CALL TO ORDER
Director Cyr called the Special Meeting of the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee (BAE) to
order at 3:01 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Cecily Harris, and Larry Hassett
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: General Counsel Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse,
General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner, and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Motion: Director Hassett moved, and Director Harris seconded a motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 3-0-0
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Agenda Item #1 – Information on the Board Appointee Evaluation Process (R-13-121)
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse provided the staff report summarizing the
research completed by District staff related to Board appointee evaluation best practices. Mr.
Woodhouse outlined various key factors and goals involved in the process as it is developed.
Directors Cyr and Hassett provided a brief summary of their experiences as members of the
Board Appointee Evaluation (BAE) Committee and the various processes used to evaluate Board
appointees during that time.
BAE Committee Page 2
December 17, 2013
Mr. Woodhouse inquired if the Committee is interested in creating a written policy related to
Board Appointee Evaluations.
The Committee members agreed that they would like to create a policy which would be
approved by the full Board of Directors.
Discussion ensued regarding whether the appointees’ evaluations should be tied to the District’s
fiscal year to allow for the appointees to report on accomplishments and budget performance
during the previous fiscal year. Committee members and the Board appointees also discussed
the possible content of the appointees’ report to the Committee to summarize the previous year’s
significant accomplishments, issues resolved, and goals for the next year.
General Manager Steve Abbors stated that he currently creates a performance plan for himself
and would like to see an evaluation process that will allow the BAE Committee to provide
periodic feedback on his progress in accomplishing the items contained in the performance plan.
Discussion ensued regarding whether a facilitator should be utilized as part of the appointee
evaluation process. The Committee members agreed that a facilitator is not currently required,
but the policy should not prohibit the use of a facilitator.
As part of the evaluation process, the District Clerk will schedule BAE Committee meetings, and
the Human Resources Supervisor will provide data regarding appointee compensation and recent
changes to District staff compensation.
Mr. Abbors suggested implementation of a compensation philosophy for the District regarding
salaries for all members of District staff. Brief discussion ensued.
The Committee discussed the next steps for the process stating that staff will return to the
Committee in early 2014 with a draft evaluation form, timeline, and policy.
Public hearing opened at 4:15 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 4:15 p.m.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The next BAE meeting was not scheduled.
Chair Cyr adjourned the Regular Meeting of the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee at 4:23
p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Board Appointee EvaluationCommittee
April 8, 2014
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD APPOINTEE EVALUATION COMMITTEE
Administration Office – Long Ridge Conference Room
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
DRAFT MINUTES
April 8, 2014
I. CALL TO ORDER
Director Harris called the Special Meeting of the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee (BAE)
to order at 2:35 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Cecily Harris, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: General Counsel Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Kevin
Woodhouse, General Counsel Sheryl Schaffner, District Controller Mike
Foster, Human Resources Supervisor Candice Basnight, and District Clerk
Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Motion: Director Siemens moved, and Director Harris seconded a motion to adopt the agenda.
VOTE: 3-0-0
IV. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Agenda Item #1 – Approved the minutes of December 17, 2013
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Siemens seconded a motion to approve the minutes
of the December 17, 2013 meeting.
VOTE: 3-0-0
BAE Committee Page 2
April 8, 2014
2. Board Appointee Performance Evaluation Process Policy (R-14-69)
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse provided the staff report summarizing the
discussion at the Committee’s meeting in December. Mr. Woodhouse outlined the draft policy
and timeline of the proposed evaluation process. Mr. Woodhouse explained that the timeline
outlined in the draft policy is tied to the fiscal year and reviewed the various milestones included
in the draft policy. Finally, Mr. Woodhouse described the next steps to be taken following this
Committee meeting
The Committee members made recommendations for changes to the draft policy. Extensive
discussion ensued.
The Committee agreed by consensus to the following changes to the draft Board Appointee
Performance Evaluation Process policy:
- Move the references to the use of a facilitator/consultant to the end of the policy
- Alter the requirement that follow-up written questions be provided to the appointees
within three days to as soon as possible
- Shorten the timeline for the evaluation process to establish the goal of completing the
evaluation process within fourth months of the completion of the fiscal year
- Raises will customarily be retroactive to the beginning of the fiscal year, however, this is
not a requirement
- Fiscal Year End summary will guide the memorandums from appointees
- Draft appointees’ evaluation forms will be provided as a sample but are not required for
use by the Board or appointees
- Remove the numerical rating system from the evaluation form but leave the descriptions
provided
The Committee directed staff to draft evaluation form for all Board appointees and send to all
Committee members for review.
Public hearing opened at 3:58 p.m.
No speakers present.
Public hearing closed at 3:58 p.m.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The next BAE meeting was not scheduled.
Chair Cyr adjourned the Regular Meeting of the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee at 3:59
p.m.
__________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk