HomeMy Public PortalAbout20140122 - Agenda Packet - Board of Directors (BOD) - 14-03
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND FINANCING AUTHORITY OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
SPECIAL MEETING BEGINS AT 6:00 P.M.
REGULAR MEETING BEGINS AT 7:00 P.M.
A G E N D A
6:00 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT – CLOSED SESSION
ROLL CALL
1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8)
Property: Santa Clara County APN 351-12-006 and San Mateo County APNs 080-312-010 and 080-
411-010, 1405 Skyline Blvd., Palo Alto, California
Agency Negotiator: Allen Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist
Negotiating Party: Sharon Rogers, Property Owner
Under Negotiation: Terms of real property transaction
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
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
Introduction of District Staff: Cydney Bieber, Web Administrator
PRESENTATION
Fundraising Efforts by the Equestrian Trail Riders' Action Committee, Mike Bushue (10 minutes)
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Approve Minutes of the Special and Regular Board Meetings
January 8, 2013
Meeting 14-03
2. Approve Revised Claims Report
3. Renewal of Investment Authority and Adoption of Annual Statement of Investment Policy (R-14-02) – M.
Foster
4.
Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract between California Public
Employees’ Retirement System and the District in order to implement the Indexed Level 1959 Survivor
Benefits (R-14-22) – C. Basnight
5. Approval of an Agreement to Exchange Real Property Interests with Santa Clara County (County) Roads
& Airports concerning County property located on State Highway 9 and surrounded by Saratoga Gap
Open Space Preserve (Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel Number: 503-37-004) and Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District (District) property located along Stevens Canyon Road at Saratoga Gap and
Monte Bello Open Space Preserves (Portions of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 351-26-
003, 351-16-023 and 351-16-014) (R-14-20) – A. Ishibashi
6. Adoption of Ordinance Amending the “Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Lands” and Adoption of District Bail Schedule for newly added Regulations (R-14-09) – G.
Baillie
7. Authorization to Amend a Contract with Geoinsite Environmental Management Inc., for Additional
Grading Oversight for the Mount Umunhum Demolition Project at Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve (R-
14-23) – G. Coony
ADJOURNMENT TO THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FINANCING
AUTHORITY MEETING
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FINANCING
AUTHORITY
1. Acceptance of the Controller’s Annual Financial Report of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Financing Authority (R-14-01) – M. Foster
RECONVENE THE REGULAR MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
BOARD BUSINESS
8. Authorize the General Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Interschola, Inc., for Disposal of District
Property and to Approve the Disposal of District Assets, Excluding Real Property (R-14-10) – K. Drayson
9. Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Mindego Ranch
Area of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve and Approval of an Amendment to the Russian Ridge Use
and Management Plan (R-14-21) – G. Lausten
10.
Appointment of Board of Directors Standing Committee Members for Calendar Year 2014 (R-14-16) – C.
Harris
11. Appointment of District Representatives to the Governing Board of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Financing Authority for Calendar Year 2014 (R-14-15) – C. Harris
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 January 17, 2014, at the Administrative Offices of MROSD, 330
Distel Circle, Los Altos California, 94022. The agenda is also available on the District’s web site at http://www.openspace.org.
Signed this 17th day of January, 2014, at Los Altos, California.
January 8, 2014
Board Meeting 14-01
SPECIAL AND REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Administrative Office
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
January 8, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
CLOSED SESSION
I. CALL TO ORDER
President Cyr called the Special Meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board of Directors to order at 5:34 p.m.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Nonette Hanko, Cecily Harris, Larry Hassett, Curt Riffle, and
Pete Siemens
Members Absent: Yoriko Kishimoto
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, and Assistant General
Counsel Hilary Stevenson
III. CLOSED SESSION: PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION –
Government Code Section 54957(b)(1)
Title of Employee: General Manager
IV. ADJOURNMENT
President Cyr adjourned the Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District at 6:57 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Meeting 14-01 Page 2
President Cyr called the Regular Meeting of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Board of Directors to order at 7:04 p.m.
President Cyr noted that there were no actions taken to report out of closed session.
II. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Jed Cyr, Nonette Hanko, Cecily Harris, Larry Hassett, and Pete Siemens
Members Absent: Curt Riffle and Yoriko Kishimoto
Staff Present: General Manager Steve Abbors, Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz,
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse, Assistant General Counsel
Hilary Stevenson, Acting Operations Manager Brian Malone, Senior
Management Analyst Gordon Baillie, Natural Resources Manager Kirk
Lenington, Real Property Manager Mike Williams, Administrative
Services Manager Kate Drayson, Public Affairs Manager Shelly Lewis,
Co-Acting Planning Manager Meredith Manning, Planner III Gina Coony,
and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
No speakers present.
Director Riffle arrived at 7:05 p.m.
IV. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Motion: Director Hanko moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to adopt the
agenda.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
V. SPECIAL ORDER OF THE DAY
Screening of District Video – “The Art of the Trail”
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
Agenda Item #1 – Approve Minutes of the December 11, 2013 Board Meeting
Agenda Item #2 – Approve the Revised Claims Report
Agenda Item #3 – Authorization to Amend a Contract with David J. Powers Associates for
an Amount Not-To-Exceed $103,285 to Provide Additional Environmental Review
Consulting Services for the Proposed Ridge Vineyards Exchange Project (R-14-03)
Meeting 14-01 Page 3
Will Betchart thanked the District and its staff for taking time to listen to comments and input
that he and other neighbors provided regarding the Ridge Vineyards proposed exchange of
dedicated open space.
Howard Levitan spoke regarding the District’s notice of the Ridge Vineyards proposed exchange
of dedicated open space and submitted a list of 70 neighbors that would like to be included in the
interested parties’ list related to this property.
Lynne Farris, a resident on Monte Bello Rd., asked the District to continue to keep the residents
fully apprised of District actions related to this property.
Agenda Item #4 – Authorization to Amend a Contract with Northgate Environmental
Management Inc., for Additional Soils Sampling, Abatement Monitoring, and Laboratory
Analyses for the Mount Umunhum Demolition Project at Sierra Azul Open Space Preserve
(R-14-14)
Agenda Item #5 – Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives Revisions for Fiscal Year 2014-15
(R-14-13)
Agenda Item #6 – Proposed Names for the New Mount Umunhum Parking Area and Trail
(R-14-12)
Motion: Director Riffle moved, and Director Hanko seconded the motion to approve the
Consent Calendar.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
VII. BOARD BUSINESS
Agenda Item #7 – Election of the Board of Directors Officers for Calendar Year 2014 (R-
14-04)
President Cyr reflected on the past year and shared some of the District’s accomplishments
during his term as Board President.
President Cyr reviewed the voting procedures for the election of officers for the Board of
Directors for Calendar Year 2014 and District Clerk Jennifer Woodworth called for nominations
for Board President. Director Hassett nominated Director Harris for President and Director
Riffle seconded the nomination. No further nominations were presented.
Motion: Upon motion by Director Siemens, seconded by Director Hanko, the nominations for
Board President were closed.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
By a vote of 6 to 0, the Board elected Director Cyr as Board President for Calendar Year 2014.
Meeting 14-01 Page 4
President Harris called for nominations for Board Vice President. Director Hanko nominated
Director Siemens for Vice President and Director Riffle seconded the nomination. No further
nominations were presented.
Motion: Upon motion by Director Cyr, seconded by Director Hanko, the nominations for Board
Vice President were closed.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
By a vote of 6 to 0, the Board elected Director Siemens as Board Vice President for Calendar
Year 2014.
President Harris called for nominations for Board Treasurer. Director Hanko nominated Director
Riffle for Board Treasurer and Director Siemens seconded the nomination. No further
nominations were presented.
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Hanko seconded the motion to close the nominations
for Board Treasurer.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
By a vote of 6 to 0, the Board elected Director Riffle as Board Treasurer for Calendar Year 2014.
President Harris called for nominations for Board Secretary. Director Cyr nominated Director
Hassett for Board Secretary and Director Hanko seconded the nomination. No further
nominations were presented.
Motion: Upon motion by Director Cyr, seconded by Director Siemens, the nominations for
Board Secretary were closed.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
By a vote of 6 to 0, the Board elected Director Hassett as Board Secretary for Calendar Year
2014.
Public hearing opened at 7:31 p.m.
No speakers were present.
Public hearing closed at 7:31 p.m.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
Agenda Item #8 – Appointment of Action Plan and Budget Committee Members for
Calendar Year 2014 (R-14-05)
President Harris reported that she has appointed Directors Siemens, Riffle, and Kishimoto to the
Action Plan and Budget Committee for Calendar Year 2014. Brief discussion ensued.
Meeting 14-01 Page 5
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Hanko seconded the motion to approve the Board
President’s appointments to the Action Plan and Budget Committee for Calendar Year 2014.
Public hearing opened at 7:32 p.m.
No speakers were present.
Public hearing closed at 7:32 p.m.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
Agenda Item #9 – Partnership Guidelines for the Mount Umunhum Radar Tower (R-14-
11)
Co-Acting Planning Manager Meredith Manning presented the staff report and summarized the
recommendations of staff and Legislative, Funding, and Public Affairs Committee (LFPAC).
Director Siemens inquired as to what would happen to any funds remaining after the work is
completed.
Ms. Manning explained that a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would include that type
of detailed decisions. If the Board approves the recommendations, then the General Manager
and General Counsel would be directed to negotiate the details and return to LFPAC and the
Board to approve the MOU.
Director Hassett outlined his concerns with the District’s relationship with the partner in the
event that the full amount of funds is not raised.
Ms. Manning explained the decision before the Board tonight is to set the minimum
requirements a potential partner would have meet in order to engage in negotiation for a MOU.
Public hearing opened at 8:06 p.m.
Sam Drake, President of the Umunhum Conservancy, explained that one positive aspect of
allowing the partner to raise the money is that the partner is responsible if the money is not fully
raised. Mr. Drake explained that many of the details of the partnership will be negotiated as part
of the MOU, which negotiations will not begin until the minimum requirements are met. Finally,
Mr. Drake urged the Board to accept incremental funds from the Conservancy before a MOU is
finalized in the event emergency or interim repairs are needed.
Public hearing closed at 8:16 p.m.
Director Hanko suggested that the District’s website include information on the Conservancy and
an explanation of the project instead of providing a direct link to the Conservancy’s website.
Extensive discussion ensued.
Directors Hassett and Cyr expressed their concerns with the District making further
commitments to the project, such as accepting incremental funds, without additional safeguards
being in place.
Meeting 14-01 Page 6
Director Harris expressed her belief that the District is not yet ready to address the concerns
raised by the partner in the document submitted by Mr. Drake prior to the Board meeting.
Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz suggested that the Board may consider placing information
about the District’s partner on the website after a MOU has been agreed upon.
Director Siemens expressed his concern that staff time to manage the project should be
reimbursed by the partner.
Gina Coony explained that the conceptual cost estimates included percentages related to project
management by District staff.
Motion: Director Siemens moved, and Director Riffle seconded the motion to define the
partnership parameters for external fundraising for the Mount Umunhum radar tower, LFPAC
and the General Manager recommend the following:
1. Define the District relationship with a fundraising entity whose mission is to raise
funds to permanently retain the radar tower as an informal relationship, until that organization
has met minimum requirements established by the District Board of Directors, as detailed below.
2. Direct the General Manager and General Counsel to work with the organization(s)
to establish a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) once minimum requirements are met.
3. For the Board to consider an MOU, set the minimum partner funding commitment
for long-term repair and maintenance costs at $625,000; this is 50% of the sum of the escalated
construction costs ($500,000) plus 50% of the 20-year maintenance costs ($125,000) (as
described in Attachment 1 to the Board report).
4. Confirm that minor maintenance is to be funded by the District until long-term
repairs are implemented, at which time all maintenance costs would be funded by a fundraising
entity or outside partner (estimated timeframe: three to five years).
5. Approve allocating up to 40 hours of District staff time for preparation,
arrangements, and escorting potential partners and their prospective donors to Mount Umunhum
at no cost to the fundraising entity.
6. Prohibit the District from accepting public funds for long-term radar tower repairs
at this time.
7. Direct the General Manager to redirect public inquiry regarding fundraising for
the radar tower to the fundraising entity both verbally and in writing, as opposed to maintaining a
District link from its web page to the fundraising entity.
VOTE: 4-0-2 (Director Kishimoto absent; Directors Harris and Hassett abstained)
Agenda Item #10 – First reading of amendments to the “Regulations for Use of
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands” (R-14-06)
Senior Management Analyst Gordon Baillie presented the staff report providing a summary of
the proposed changes. Mr. Baillie also discussed in detail two topics of discussion that arose at
the Legislative, Funding, and Public Affairs Committee’s review of the amendments to the
ordinance. First, Mr. Baillie addressed unpermitted diversion of water and the recommended
bail for violation of this provision. Second, Mr. Baillie addressed the removal of dog excrement
from an area if it poses a health hazard or creates a public nuisance on District lands but removes
requirement that notices to remove be posted in all areas. Finally, Mr. Baillie provided a brief
Meeting 14-01 Page 7
overview of the bail schedule and the additions being proposed as part of the General Manager’s
recommendation.
Public hearing opened at 9:07 p.m.
Alex Hapke, Secretary of District’s Field Employees Association and a ranger at Skyline,
expressed his appreciation to Mr. Baillie for allowing the rangers to provide input in the process.
Shani Keinhaus thanked the District for including a prohibition against drones on District lands.
Public hearing closed at 9:08 p.m.
Motion: Director Cyr moved, and Director Siemens seconded the motion to:
1. Waive reading, read by title only, and introduce the proposed amendments to the
Regulations for use of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands for
adoption of the ordinance at the Board’s next regular meeting; with the following
changes:
701.5 Removal of Dog Excrement. No person responsible for a dog shall allow
its excrement or feces to remain in an area if it poses a health hazard, a public
nuisance, or is in an area posted requiring its removal on District lands.
702.7 Unpermitted Diversion of Water.
No person shall divert water from any surface water, ground water, or water
storage facility on District Lands without the express written permission of the
District.
2. Introduce proposed additions to the District Bail Schedule for newly added
Regulations for adoption at the Board’s next regular meeting.
VOTE: 6-0-0 (Director Kishimoto absent)
VIII. COMMITTEE REPORTS
Director Riffle reported that the Capital Finance Ad Hoc Committee met with District staff. He
requested that all of the Board members read through the materials provided by the General
Manager provided prior to the holiday season in order to prepare for the upcoming meetings
related to the Vision Plan.
Director Cyr reported that the Board Appointee Evaluation Committee met in December and
discussed the process for reviewing Board appointees.
IX. STAFF REPORTS
Assistant General Manager Ana Ruiz reported that she and Assistant General Manager Kevin
Woodhouse will be attending a meeting of the Santa Clara County Cities Association to present
the District video and information on the Vision Plan.
Assistant General Manager Kevin Woodhouse reported that one of the supervising rangers
commented at today’s all-staff meeting that this holiday season was the busiest he has ever seen
Meeting 14-01 Page 8
General Manager Steve Abbors reported that he will be making presentations to the Silicon
Valley Leadership Group next week and to the Pacific Skyline Council of the Boy Scouts of
America this weekend.
X. DIRECTOR REPORTS
The Board submitted their compensatory forms to the District Clerk.
Director Hassett commented on how busy the preserves have been recently.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
President Cyr adjourned the Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District at 9:33 p.m.
________________________________
Jennifer Woodworth, CMC
District Clerk
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount
Name
Description
21706
21707
21708
21709
21710
21711
21712
21713
21714
21715
21716
21717
21718
21719
21720
21721
21722
21723
$251,364,30
$20,697.19
$10,000.00
$9,984.80
$9,643.00
$5,937.50
$5,125,00
$5,000.00
$4,871.07
$4,642.68
$4,630.00
$4,626.23
$3,446.18
$3,060.00
$3,000.00
$2,777.74
$2,629.30
$2,407.92
American Wrecking
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP
*1 Old Republic Title Company
Public Dialogue Consortium
# Shelton Roofing Company
Grossmann Design Group
Ideal Restoration
Colliers International
Matthew Bender And Company
Sol's Mobile Service
John Northmore Roberts & Associates
Summit Uniforms
David J. Powers & Associates
The Bank Of New York Mellon
Strategy Research Institute
*2 First National Bank
Amermex Upgrades
Central Coast Bat Research Group
21724 $2,322.22 Ecological Concerns
21725 $2,315.00 Aaron's Septic Tank Service
21726 $2,300.05 Redwood General Tire Company
21727 $2,074.31 *2 First National Bank
21728 $1,770.26 *2 First National Bank
21729 $1,618.01 *2 First National Bank
21730
21731
21732
21733
21734
21735
$1,500.00
$1,330.00
$1,237,10
$1,168.45
$1,140.16
$1,075.66
Joint Venture Silicon Valley
Socialmentum
Moffett Supply Company
Roessler, Cindy
The Sign Shop
*2 First National Bank
21736 $1,037.00 *2 First National Bank
21737
21738
21739
21740
21741
21742
$972.67
$920.32
$858.90
$810.80
$801.71
$796.89
Goodyear Auto Service Center
Ergovera
Barresi, Chris
*2 First National Bank
Accountemps
ADT Security Services
Mt. Umunhum Demolition
Legal Services - Amicus Brief On Lehigh Vested Rights Appeal
Rogers Purchase Option
Vision Plan Public Participation Services
Roof Preventive Maintenance - Hawthorn Property
Mt. Umunhum Demolition Project Monitoring & Consulting
Asbestos Abatement Services - Rental Residence
Appraisal Services - Lysons Parcel
Legal Publications - Penal & Vehicle Code Books / Real Estate
Law Books / Deerings Code Books
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Design & Engineering Services - Mt. Umunhum Staging Area
Body Armor & Uniform Expenses For New Rangers
Consultant Services - Ridge Vineyards Exchange Environmental
Review
Note Paying Agent Fees - 2007 Refunding Promissory Notes
Consulting Services - Capital Funding Program
Miscellaneous Expenses - Facility Rental & Supplies For Santa
Clara County City Managers Association Luncheon / Snake Tank
Repairs / San Mateo County Environmental Impact Report
Administrative Fee / Digital Camera And Accessories For
Operations Department
Replacement Of Emergency Exit Lights - AO
Consulting Services - Mt. Umunhum Demolition Mitigation
Monitoring
Native Revegetation Maintenance & Monitoring - Skyline Ridge
Tree Farm Phase III
Pumping Services - SFO / Purisima Creek / Windy Hill / Rental
Residence
Tires & Installation Of Tires
Computer, Website & Internet Expenses - Computer Supplies /
Wi-Fi For GM iPad / Email Service Provider For Sending Email
Blasts / Web Hosting Fee For District Website / Online Form
Service / Notebook / Keyboard / Computer Monitors
Conferences & Training Expenses - CalPELRA Conference
Expenses / EMT Refresher Course / Redwood City & San Mateo
County Chamber Of Commerce Progress Seminar
Field Supplies / Tarps For DHF / Hand Warmers / Magnets For
Signboards / Compressor / Tools For SFO Shop
Sponsorship Of 2014 State Of The Valley Conference
On -Line Public Participation Tool For The Vision Plan
Janitorial Supplies For Skyline Preserves
Reimbursement - Cameras For Bobcat Wildlife Study At RSA
Trail Hazard Sign / Reduce Speed Signs / Various Preserve Signs
Vehicle Maintenance, Repairs & Supplies - Gas Pump For SFO /
Car Wash
Office Supplies / Break Room Supplies / Coffee Maker / Scanner /
Monthly Planner / Shipping Labels
Tires & Installation Of Tires
Ergonomic Evaluations & Reports
Reimbursement - Propane For Alr Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA & Cell Phone
Rental Residence Expenses - UV Bulbs For Water Systems
Accounting Temp
Alarm Service - SFO
Page 1 of 3
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount
Name
Description
21743
21744
21745
21746
21747
21748
21749
$783.25
$752.02
$690.00
$669.22
$584.00
$578.75
$562.50
Alvaro Jaramillo
Gardenland Power Equipment
United Chimney
Sunnyvale Ford
*2 First National Bank
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
Communication Advantage
21750 $537.53 San Jose Water Company
21751 $460.00 Cabrillo Unified District
21752 $430.92 Simms Plumbing & Water Equipment
21753 $430.00 *2 First National Bank
21754 $405.44 Office Team
21755 $400.00 California Department Of Fish &
Wildlife
21756 $399.00 American Red Cross
21757 $388.49 Jurich, Michael
21758 $366.60 *2 First National Bank
21759
21760
21761
21762
21763
21764
21765
21766
21767
21768
21769
21770
21771
21772
21773
21774
$355.96
$352.67
$326.00
$324.32
$301.33
$277.63
$240.00
$237.46
$225.33
$218.95
$206.93
$200.00
$194.44
$174.37
$168.09
$150.00
RDO Equipment Company
Williams, Mike
Claire Moore
*2 First National Bank
Safety Kleen
CMK Automotive
Schaffner, Sheryl
Chance, Marianne
Orlandi Trailer
T -Squared HVAC
*2 First National Bank
Ruiz, Ana
Stevens Creek Quarry
Voiss, Sue
Los Altos Business Machines
Alvaro Jaramillo
21775 $109.00 Coastal Sierra
21776 $100.00 Santa Clara County Special Districts
Association
21777 $90.75 Barron Park Supply
21778 $63.66 Protection One
21779 $54.38 DFM Associates
21780 $51.59 Baldzikowski, Matt
21781 $46.16 Alexander, Zachary
21782 $41.00 Data Safe
21783 $37.29 Manning, Meredith
21784 $35.69 California Water Service Company
Mt. Umunhum Avian Study & Survey Work
Chain Sharpening & Repairs / Pole Saw Repair / Grinding Wheels
Chimney Sweep Services At Rental Residences
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Membership Dues - State Bar Of California / California Rural
Water Association
Russian Ridge Bird Monitoring & Nest Surveys
Consulting Services - Information Fact Sheet For Potential Ballot
Measure
Water Service - RSA
Facility Rental For Board Meeting
Measure Water Level - Rental Residence
Event Supplies & Expenses - Holiday Lunch For Staff
Office Temp - Real Property Administrative Assistant
California Natural Diversity Database Subscription Renewal
First Aid Training
Reimbursement - Propane For Air Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA & Cell Phone
Volunteer Supplies & Supplies For Volunteer & Docent
Enrichment Training
Parts For Tractor Repair
Reimbursement - Mileage & Cell Phone
Reimbursement - Electricity For Air Quality Monitoring At RSA
Uniform Expenses
Solvent Tank Service - SFO
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Reimbursement - Cell Phone
Reimbursement - Ranger Academy Expenses
Trailer Lights
Heater Repair At Rental Residence
Business Related Meals - Board Meeting / Operations
Department Meeting / Lunch With Boy Scouts Of America Pacific
Skyline Council
Reimbursement - National Professional Planning Association
Membership Dues
Base Rock For FFO Stock
Reimbursement - Bookcase
Folding Machine Repair
Purple Martin Consultant Services - Build House To Encourage
Nesting
Internet Service - SFO
Annual Membership Dues
Plumbing Supplies - RSA
Fire Inspection & Monitoring - AO
2014 California Elections Code Update
Reimbursement - Supplies For Air Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA
Reimbursement - Mileage
Shredding Services - AO
Reimbursement - Mileage
Water Service - Windy Hill
Page 2 of 3
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount Name
Description
21785 $35.22 O'Reilly Auto Parts Vehicle Supplies - Windshield Cleaner
21786 $26.25 Rayne Of San Jose Water Service - Fremont Older
21787 $9.80 Portola Valley Hardware Fire Pumper Supply
21788 $9.78 Rural Supply Hardware FFO Shop Supply
21789 $8.57 United Parcel Service Parcel Shipping
21790 $7.60 Los Altos Hardware Hardware For AO Cubicle Repair
Total $393,010.36
*1 Urgent check issued 1/15/14
*2 Urgent check issued 1/7/14
The total amount for First
National Bank is $13,075.63
# Hawthorn expense
Page 3 of 3
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Revised
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount
Name
Description
21706
21707
21708
21709
21710
21711
21712
21713
21714
21715
21716
21717
21718
21719
21720
21721
21722
21723
21724
21725
21726
21727
$251,364.30
$20,697.19
$10,000.00
$9,984.80
$9,643.00
$5,937.50
$5,125.00
$5,000.00
$4,871.07
$4,642.68
$4,630.00
$4,626.23
$3,446.18
$3,060.00
$3,000.00
$2,777.74
$2,629.30
$2,407.92
$2,322.22
$2,315.00
American Wrecking
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP
*1 Old Republic Title Company
Public Dialogue Consortium
# Shelton Roofing Company
Grossmann Design Group
Ideal Restoration
Colliers International
Matthew Bender And Company
Sol's Mobile Service
John Northmore Roberts & Associates
Summit Uniforms
David J. Powers & Associates
The Bank Of New York Mellon
Strategy Research Institute
*2 First National Bank
Amermex Upgrades
Central Coast Bat Research Group
Ecological Concerns
Aaron's Septic Tank Service
$2,300.05 Redwood General Tire Company
$2,074.31 *2 First National Bank
21728 $1,770.26 *2 First National Bank
21729 $1,618.01 *2 First National Bank
21730
21731
21732
21733
21734
21735
$1,500.00
$1,330,00
$1,237.10
$1,168.45
$1,140.16
$1,075.66
Joint Venture Silicon Valley
Socialmentum
Moffett Supply Company
Roessler, Cindy
The Sign Shop
*2 First National Bank
21736 $1,037.00 *2 First National Bank
21737
21738
21739
21740
21741
21742
$972.67
$920.32
$858.90
$810.80
$801.71
$796.89
Goodyear Auto Service Center
Ergovera
Barresi, Chris
*2 First National Bank
Accountemps
ADT Security Services
Mt. Umunhum Demolition
Legal Services - Amicus Brief On Lehigh Vested Rights Appeal
Rogers Purchase Option
Vision Plan Public Participation Services
Roof Preventive Maintenance - Hawthorn Property
Mt. Umunhum Demolition Project Monitoring & Consulting
Asbestos Abatement Services - Rental Residence
Appraisal Services - Lysons Parcel
Legal Publications - Penal & Vehicle Code Books / Real Estate
Law Books / Deerings Code Books
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Design & Engineering Services - Mt. Umunhum Staging Area
Body Armor & Uniform Expenses For New Rangers
Consultant Services - Ridge Vineyards Exchange Environmental
Review
Note Paying Agent Fees - 2007 Refunding Promissory Notes
Consulting Services - Capital Funding Program
Miscellaneous Expenses - Facility Rental & Supplies For Santa
Clara County City Managers Association Luncheon / Snake Tank
Repairs / San Mateo County Environmental Impact Report
Administrative Fee / Digital Camera And Accessories For
Operations Department
Replacement Of Emergency Exit Lights - AO
Consulting Services - Mt. Umunhum Demolition Mitigation
Monitoring
Native Revegetation Maintenance & Monitoring - Skyline Ridge
Tree Farm Phase III
Pumping Services - SFO / Purisima Creek / Windy Hill / Rental
Residence
Tires & Installation Of Tires
Computer, Website & Internet Expenses - Computer Supplies /
Wi-Fi For GM iPad / Email Service Provider For Sending Email
Blasts / Web Hosting Fee For District Website / Online Form
Service / Notebook / Keyboard / Computer Monitors
Conferences & Training Expenses - CalPELRA Conference
Expenses / EMT Refresher Course / Redwood City & San Mateo
County Chamber Of Commerce Progress Seminar
Field Supplies / Tarps For DHF / Hand Warmers / Magnets For
Signboards / Compressor / Tools For SFO Shop
Sponsorship Of 2014 State Of The Valley Conference
On -Line Public Participation Tool For The Vision Plan
Janitorial Supplies For Skyline Preserves
Reimbursement - Cameras For Bobcat Wildlife Study At RSA
Trail Hazard Sign / Reduce Speed Signs / Various Preserve Signs
Vehicle Maintenance, Repairs & Supplies - Gas Pump For SFO /
Car Wash
Office Supplies / Break Room Supplies / Coffee Maker / Scanner /
Monthly Planner / Shipping Labels
Tires & Installation Of Tires
Ergonomic Evaluations & Reports
Reimbursement - Propane For Air Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA & Cell Phone
Rental Residence Expenses - UV Bulbs For Water Systems
Accounting Temp
Alarm Service - SFO
Page 1 of 3
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Revised
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount
Name
Description
21743
21744
21745
21746
21747
21748
21749
$783.25
$752.02
$690.00
$669.22
$584.00
$578.75
$562.50
Alvaro Jaramillo
Gardenland Power Equipment
United Chimney
Sunnyvale Ford
*2 First National Bank
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory
Communication Advantage
21750 $537.53 San Jose Water Company
21751 $460.00 Cabrillo Unified District
21752 $430.92 Simms Plumbing & Water Equipment
21753 $430.00 *2 First National Bank
21754 $405.44 Office Team
21755 $400.00 California Department Of Fish &
Wildlife
21756 $399.00 American Red Cross
21757 $388.49 Jurich, Michael
21758
21759
21760
21761
21762
21763
21764
21765
21766
21767
21768
21769
21770
21771
21772
21773
21774
$366.60 *2 First National Bank
$355.96
$352.67
$326.00
$324.32
$301.33
$277.63
$240.00
$237.46
$225.33
$218.95
$206.93
$200.00
$194.44
$174.37
$168.09
$150.00
RDO Equipment Company
Williams, Mike
Claire Moore
*2 First National Bank
Safety Kleen
CMK Automotive
Schaffner, Sheryl
Chance, Marianne
Orlandi Trailer
T -Squared HVAC
*2 First National Bank
Ruiz, Ana
Stevens Creek Quarry
Voiss, Sue
Los Altos Business Machines
Alvaro Jaramillo
21775 $109.00 Coastal Sierra
21776 $100.00 Santa Clara County Special Districts
Association
21777 $90.75 Barron Park Supply
21778 $63,66 Protection One
21779 $54.38 DFM Associates
21780 $51.59 Baldzikowski, Matt
21781
21782
21783
21784
$46.16
$41.00
$37.29
$35.69
Alexander, Zachary
Data Safe
Manning, Meredith
California Water Service Company
Mt. Umunhum Avian Study & Survey Work
Chain Sharpening & Repairs / Pole Saw Repair / Grinding Wheels
Chimney Sweep Services At Rental Residences
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Membership Dues - State Bar Of California / California Rural
Water Association
Russian Ridge Bird Monitoring & Nest Surveys
Consulting Services - Information Fact Sheet For Potential Ballot
Measure
Water Service - RSA
Facility Rental For Board Meeting
Measure Water Level - Rental Residence
Event Supplies & Expenses - Holiday Lunch For Staff
Office Temp - Real Property Administrative Assistant
California Natural Diversity Database Subscription Renewal
First Aid Training
Reimbursement - Propane For Air Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA & Cell Phone
Volunteer Supplies & Supplies For Volunteer & Docent
Enrichment Training
Parts For Tractor Repair
Reimbursement - Mileage & Cell Phone
Reimbursement - Electricity For Air Quality Monitoring At RSA
Uniform Expenses
Solvent Tank Service - SFO
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Reimbursement - Cell Phone
Reimbursement - Ranger Academy Expenses
Trailer Lights
Heater Repair At Rental Residence
Business Related Meals - Board Meeting / Operations
Department Meeting / Lunch With Boy Scouts Of America Pacific
Skyline Council
Reimbursement - National Professional Planning Association
Membership Dues
Base Rock For FFO Stock
Reimbursement - Bookcase
Folding Machine Repair
Purple Martin Consultant Services - Build House To Encourage
Nesting
Internet Service - SFO
Annual Membership Dues
Plumbing Supplies - RSA
Fire Inspection & Monitoring - AO
2014 California Elections Code Update
Reimbursement - Supplies For Air Quality Monitoring Study At
RSA
Reimbursement - Mileage
Shredding Services - AO
Reimbursement - Mileage
Water Service - Windy Hill
Page 2 of 3
Claims No. 14-02
Meeting 14-03
Date 1/22/14
Revised
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Amount Name
Description
21785
21786
21787
21788
21789
21790
21791 R
$35,22
$26.25
$9,80
$9.78
$8.57
$7.60
$24,833.68
O'Reilly Auto Parts
Rayne Of San Jose
Portola Valley Hardware
Rural Supply Hardware
United Parcel Service
Los Altos Hardware
Ascent Environmental
21792 R $15,000.00 Winegar Air Sciences
21793 R $6,522.50 TKO General Engineering &
Construction
21794 R $5,809.73 San Mateo County Planning & Building
Department
21795 R $1,749.96 Proelia Defense & Arrest Tactics
21796 R $1,462.11 Phytosphere Research
21797 R $1,088.76 Accountemps
21798 R $494.92 Life Assist
21799 R $393.39 The Ferguson Group
21800 R $350.00 # Paul Bauman's Tree Service
21801 R $345.96 Fastenal
21802 R $238.53 California Water Service Company
21803 R $230.00 South Bay Regional Public Safety
21804 R $220.68 Chance, Marianne
21805 R $220,18 San Mateo County Planning & Building
Department
21806 R $126.58 CMK Automotive
21807 R $117.50 Mission Trail Waste Systems
21808 R $95.88 Thomson Reuters - West
21809 R $53.10 Roessler, Cindy
21810 R $19.00 American Red Cross
Total $452,382.82
Vehicle Supplies - Windshield Cleaner
Water Service - Fremont Older
Fire Pumper Supply
FFO Shop Supply
Parcel Shipping
Hardware For AO Cubicle Repair
Environmental Consulting Services For Integrated Pest
Management Policy
Air Quality Monitoring At RSA
Emergency Creek Repair - Thornwood
Grading Permit Fee For Silva Property Driveway & Water System
Improvements
Defensive Tactics Training
Herbicides For Sudden Oak Death Treatment
Accounting Temp
First Aid Supplies
Legislative Consulting Services
Remove Fallen Oak Tree At Hawthorn Property
Shop Supplies - FFO
Water Service - FFO
Field Training Officer Course
Reimbursement - Ranger Academy Expenses
Permit Fee For Peters Creek Bridge Design Update
Vehicle Maintenance & Repairs
Garbage Service - AO
Monthly Legal Information Charges
Reimbursement - Cell Phone & Mileage
First Aid Training
*1 Urgent check issued 1/15/14
*2 Urgent check Issued 1/7/14
The total amount for First
National Bank is $13,075.63
# Hawthorn expenses
Page 3 of 3
R-14-02
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 3
AGENDA ITEM
Renewal of Investment Authority and Adoption of Annual Statement of Investment Policy
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Resolution to renew the District Controller’s investment authority until
January 7, 2015 and approve the District’s Revised Statement of Investment Policy.
SUMMARY
Approval of the attached resolution will renew the District Controller’s authority to invest
District funds in accordance with the District’s Investment Policy.
DISCUSSION
The District Controller’s authority to invest temporarily idle funds expires on January 8, 2014,
according to the provisions of Resolution 13-09 (see Report R-13-46). The attached Resolution
renews the Controller’s authority to invest District funds in accordance with the District’s
Investment Policy.
When short-term interest rates rise, as they did in 2006 and 2007, the District is able to earn an
enhanced return on temporarily idle funds by investing directly as permitted by the California
Government Code. The attached policy permits the Controller to invest surplus District funds
directly in such specific investments.
The only recommended change to the Statement of Investment Policy is to update the reserve
policy, which was last revised in January 2005. The current policy requires the preservation of a
contingency cash reserve of at least $5 million, at all times, principally to respond quickly to land
acquisition opportunities. This is prudent and should be continued. However, with the
broadening of the District’s capital and operating programs under the new District Strategic Plan,
a more comprehensive reserve policy is needed. The proposed policy requires that the District
maintain, at the end of each fiscal year, unpledged cash and liquid investments equal to at least
(1) debt service payable in the next six months plus (2) the total capital expenditures budget,
including land purchases, for the next fiscal year minus (3) the year-end balance of Taxes
Receivable minus (4) grant receipts budgeted for the next fiscal year. If this calculation is less
than $5 million, then the contingency reserve amount would govern. Using this formula, the
required reserve balance would have been $6.8 million at the end of March 2013, $10.9 million
at the end of March 2012, and $15.5 million at the end of March 2011. The fiscal 2014 budget
R-14-02 Page 2
contained an unusually low level of District capital expenditures, and thus, the required cash
reserves were low; the opposite was the case in March 2011.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
This item was not reviewed by any Committee.
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of this policy will not result in an increase to the budget. However, implementation of
this policy is crucial for the fiscal health of the District.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
The recommended action is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality
Act.
NEXT STEPS
None
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Statement of Investment Policy
Prepared by:
Mike Foster, Controller
Contact person:
Michael Foster, Controller
RESOLUTION NO. 14-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT
POLICY AND AUTHORIZING THE CONTROLLER TO INVEST
SURPLUS FUNDS ALLOWED BY THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE
WHEREAS, the District needs to maximize the yield on surplus temporarily idle funds in
order to help meet Capital Program objectives, including land acquisition; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 4, Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code authorizes the
District to deposit and invest surplus funds in investments which, at times, yield interest rates
higher than achievable through the Santa Clara County Pooled Fund, or the California Pooled
Investment Authority; and
WHEREAS, the District can often improve its yield on surplus funds without sacrificing
financial safety and flexibility.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District does hereby authorize the Controller to invest surplus or temporarily idle funds
according to the Investment Policy attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and by reference made a part
hereof.
SECTION TWO. This authorization is retroactive to January 8, 2014.
SECTION THREE. Before any particular investments, the Controller shall consult with
the General Manager, or a District employee authorized to act in his behalf, to determine
anticipated cash flow needs of the District.
SECTION FOUR. This Resolution supersedes the prior Resolution No. 13-09 adopted
April 24, 2013. This Resolution shall no longer be in effect as of January 7, 2015, unless
extended, and inactive funds shall then be deposited in the Santa Clara County Pooled
Investment Fund, with the California Pooled Investment Authority, or invested through the
District’s commercial bank.
* * * * * * * * * *
ATTACHMENT 2
Statement of Investment Policy
GOALS
Goal 1. Capital Preservation
The primary goal shall be to safeguard the principal of invested funds. The secondary objective
shall be to meet the liquidity needs of the District. The third objective shall be to achieve a
return on funds consistent with this Policy. Temporarily idle funds shall be invested in a
conservative manner, such that funds can always be withdrawn at, or just above or below, full
invested value. Investments that offer opportunities for significant capital gains and losses are
excluded.
Goal 2. Liquidity
Temporarily idle funds shall be managed so that normal operating cash needs and scheduled
extraordinary cash needs can be met on a same day basis. Investments shall be sufficiently
liquid to provide a steady and reliable flow of cash to the District to insure that all land purchases
can be made promptly (within two weeks).
Goal 3. Income
Temporarily idle funds shall earn the highest rate of return that is consistent with capital
preservation and liquidity goals and the California Government Code.
GUIDELINES
1. Determination of Idle Funds
The Controller shall prepare a cash flow projection prior to all investment decisions involving
securities with a term to maturity exceeding 180 days. This cash flow projection shall be
reviewed and evaluated by the General Manager. The General Manager is responsible for
approving the Controller’s designation of the amount of funds available for investment for longer
than 180 days.
2. Cash Reserve Policy and Contingency Reserve
A contingency reserve of at least $5,000,000 shall be maintained, at all times, with the Santa
Clara County Pooled Investment Fund. The General Manager is responsible for approving the
Controller’s designation of the size of this contingency reserve. In addition, at the end of each
fiscal year, the District shall hold total reserves of unpledged cash and liquid investments
exceeding the sum of (1) debt service payable in the next six months and (2) the capital
expenditures budget for the next fiscal year, reduced by (3) year-end taxes receivable and (4)
grant receipts budgeted for the next fiscal year. At all times this contingency reserve, together
withtotal cash reserve, including funds held in trust by bond trustees and pledged to the payment
of bonds issued by the District, shall be sufficient to satisfy the reserve requirements for all
District debt.
3. Non-Invested Funds
Idle District funds not otherwise invested as permitted by this Policy, or maintained with trustee
paying agents and pledged to the payment of District indebtedness, shall be deposited with the
ATTACHMENT 2
Santa Clara County Pooled Investment Fund, the San Mateo County Treasurer’s Pooled
Investment Fund or the State of California’s Local Agency Investment Fund.
4. Selection of Investments
The Controller is responsible for selecting investments that fit within the amounts and maturities
recommended by the Controller and by the General Manager. The Controller is also responsible
for directing security transactions.
5. Investments Instruments and Deposit of Funds
Investments and deposits of funds shall be limited to those allowed by and subject to the
procedures of Government Code Section 53600 et seq. and 53635 et seq. In the event of any
conflict between the terms of this Policy, and the Government Code, the provisions of the
Government Code shall prevail. Investments shall not be leveraged. Investments, and
“derivatives,” that offer opportunities for significant capital gains and losses are excluded. All
investments, other than investment of bond proceeds and funds held by trustees and pledged to
the repayment of bonds or other District indebtedness, shall mature within 180 days, except for
[1] U.S. Treasury and U.S. Government Agency bills and notes and [2] Corporate notes carrying
a minimum rating of AA from a nationally recognized rating service, which shall mature within
two years. Funds held by such trustees and other bond proceeds may be invested in accordance
with the indenture or agreement providing for the issuance of such debt.
6. Diversification
Investments s shall meet the diversification test of Government Code Section 53601.7(c), stating
that no more than 5% of the total investment portfolio may be invested in the securities of any
one issuer, except for the obligations of the U.S. Treasury or U.S. Government Agencies.
Investments maturing in 181 days or longer shall represent no more than 20% of the total market
value of the investment portfolio.
7. Marketability
For investments other than deposits and investment of funds held by trustees as set out in Section
5, the breadth of ownership and number of securities outstanding shall be sufficient to establish a
secondary market in which investments can be readily converted to cash without causing a
material change in their market value.
8. Acceptable Banks
Bankers' Acceptances and Negotiable Certificates of Deposit may be purchased only from the
District’s commercial bank or banks and savings and loan associations with over $1,000,000,000
of deposits and reporting profitable operations and which meet all applicable criteria of the
Government Code. Certificates of Deposit may be purchased from other banks within Santa
Clara and San Mateo Counties which meet all applicable criteria of the Government Code if the
principal is fully insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
9. Acceptable Collateral
Securities collateralizing bank or savings and loan deposits must be rated “A” or higher.
ATTACHMENT 2
10. Investments in Name of District
All investments purchased shall stand in the name of the District.
11. Reporting
The Controller shall report all security transactions to the board no later than the next Regular
Meeting of the Board of Directors after any transaction has been made. The Controller shall
submit a report of the District’s investments and security transactions to the Board of Directors
by the fourth Wednesday of each month in accordance with Government Code Section 53607.
The Controller will render a quarterly investment report to the Board of Directors as required by
Government Code Section 53646. Such reports shall also be submitted to the General Manager
and to the District’s auditor.
12. Purchase of Securities
The Controller is authorized to purchase securities through the investment department of the
District’s commercial bank and as otherwise permitted by the Government Code. The bank or
other investment institution from which authorized securities are purchased shall be instructed in
writing only to purchase securities in the name of the District and that all matured funds shall be
returned to the District’s commercial bank account. The bank shall also be instructed to send
receipts for transactions to the General Manager.
R-14-22
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 4
AGENDA ITEM
Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract between California
Public Employees’ Retirement System and the District in order to implement the Indexed Level
1959 Survivor Benefits
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract between California
Public Employees’ Retirement System and the District in order to implement the Indexed Level
of 1959 Survivor Benefits.
SUMMARY
The current Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the District Field Employees Association
(FEA) requires the District to amend its agreement with the California Public Employees’
Retirement System (CalPERS) to implement the Indexed Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits. This
benefit will provide for a monthly allowance to survivors of a member who dies prior to
retirement. To implement the survivor benefit, the proposed CalPERS benefit change and
subsequent contract amendment must be made public prior to adoption. This agenda item serves
to make the contract change public in a subsequent meeting at which the Board will approve the
contract amendment. At this time, the District’s Board of Directors must adopt a Resolution of
Intention to Approve an Amendment to the CalPERS contract to implement this benefit.
DISCUSSION
The current MOA with the District FEA requires the District to implement the Indexed Level of
1959 Survivor Benefits through a contract amendment with CalPERS. This benefit is paid
monthly to certain survivors of a member who dies before retirement and includes an automatic
cost of living increase of two percent per year for beneficiaries already receiving this benefit and
those who will receive it in the future. The benefit amounts for calendar year 2014 are $660,
$1,319 and $1,979 for one, two and three eligible survivors, respectively.
The cost to the District of the Indexed Level 1959 Survivor Benefits is $4.80 per member per
month. The cost to the employees enrolled in this program is $2.60 monthly. Additionally, this
program requires the District to continue to pay health benefits to the surviving recipients for
life.
R-14-22 Page 2
In order to implement this benefit, the Board must adopt a Resolution of Intention to approve a
contract amendment and certify this resolution was adopted. After the Board adopts the
Resolution of Intention, District employees enrolled in CalPERS will be given the opportunity to
elect to receive this benefit. After the election period, the Board will adopt and approve a final
resolution to implement the benefit.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost to the District to join the 1959 Survivor program is estimated to be $6,912 annually.
Initially the anticipated cost to the District was $2.60 per member. At this time the rate is $4.80
per member, which is $2.20 higher than initially budgeted. The expense of this program has
been anticipated and included in the budget beginning with FY2013-14. The annual employer
cost will be recalculated each year as the number of members in the pool and the employer cost
may vary.
The exact cost to the District to pay for life-long medical benefits to an employee’s survivor is
unknown. Additionally, occurrence of this is rare. However, we have estimated the cost based
on the following example:
A 40-year-old survivor and children of an employee could receive $1,551.30 per month for
medical insurance until age 65. At age 65, the survivor’s benefit would decrease to the retiree
amount of $350 per month. Based on a general average of survivor life expectancy the total cost
could be $528,390. This hypothetical estimate is based on current medical insurance rates for a
40 year period.
It is important to note that the total cost to the District is based on variable factors including: life
expectancy of survivors, changes in premium rates and the District contribution to retiree
medical. In addition, the fiscal impact would be incurred over a 40-year period.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is necessary.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
NEXT STEP
If approved, District staff enrolled in CalPERS will elect coverage under the 1959 Survivor
program. A resolution for final approval and adoption of the benefit will be brought to the Board
after the election period.
Attachments:
1. Resolution of Intention to Approve an Amendment to Contract Between California Public
Employees Retirement System and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2. Certification of Governing Body’s Action
3. Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 7507
R-14-22 Page 3
4. Indexed Level 1959 Survivor Fact Sheet
Responsible Manager:
Kevin S. Woodhouse, Assistant General Manager
Prepared by:
Candice Basnight, Human Resources Supervisor
RESOLUTION NO. 14-___
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT
TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public
agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System by the execution of a
contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject
themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and
WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by
the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve
an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed
in said contract; and
WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change:
To provide Section 21574.5 (Indexed Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for
local miscellaneous members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the above agency
does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract between said
public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a
copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part
hereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon
adoption.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RESOLUTION NO. 14-___
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District on January 22, 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
RESOLUTION OF INTENTION
TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
BETWEEN THE
BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
AND THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Public Employees' Retirement Law permits the participation of public agencies and their employees in the Public Employees' Retirement System
by the execution of a contract, and sets forth the procedure by which said public agencies may elect to subject themselves and their employees to amendments to said Law; and
WHEREAS, one of the steps in the procedures to amend this contract is the adoption by the governing body of the public agency of a resolution giving notice of its intention to approve an amendment to said contract, which resolution shall contain a summary of the change proposed in said contract; and
WHEREAS, the following is a statement of the proposed change:
To provide Section 21574.5 (Indexed Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits) for local miscellaneous members.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the governing body of the above agency does hereby give notice of intention to approve an amendment to the contract between said public agency and the Board of Administration of the Public Employees' Retirement System, a copy of said amendment being attached hereto, as an "Exhibit" and by this reference made a part hereof.
Date adopted and approved
(Amendment) CalPERS 10#2857159579
CON-302 (Rev_ 4/96)
By: _________________ _ Presiding Officer
Title
CalPERS
'EXHIBIT
California Public Employees' Retirement System
-------�-------
AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT
Between the
Board of Administration
California Public Employees' Retirement System
and the
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
-------�-------
The Board of Administration, California Public Employees' Retirement System,
hereinafter referred to as Board, and the governing body of the above public agency, hereinafter referred to as Public Agency, having entered into a contract effective December 31, 1973, and witnessed November 14, 1973, and as amended effective April 4, 1977, June 26, 1997 and October 9, 2006 which provides for participation of Public Agency in said System, Board and Public Agency hereby agree as Tollows:
A.' Paragraphs 1 through 12 are hereby stricken from said contract as executed 'effective October 9, 2006, and hereby replaced by the following paragraphs numbered 1 through ,13 inclusive:
1. .AII words and terms used herein which are defined in the Public Employees' Retirement Law shall have the meaning as defined therein unless otherwise specifically provided. "Normal retirement age" shall mean age 55 for local miscellaneous members.
2. Public Agency shall participate in the Public Employees' Retirement System from and after December 31, 1973 making its employees as hereinafter provided, members of said System subject to all provisions of the, Public Employees' Retirement Law except such as apply only on election of a contracting agency and are not provided for herein and to all amendments to said Law hereafter enacted except those, which by express provisions thereof, apply only on the election of a contracting agency.
� ,,""'. ;"'� ':""') �� � "f" """c. � , .... '., :� �("""-,�! � ,', "
"' , " "': .
_ ,'" L.,.! .'4"; ,.�,: '-"".1 J ',�j � ;_"�, j (, 'j
3. Public Agency agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS) and its
trustees, agents and employees, the CalPERS Board of Administration, and the California Public Employees' Retirement Fund from any claims, demands, actions, losses, liabilities, damages, judgments, expenses and costs, including but not limited to interest, penalties and attorneys fees
that may arise as a result of any of the following:
(a) Public Agency's election to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas under this Contract that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under the Public Agency's prior non-CaIPERS retirement program.
(b) Any dispute, disagreement, claim, or proceeding (including without limitation arbitration, administrative hearing, or litigation) between Public Agency and its employees (or their representatives) which relates to Public Agency's election to amend this Contract to provide retirement benefits, provisions or formulas that are different than such employees' existing retirement benefits, provisions or formulas
(c) Public Age�cy's agreement with a third party other than CalPERS to provide retirement benefits, provisions, or formulas that are different than the retirement benefits, provisions or formulas provided under this Contract and provided for under the California Public Employees' Retirement Law.
4. Employees of Public Agency in the following classes shall become members of said Retirement System except such in each such class as are excluded by law or this agreement:
a. Employees other than local safety members (herein referred to as local miscellaneous members).
5. In addition to the classes of employees excluded from membership by said Retirement Law, the following classes of employees shall not become members of said Retirement System:
a. SAFETY EMPLOYEES.
6. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member in
employment before and not on or after October 9, 2006 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354 of said Retirement Law
(2% at age 55 Full).
7. The percentage of final compensation to be provided for each year of credited prior and current service as a local miscellaneous member in employment on or after October 9, 2006 shall be determined in accordance with Section 21354.4 of said Retirement Law (2.5% at age 55 Full).
8. Public Agency elected and elects to be· subject to the following optional provisions:
a. Section 20042 (One-Year Final Compensation).
b. Section 21574.5 (Indexed Level of 1959 Survivor Benefits).
9. Public Agency, in accordance with Government Code Section 20790, ceased to be an "employer" for purposes of Section 20834 effective on April 4, 1977. Accumulated contributions of Public Agency shall be fixed and determined as provided in Government Code Section 20834, and accumulated contributions thereafter shall be held by the Board as provided in Government Code Section 20834.
10. Public Agency shall contribute to said Retirement System the contributions determined by actuarial valuations of prior and future service liability with respect to local miscellaneous members of said Retirement System.
11. Public Agency shall also contribute to said Retirement System as follows:
a. ,Contributions required per covered member on account of the 1959 Survivor Benefits provided under Section 21574.5 of said Retirement Law. (Subject to annual change.) In addition, all assets and liabilities of Public Agency and its employees shall be pooled in a single account, based on term insurance rates, for survivors of all local miscellaneous members.
b. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment within 60 days of date of contract to cover the costs of administering said System as it affects the employees of Public Agency, not including the costs of special valuations or of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
c. A reasonable amount, as fixed by the Board, payable in one installment as the occasions arise, to cover the costs of special valuations on account of employees of Public Agency, and costs of the periodic investigation and valuations required by law.
12. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be subject to adjustment by Board on account of amendments to the Public Employees' Retirement Law, and on account of the experience under the Retirement System as determined by the periodic investigation and valuation required by said Retirement Law.
13. Contributions required of Public Agency and its employees shall be paid by Public Agency to the Retirement System within fifteen days after the end of the period to which said contributions refer or as may be prescribed by Board regulation. If more or less than the correct amount of contributions is paid for any period, proper adjustment shall be made in connection with subsequent remittances. Adjustments on account of errors in contributions required of any employee may be made by direct payments between the e�ployee and the Board.
," .\
A-"':'. '\ B. This amendment shall be effeptfve on the __ day of . , ,,<'."�,,\ ',) BOARD OF ADMINISTRAJTe�"
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'",REq;iREMENT SYSTEM
("-! BY , < ,') KARE� {5�'�:��RANK, CHIEF
CUS3;q,M ER ACCOUNT SERVICES DIVISION PUB£:-IC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM
AMENDMENT CalPERS ID #2857159579
PERS-CON-702A
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
BY «:�6>
",i\"" ""),"' PRESIDI NG OFFICE :" ��';}"
/.,'"Y
r'· '"
(':�';,,,)<'
Clerk
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Actuarial and Employer Services Branch Public Agency Contract Services P.O. Box 942709 Sacramento, CA 94229-2709
(888) CalPERS (225-7377)
CERTIFICATION OF GOVERNING BODY'S ACTION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution adopted by the
__________________________________________________________ of the (governing body)
(public agency)
on ________________ _ (date)
Clerk/Secretary
Title
PERS-CON-12 (rev. 1/96)
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Actuarial and Employer Services Branch Public Agency Contract Services P.O. Box 942709 Sacramento, CA 94229-2709
(888) CalPERS (225-7377)
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 7507
I hereby certify that in accordance with Section 7507 of the Government Code
the future annual costs as determined by the System Actuary for the
increase/change in retirement benefit(s) have been made public at a public meeting
of the
on (date)
Resolution / Ordinance.
_____________
________________________ of the (governing body)
(public agency)
which is at least two weeks prior to the adoption of the
Adoption of the retirement benefit increase/change will not be placed on the consent calendar.
Clerk/Secretary
Title Date _______ _
PERS-CON-12A (rev. 1/96)
Plans New to 1959 Survivor Benefit Program:
Indexed Level
The Indexed Level 1959 Survivor Benefit provides a monthly allowance for survivors of members who
were covered for this benefit and who die before retirement. The benefit amounts for calendar year 2014
are $660, $1,319 and $1,979 for one, two and three eligible survivors, respectively. These amounts will
increase by 2% on January 1 of each following year. The increased benefit amounts compounded by 2%
annually are applicable to both current and future beneficiaries. This benefit coverage is available by
contract amendment for those members who are not covered by Federal Social Security with their
employer. The 1959 Survivor Benefit allowance is payable in addition to any other pre -retirement death
benefit paid by Ca1PERS, with the exception of the Special Death Benefit. If the 1959 Survivor Benefit is
greater than the Special Death Benefit, then the difference is paid as the 1959 Survivor Benefit. The
Indexed Level assets are pooled.
The Ca1PERS Board of Administration has approved the Indexed Level 1959 Survivor per member, per
month normal costs for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2013 as follows:
Employer: $4.80
Employee: $2.60
The employer cost to initially join the 1959 Survivor program is the payment of the pool's annual employer
normal cost for a period of five years. For example, if your plan has 65 members who elect the 1959
Survivor Indexed Level benefit at the time of contract, the employer cost would be $3,744.00 (member
count x normal cost x 12) for the first year. The annual employer normal cost and member counts will be
recalculated each year, thus the total employer cost will vary in subsequent years, even though the formula
is the same. After the first five years, agencies will be required to pay the net premium for the Indexed
Level pool (the pool's normal cost after amortization of the pool's surplus of unfunded liability). The
annual payments are due in full at the start of each fiscal year; in general your first full year payment is due
on August 15th following the contract date. As a result, payment cycles may not necessarily correspond
with contract anniversary dates.
The employee cost to fund the 1959 Survivor program is presently $2.60 per covered member, per month.
In accordance with Section 21581 of the Public Employees' Retirement Law, since the total required
premium after the amortization of the pool's surplus exceeds $4.00, the employee and employer shall split
the cost evenly. This cost will be recalculated each year.
CalPERS customarily approves new annual costs for the upcoming fiscal year at the June Finance and
Administration Committee Meeting. Therefore, if your agency contracts with CalPERS and includes this
provision after June 30, 2014, you must contact our office for updated cost information.
Additional information regarding the 1959 Survivor Benefit Program may be found at www.calpers.ca.xov.
Indexed Level 1959 Survivor Fact Sheet rev. 9/9/13
R-14-20
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 5
AGENDA ITEM
Approval of an Agreement to Exchange Real Property Interests with Santa Clara County
(County) Roads & Airports concerning County property located on State Highway 9 and
surrounded by Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve (Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel
Number: 503-37-004) and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) property
located along Stevens Canyon Road at Saratoga Gap and Monte Bello Open Space Preserves
(Portions of Santa Clara County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 351-26-003, 351-16-023 and 351-
16-014).
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Find that the District, acting as a Responsible Agency, has independently considered the
Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by County Roads & Airports regarding the Stevens
Canyon Road bridge replacement project. Determine that the recommended actions related
to the real property exchange are categorically exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act as set out in the staff report.
2. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Agreement to Exchange Interests in Real Property for
roadway and open space purposes between the District and County.
3. Adopt the Preliminary Use and Management Plan for the property granted to the District.
SUMMARY
The proposed exchange agreement involves the District providing the County additional right-of-
way easements to replace two bridges on Stevens Canyon Road and access to District land for
riparian habitat and stream channel restoration work in exchange for a 4.71 acre County in-
holding on Highway 9 as an addition to Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve. The following
report presents a brief description of exchange property interests, a recommended Preliminary
Use and Management Plan, the environmental review analysis, and terms and conditions for the
proposed exchange agreement. A unanimous vote of the seven members of the Board of
Directors (Board) is required to approve this agreement because the transaction involves
dedicated land, the exchange of which is governed by Public Resources Code section 5540.5.
Costs associates with this item are nominal and covered under the existing Real Property Budget.
See summary of Terms and Conditions below.
DISCUSSION
This item was brought to the Board on December 11, 2013 (R-13-119), but a motion modified
the original General Manager’s Recommendation as the full Board was not present due to a
R-14-20 Page 2
Board Member’s illness and full Board approval was required for the original recommendation.
At this meeting, only the Right of Entry Agreements, which do not require full Board consent,
were considered and approved to allow the County to keep the project on schedule and obtain the
needed Federal Certification. The remaining items that are returning to the Board for full Board
consideration as part of tonight’s meeting require unanimous full Board consent as they involve
dedicated open space property. Background information and the details of these items are
described further below and summarized in the Terms and Conditions section.
County Bridge Replacement Project (see map, Attachment A)
Phase 1
At the March 26, 2008 regular meeting, the Board approved a Permit to Enter and Construct with
the County for the Phase 1 replacement of two County bridges along Stevens Canyon Road as
the bridges required a slight roadway realignment affecting approximately 3,700 square feet of
District land (R-08-44). Phase 2 of the project is to replace two additional bridges east of the
Phase 1 bridges on Stevens Canyon Road.
The Phase 1 bridges (bridges 37C576 & 37C577) were widened from one to two lanes and now
meet current safety and fire engine standards. The Permit to Enter was approved with the
understanding that the County would return for the property rights after Phase 1 of the project
was completed. The County finished the construction of these new bridges on November 20,
2012, and is ready to permanently secure the property rights. The County is seeking right of way
easement rights for 3,780 square feet of District Property and due to the realignment, the County
will vacate 4,115 square feet of right-of-way to the District for a net gain to the District of 335
square feet.
As part of the Phase 1 bridge replacement project, the County also requested the ability to utilize
51,634 square feet of District property adjacent to Stevens Creek to meet regulatory agency
mitigation requirements. The mitigation work, which was reviewed and monitored by Natural
Resources staff, included riparian habitat and stream channel restoration. The original term of
the permit was from July 2009 to December 2013. The County requested an extension of this
permit until December 2022 to allow for continued monitoring of the habitat and restoration
work. This Right of Entry was approved by the Board on December 11, 2013.
Phase 2
The County is currently working to replace two more outdated bridges along Stevens Canyon
Road (bridges 37C0574 & 37C0575), and they were in need of a Right of Entry to realign the
roadway to accommodate the new bridges. This Right of Entry was approved by the Board on
December 11, 2013. The new alignment affects approximately 12,484 square feet of District
property. The District will grant the needed permanent property rights after construction is
complete. Similar to Phase 1, the County will vacate any excess right-of-way (currently
estimated at 4,026 square feet) to the District, which would result in a net gain to the County of
8,458 square feet. The District completed a design review of the proposed bridges, and the
County has accepted the District’s suggestion to add earth tone coloring to the bridge concrete to
help the two new bridges better blend into the natural creek surroundings.
In addition, the County requested a separate Right of Entry for the ability to utilize an additional
28,825 square feet of District property adjacent to Stevens Creek to meet mitigation
requirements. The mitigation work will include riparian habitat and stream channel restoration
work and the term is 10 years. This Right of Entry was approved by the Board on December 11,
2013.
R-14-20 Page 3
County Conveyance Property
At the time the first Right of Entry was approved in 2008, the District identified a 4.71-acre
surplus County parcel located off of Highway 9 as a logical addition to the District’s Saratoga
Gap Open Space Preserve as it is surrounded on three sides by District land. On May 28, 2013,
Santa Clara County Roads & Airports secured permission from the County Board of Supervisors
to declare this parcel surplus and to negotiate an Agreement to convey the property to the District
in consideration for the transactions described above. The County obtained approval of the
exchange agreement from the Board of Supervisors on December 17, 2013.
USE AND MANAGEMENT
Preliminary Use and Management Plan (Next Steps)
The principal purpose of the Preliminary Use and Management Plan (PUMP) is to establish
interim status quo District land management to be in effect between the purchase and the
completion of a subsequent long-term plan. The PUMP will remain effective until a
comprehensive plan or Master Plan is approved for Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve. The
PUMP includes routine patrol. The property will be maintained in its current condition, with no
changes anticipated. If changes to land use or the physical environment are proposed in the
future, the plan would be subject to further environmental review and public input.
Public Access: Closed to public use.
Signs and Site
Security:
Review and install preserve boundary signs where appropriate.
Patrol: Patrol the property utilizing Congress Springs Road (Highway 9).
Site Safety
Inspection:
There are no known safety hazards on the site.
Name: Name the property as an addition to the Saratoga Gap Open Space Preserve.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
Project Description
As the Lead Agency on this project, the County of Santa Clara adopted a Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) on February 7, 2012. The project consists of replacing two existing bridges
located on Stevens Canyon Road (a County road) and crossing Stevens Creek. The Project
involves the phased demolition and reconstruction of the two bridges and related roadway
improvements. The MND considered the replacement project and found that, with the
incorporation of mitigations, the project would not have a significant effect on the environment.
The action to be taken by the District consists of granting the County right of way easements and
Rights of Entry as part of the County’s overall Stevens Canyon Bridge Replacement Project in
exchange for the County granting a 4.71 acre property to the District as an addition to Saratoga
Gap Open Space Preserve. Upon completion of the entire project, the District will grant
permanent roadway easements to the County for affected lands, and the County will vacate
excess portions of its existing right of way to the District.
CEQA Determination
R-14-20 Page 4
As a responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the District
considered the MND and determines that no substantial changes in the project or in the
circumstances under which it will be undertaken have occurred.
The District concludes that the acquisition phase of the project will not have a significant effect
on the environment. It is categorically exempt from CEQA under Article 19, Sections 15316,
15317, and 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows:
Section 15316 exempts the acquisition of land in order to create parks if the land is in a natural
condition and the management plan proposes to keep the area in a natural condition. The
Preliminary Use and Management Plan specifies that the land will not be developed and will
remain in a natural condition.
Section 15317 exempts the acceptance of fee interests in order to maintain the open space
character of an area. The District will acquire fee interest in order to maintain the open space
character of the property.
This purchase qualifies under these two sections. The actions recommended in the Preliminary
Use and Management Plan are also exempt under section 15061(b)(3), as there is no possibility
the recommended actions will have a significant effect on the environment.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The Agreement to Exchange Property Interests in Real Property between the County and District
includes the following key terms and conditions:
1. Phase 1 of County Bridge Replacement Project:
• District will grant County right of way easements, including 3,780 square feet for the
completed Phase 1 bridge replacements.
• District has issued an extension of the Right of Entry for Phase 1 mitigation area
(51,634 square feet) until December 31, 2022 at Monte Bello Open Space Preserve.
This allows for continued monitoring of planted native trees and plants and continued
invasive plant removal to ensure a successful restoration.
2. Phase 2 of County Bridge Replacement Project:
• District has issued the County a new Right of Entry until December 31, 2018 for
Phase 2 to replace two bridges on Stevens Canyon Road utilizing 12,484 square feet
of District land for bridge construction, and an additional 4,687 square feet for
temporary construction staging.
• After construction is complete, the District will grant right of way easements to the
County for the needed right of way currently estimated at 8,458 square feet.
• District has issued the County a Right of Entry for mitigation work on Monte Bello
Open Space Preserve for an area of 28,825 square feet along Stevens Creek that
expires December 31, 2025.
3. County grant to District:
• County will grant a 4.71-acre property to the District as an addition to the Saratoga
Gap Open Space Preserve.
R-14-20 Page 5
• County will vacate the excess right of way for Stevens Canyon Road after bridge
construction is complete, which is estimated at 11,921 square feet.
4. Escrow for these property conveyances would close on or before December 31, 2018. Title
and escrow costs will be split 50/50 between the County and District.
The District has determined that the exchange of interest in real property is of equal or greater
value to the public, and the exchange has been determined to be in accordance with the District’s
enabling legislation set out in Section 5500 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code.
Because the District land needed for the bridge replacements is dedicated land, a unanimous vote
of the seven Board members is required to approve this property exchange.
FISCAL IMPACT
The District will be responsible for splitting any escrow fees and closing costs with the County
50/50. These minor costs will be covered from the Real Property Budget.
BOARD COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
The Board previously reviewed this project in March 2008 and December 2013. Therefore,
additional Board Committee review is not required for this agenda item.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. Adjoining property owners have been
mailed a copy of the agenda for this public meeting.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, staff will work to execute the easement agreements,
execute the grant deed, and oversee the construction phase of the project as it impacts District
property. The conveyance of the right of way easements to the County and the 4.71 acre
property to the District will close escrow on or before October 31, 2018.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Location Map
Responsible Department Manager:
Michael Williams, Real Property Manager
Prepared by:
Allen Ishibashi, Real Property Specialist
Graphics prepared by:
Michele Childs, GIS Technician
Jon Montgomery, GIS Intern
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION 14-_____
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF
AGREEMENT TO EXCHANGE INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY; AUTHORIZING
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD, GENERAL MANAGER OR OTHER OFFICER TO
EXECUTE EASEMENT DEEDS WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CERTIFICATES
OF ACCEPTANCE FOR THE GRANT DEED, AND QUITCLAIM DEEDS TO THE
DISTRICT; AND AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY
AND ALL OTHER DOCUMENTS NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE TO THE
CLOSING OF THE TRANSACTION (MONTE BELLO & SARATOGA GAP OPEN
SPACE PRESERVE-LANDS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY)
The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District does resolve as
follows:
SECTION ONE. Accepts the Agreement to Exchange Interests in Real Property between Santa
Clara County and the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and authorizes the President
of the Board, General Manager or appropriate officer to execute the Agreement on behalf of the
District.
SECTION TWO. Authorizes the General Manager, President of the Board or other appropriate
officer to execute right of way easement deeds to Santa Clara County and the certificates of
acceptance for the Santa Clara County conveyances to the District (grant deed and quitclaim
deeds).
SECTION THREE. Authorizes the General Manager and General Counsel to execute any and
all other documents necessary or appropriate to the closing of the transaction approved in this
Resolution. Authorizes the General Manager and General Counsel to also approve minor, or
technical revisions to the Agreement and Easement Deeds that do not involve any substantial
change to any terms of the Agreement and Easement Deeds, and which are necessary or
appropriate to the closing or implementation of this transaction.
SECTION FOUR. Directs the General Manager or the General Manager’s designee to give
appropriate notice of acceptance to the County and to extend escrow if necessary.
SECTION FIVE. Authorizes the General Manager or the General Manager’s designee to
expend up to $2,500.00 to cover the cost of title insurance, escrow fees, and other miscellaneous
costs related to this transaction.
SECTION SIX. Finds and determines that, pursuant to § 5540.5 of the Public Resources Code
of the State of California, the granting and acceptance of these fee and easement property
interests are consistent with Public Resources Code §5540.5, that the real properties being
acquired by the District are of equal or greater value than the real property interests being
conveyed to Santa Clara County, and are necessary to be acquired for open space purposes.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Phase 1 Mitigation
Phase 2BridgeReplacement
CountySurplusParcel
Phase 2Mitigation
Phase 1Completed BridgeReplacementSaratogaGap
MonteBello
SaratogaGap
£¤35
CA H w y.9
StevensCan yo n R d .
Heather
Hei g h ts Rd.
RedMountain Trail
Zinfa n delTrail
Achistacatrail
SaratogaG
a
p
Trail
Char
c
o
alRd
CharcoalRoad
C
r
e
e
k
T
r
a
il
RedMountain Trail
£¤9
Stevens
Creek
O i l C reek Sar a t o g a Creek
Mi d p en in su la Re g io na lOpen S p ac e Di st r ic tAttachment A : S t e v e n s C re e k B r id g e s
December, 2013
Path: G:\Projects\Saratoga_Gap\Stevens_Canyon\Stevens_Canyon_Bridges.mxd
Created By: jmontgomery
0 0.50.25MilesI
(M RO S D )
Ot her Pr o t ect ed O p en S p ac eor Pa rk La nds No n M R O SD C o n serv at io n or A g ri c ult ur al E asem ent
MR O SD C on serv at i o nor A g ri c ult ur al E asem ent
MR O SD Pr ese rves
Pr i va te Pr op er t y
Deve lo ped L a nd
While the District strive s t o u se t he best availab le digit al d at a, this data does not rep resent a legal survey an d is mer ely a graphic illustration of geographic featur es.
!
!
!
!
!
!
Cupertino
Area ofDetail
£¤280
St ev e ns_Ca n yo n _Br idge s&".mxd"
£¤35
C ou nt y S ur p lus Par cel
Br i dg e Repl ace ment
Mi t i g at i o n
Canyon
Trail
R-14-09
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 6
AGENDA ITEM
Adoption of Ordinance Amending the “Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Lands” and Adoption of District Bail Schedule for newly added Regulations
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Waive second reading and adopt the ordinance updating Regulations for Use of
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands;
2. Adopt the District Bail Schedule for newly added Regulations.
SUMMARY
Proposed updates to the District’s Regulations for use of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Lands were reviewed by the Board of Directors at a first reading on January 8, 2014 (see
report R-14-06). During that meeting two revisions to the proposed updates were discussed and
approved by the Board as described below. Attachment 1 contains the final language of the
ordinance proposed for adoption.
DISCUSSION
The two revisions adopted during the Board meeting have been included in the proposed updates
(see Attachment 1). The revisions are: the update of an existing regulation requiring the removal
of dog excrement (701.5), and the addition of a new regulation (702.7) which prohibits the
diversion of water. The changes to the regulations are shown below (text to be added appears in
underline; text to be removed appears in strikethrough).
701.5 Removal of Dog Excrement. No person responsible for an animal a dog shall allow its excrement
or feces to remain in an area if it poses a health hazard, a public nuisance, or is in an area posted
requiring its removal on District lands.
702.7 Unpermitted Diversion of Water.
No person shall divert water from any surface water, ground water, or water storage facility on
District Lands without the express written permission of the District.
FISCAL IMPACT
The District receives minimal revenue from the court fines. The newly added regulations are not
anticipated to noticeably change revenues from court fines.
R-14-09 Page 2
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under CEQA.
NEXT STEPS
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code section 5547, the ordinance will be published in a
newspaper of general circulation within 30 days after adoption.
Staff will submit the updated Bail Schedule to the San Mateo and Santa Clara County courts for
implementation.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance: “Regulations For Use Of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands”
2. Additions to the District’s Bail Schedule
Responsible Department Head:
Brian Malone, Acting Operations Manager
Prepared by:
Gordon C. Baillie, Operations Management Analyst
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-01
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 93-1 REGARDING THE USE OF
DISTRICT LANDS
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE
DISTRICT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION ONE. Findings.
A. Pursuant to Public Resources Code §5558, the Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula
Regional Open Space District (District) hereby finds that adoption of this ordinance is
necessary for the administration, governance, protection, and use of District lands and
facilities, and is necessary and appropriate for the sage use of District lands by the public.
B. The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District further finds
that the proposed ordinance is consistent with, and assists in implementing, the District’s
Basic Policy Statement.
SECTION TWO. Sections 100 through Section 808 of Ordinance 14-01 are hereby adopted
as attached in Exhibit A, a copy of which is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set
forth.
SECTION THREE. A copy of this ordinance shall be published at least once within thirty (30)
days of adoption in a newspaper of general circulation in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties
and printed, published, and circulated in the District, and shall be effective from and after July 1,
2014.
The foregoing ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors
held on January 8, 2014, and adopted as an ordinance of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District at a regular meeting of the Board of Directors held on January 22, 2014, 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
Page 1 of 21
REGULATIONS FOR USE OF
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT LANDS
Adopted by Ordinance No. 93-1, July 28, 1993
Revised and Adopted by Ordinance No. 96-1, February 28, 1996
Revised and Adopted by Ordinance No. 03-01, June 6, 2003
Revised and Adopted by Ordinance No. 03-02, August 13, 2003
Revised and Adopted by Ordinance No. 04-01, August 25 2004
Revised and Adopted by Ordinance No. 14-01, January 22, 2014
CHAPTER I.
DEFINITIONS
SECTION 100. TITLE. The following regulations shall be known as “Regulations for Use of
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Lands” and may be referred
to as “land use regulations.”
SECTION 101. PURPOSE. These regulations are adopted to provide responsible stewardship
for District Lands, to establish orderly use, and to maintain a natural and quiet
environment for persons on the lands. They are established according to the
Basic Policy of the Board of Directors of MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, adopted March 27, 1974, and as amended March
10, 1999, that “The District follows management policies that ensure proper
care of the land, that provide public access appropriate to the nature of the
land, and that are consistent with ecological values and public safety.”
SECTION 102. DEFINITIONS. Unless the context otherwise requires, the following
definitions shall govern the construction and interpretation of these
regulations.
SECTION 103. DISTRICT, DISTRICT LANDS DEFINED. “District” means MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. The term “District Lands” includes all
lands, interests in lands, structures, improvements, and waters owned,
controlled, leased, licensed or managed by MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN
SPACE DISTRICT.
SECTION 104. PERSON DEFINED. “Person” means any individual, firm, corporation,
club, municipality, district, or public agency, and all associations or
combinations of persons whenever acting for themselves or by any agent,
servant, or employee.
SECTION 105 JUVENILE DEFINED. A juvenile is defined as any person under the age of
18 years.
SECTION 106 SADDLE OR PACK ANIMAL DEFINED. A saddle or pack animal is
defined as any horse, pony, mule, donkey, other member of the equine family,
alpaca or llama whether used for riding or packing or neither. It does not
include any other animal that may be used for saddle or packing purposes.
Page 2 of 21
SECTION 107 DESIGNATED TRAIL DEFINED. A “Designated Trail,” is a trail
maintained by the District which is shown on the District’s official preserve
maps or is identified as a designated trail in the District’s Use and
Management Plan for the preserve. The area of the trail is defined as the
graded trail surface. It does not include the uphill embankment, downhill
embankment, or any area or corridor adjacent to the trail surface.
SECTION 108 DESIGNATED AREA DEFINED. A “Designated Area,” is any area or trail
on District lands specifically designated for a specific use or activity or where
a specific use or activity is prohibited or restricted by a District rule,
regulation, Ordinance, sign, notice or permit.
SECTION 109 WATER AREAS OF THE DISTRICT DEFINED. “Water Areas of the
District,” are defined as all water areas on District Lands, including, but not
limited to, natural and artificial swimming pools, reservoirs, ponds, lakes,
creeks, streams, bays, tidal areas, flood control channels, and other structures
designed or able to hold water.
SECTION 110. PERMIT OR PERMISSION DEFINED. Unless otherwise expressly provided
herein, “permit” or “permission” means permission, granted in writing by the
General Manager or his/her designee or an authorized representative of
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT.
SECTION 111. CLIMBING DEFINED. Climbing is defined as suspending oneself by hands
and or feet or with a rope or other support, such that one could not stand up
unsupported on his/her feet or progress up or down without the use of their
hands or other support without jumping or falling.
SECTION 112 DISTRICT EMPLOYEE DEFINED. A “District Employee,” is any full or
part time paid employee of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. This
definition does not include volunteers.
SECTION 113. BOARD DEFINED. “Board” means the Board of Directors of
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT.
SECTION 114. HEADINGS AND DIVISIONS. Headings and divisions are for convenience
only, and shall not be considered in the interpretation of this Ordinance, and
shall not in any way affect the conduct or activities covered by other sections
of this Ordinance.
SECTION 115. PUBLIC VIEW DEFINED. “Public View” is defined as a location which can
be seen from a road, trail, staging area, parking lot, campground or picnic area,
or other District structure or facility.
CHAPTER II.
REGULATIONS
SECTION 200. GENERAL REGULATIONS. District Lands shall be open and accessible to
all persons, except as otherwise provided by resolution, regulation, or rule of
Page 3 of 21
the Board, by administrative action of the General Manager or his/her designee
under this Ordinance, or by individual Site Use and Management Plans
adopted by the Board.
200.1 The Board may, by resolution, regulation, or rule, provide for a system of
permits and the issuance thereof. It may by such system require permits for
the use of certain lands, exempt certain lands or classifications of permits there
from, and establish a system of fees and other policies in connection with the
administration of a permit system.
200.2 Any person entering upon District Lands shall abide by the rules and
regulations of the District, the regulations or provisions of any sign or posted
notice, the terms and conditions of any permit, the lawful order or other
instruction of any District ranger appointed by the Board or any peace officer,
the laws of the State of California, any Federal law, and all applicable county
and other local ordinances.
200.3 The provisions of this Ordinance shall not apply to employees and officials of
the District acting within the scope of their authorized duties. However,
District employees and officials shall abide by the laws of the State of
California, any Federal law and all applicable county, city and other local
ordinances.
200.4 All District lessees, contractors, consultants, agents and representatives shall
abide by all provisions of this Ordinance unless the provision(s) conflicts with
a written contract or agreement with the District. When a conflict occurs, the
conditions of the written contract or agreement shall take precedence.
However, lessees, contractors, and consultants shall abide by the laws of the
State of California, any Federal law, and all applicable county, city and other
local ordinances.
200.5 Failure to comply with a permit. No person issued a permit shall violate the
terms or conditions of the permit.
SECTION 201. SPECIAL REGULATIONS. Special regulations or requirements do not
preclude the application of general regulations unless expressly indicated.
CHAPTER III.
GENERAL RULES
SECTION 300. AUTHORITY. All sections of this Ordinance are adopted pursuant to
Sections 5541, 5558, and 5559 of the Public Resources Code of the State of
California, and apply to all District Lands. A title, where used, does not limit
the language of a section.
SECTION 301. VIOLATIONS OF ORDINANCE, A MISDEMEANOR OR INFRACTION.
Unless otherwise stated, any violation of this Ordinance or of any rule or
regulation adopted by the District is punishable as an infraction.
Page 4 of 21
When any violation of this Ordinance or of any rule or regulation adopted
by the District is punishable as a misdemeanor, the prosecutor may file a
complaint or make a motion to amend an accusatory pleading specifying that
the offense is an infraction.
When any violation of this Ordinance or of any rule or regulation adopted
by the District is punishable as an infraction, the prosecutor may file a
complaint or make a motion to amend an accusatory pleading specifying that
the offense is a misdemeanor.
SECTION 302. SEVERABILITY. If any chapter, section, subsection, paragraph,
subparagraph, sentence, or clause of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held to
be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this
Ordinance. The Board of Directors declares that this Ordinance, and each
chapter, section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, and clause thereof, would
have been adopted regardless of such possible finding of invalidity or
unconstitutionality and, to that end, the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
declared to be severable.
SECTION 303. AMENDMENT OR REPEAL. When a section, rule, or regulation is amended
or repealed, acts and commissions occurring before the amendment or repeal
may be prosecuted as though such section, rule, or regulation had not been
amended or repealed.
SECTION 304 CITATIONS FOR MISDEMEANORS. If any person is arrested for a
violation of an ordinance, and such person is not immediately taken before a
magistrate, the arresting officer shall prepare in duplicate a written notice to
appear in court, containing the name and address of such person, the offense
charged, and the time and place where and when such person shall appear in
court.
a) The time specified in the notice to appear must be at least five days after
such arrest.
b) The place specified in the notice to appear shall be the court of the
magistrate before whom the person would be taken if the requirement of
taking an arrested person before a magistrate were complied with, or shall
be an officer authorized by such court to receive a deposit of bail.
c) The officer shall deliver one copy of the notice to appear to the arrested
person, and the arrested person in order to secure release must give his/her
written promise so to appear in court by signing the duplicate notice
which shall be retained by the officer. Thereupon the arresting officer
shall forthwith release the person arrested from custody.
d) The officer shall, as soon as practicable thereafter, file the duplicate notice
with the magistrate specified therein. Thereupon the magistrate shall fix
the amount of bail which in his/her judgment, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 1275 of the Penal Code, will be reasonable and
sufficient for the appearance of the defendant and shall indorse upon the
notice a statement signed by him in the form set forth in Section 815a of
Page 5 of 21
the Penal Code. The defendant may, prior to the date upon which he/she
promised to appear in court, deposit with the magistrate the amount of bail
thus set. Thereafter, at the time when the case is called for arraignment
before the magistrate, if the defendant shall not appear, either in person or
by counsel, the magistrate may declare the bail forfeited, and may in
his/her discretion order that no further proceedings shall be had in such
case. Upon the making of such order that no further proceedings be had,
all sums deposited as bail shall forthwith be paid into the county treasury
for distribution pursuant to Section 1463 of the Penal Code.
e) No warrant shall issue on such charge for the arrest of a person who has
given such written promise to appear in court, unless and until he/she has
violated such promise or has failed to deposit bail, to appear for
arraignment, trial or judgment, or to comply with the terms and provisions
of the judgment, as required by law.
SECTION 305 WILLFULLY VIOLATING WRITTEN PROMISE TO APPEAR. Any
person who willfully violates his/her or her written promise to appear or a
lawfully granted continuance of his/her promise to appear in court is guilty of
a misdemeanor, regardless of the disposition of the charge upon which he/she
was originally arrested.
SECTION 306 ARREST WARRANT FOLLOWING FAILURE TO APPEAR. When a
person signs a written promise to appear at the time and place specified in the
written promise to appear and has not posted bail as provided in Section
5560.5 of the Public Resources Code, the magistrate shall issue and have
delivered for execution a warrant for his/her arrest within 20 days after his/her
failure to appear as promised, or if such person promises to appear before an
officer authorized to accept bail other than a magistrate and fails to do so on
or before the date which he/she promised to appear, then, within 20 days after
the delivery of such written promise to appear by the officer to a magistrate
having jurisdiction over the offense. When such person violates his/her
promise to appear before an officer authorized to receive bail other than a
magistrate, the officer shall immediately deliver to the magistrate having
jurisdiction over the offense charged the written promise to appear and the
complaint, if any, filed by the arresting officer.
CHAPTER IV.
PRESERVE USES – GENERAL
SECTION 400. CAMPING.
400.1 General. No person shall erect or use a tent or shelter of any kind, arrange
bedding, or prepare food in such a way that will enable a person to remain
after official closing hours on District Lands, except by written permit in
Designated Areas. Any person receiving a written permit to camp in a
designated area shall abide by the terms and conditions of the permit.
400.2 Juvenile. No juvenile shall camp on any District Lands, except when:
Page 6 of 21
a) accompanied by a parent or guardian; or
b) part of a group supervised by at least one adult responsible for each ten or
fewer juveniles; or
c) the juvenile is an emancipated minor.
SECTION 401. SWIMMING
.
401.1 General. No person shall swim, wade, or engage in any water-contact activity
in any Water Areas of the District except in Designated Areas.
401.2 Definition. “Water-contact activity” is defined as any activity in which the
body of a person comes into physical contact with water areas by swimming,
washing, wading, aqua-planing, paddle boarding, skin diving, water skiing or
similar activity. It does not include boating, fishing, or when using a
Designated Trail.
SECTION 402. BOATING.
402.1 General. No person shall place, or attempt to place, a boat, kayak, rubber raft,
or other vessel of any description in the Water Areas of the District, except as
expressly allowed by permit or rule or regulation of the District.
SECTION 403. FIREARMS, TRAPS, WEAPONS, AND DANGEROUS DEVICES.
403.1 General.
a) No person shall carry, possess, use, set, leave or deposit, fire or discharge,
or cause to be fired or discharged, across, in, on, or into any portion of
District Lands any gun or firearm, spear, missile, bow and arrow, cross
bow, sling shot, trap, snare or hunting device, ammunition, throwing knife,
hatchet, axe, sword, machete, martial arts throwing device, any device
capable of firing or launching a projectile, or any other weapon or device
not otherwise specified, capable of injuring or killing any person or animal.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
b) No person shall carry, possess, set, leave or deposit, fire or discharge, or
cause to be fired or discharged, across, in, on, or into any portion of
District Lands any paint ball gun, BB gun, air gun or similar device.
403.2 Exceptions. This section shall not apply to:
a) the possession of otherwise lawful unloaded firearms or dangerous
weapons on public roads solely for the purpose of transporting such
firearms or dangerous weapons through District Lands for lawful purposes;
b) the possession of otherwise lawful firearms or other dangerous weapons at
a place of residence or business located on District Lands by a person in
lawful possession of the residence or business;
c) the possession and use of such firearms or weapons granted by written
permit for resource management or educational purposes.
Page 7 of 21
SECTION 404. FIRES.
404.1 General. No person shall light, build, maintain, or attempt to light, build, or
maintain, a fire of any nature on District Lands, except in permanent fixed
barbecues, camp stoves or fireplaces established and authorized by the District.
A fire shall include, but not be limited to any campfire, ground fire, warming
fire, signal fire, charcoal fire, stove, gas lantern, punk, candle, smudge stick,
flare, fusee, or any other incendiary device. This shall not apply to the
permitted use of gas camp stoves or gas lanterns when used in Designated
Area specified for camping.
404.2 Smoking. No person shall smoke on District Lands, except in Designated
Areas.
SECTION 405. SANITATION.
405.1 Disposal of Effluent. No person shall deposit waste water, sewage or effluent
from vehicles, trailers, sinks, portable toilets, or other fixtures upon or into the
ground or water. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
405.2 Use of Facilities. No person shall deposit any waste in or on any portion of
any restroom or other structure except into fixtures provided for that purpose.
405.3 Protection of Facilities. No person shall place any bottle, can, cloth, rag,
metal, wood, paper, stone, or other substances in any fixture in such a manner
as would interfere with the normal operation of such fixture.
405.4 Defecation. No person shall defecate in Public View or within twenty-five
(25) feet of a Designated Trail.
405.5 Urination. No person shall urinate in Public View.
SECTION 406. METAL DETECTORS.
406.1 General. No person shall possess or use a metal detector or similar device on
District Lands, except as provided in subsection 702.5.
SECTION 407. DISTURBING THE PEACE.
407.1 Obstructing Free Passage. No person shall by force, threat, intimidation, or by
any unlawful signing, fencing or enclosing, or any other unlawful means,
prevent or obstruct any person from peacefully entering any District Lands, or
prevent or obstruct free passage or transit over or through any District Lands.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
407.2 Interference With Use of District Lands. No person shall engage in behavior
that unreasonably interferes with others in the normal, free and safe use of
District Lands. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
Page 8 of 21
407.3 Noise. No person shall play or operate any sound amplification devices,
including radios, television sets, public address systems, musical instruments,
or similar devices in such a way as to be audible beyond 100 feet of such
device or musical instrument, or in such a manner as to disturb the quiet of
District Lands, without prior written permission.
407.4 Lawful Order. It is unlawful to willfully fail or refuse to comply with any
lawful order, signal, or direction of any District or other peace officer when
that peace officer is performing his/her duties under any of the provisions of
this Ordinance, or other statute, code, Federal, State or local law, ordinance or
regulation which the District or other peace officer is authorized to enforce.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
407.5 Order to Vacate. Any person who has committed a public offense in a District
preserve or within the District’s boundaries shall leave District lands upon
request made by any Peace Officer. No person who has left such lands after
such a request may reenter any District lands prior to official sunrise on the
following day.
SECTION 408. ORGANIZED GROUP SPECIAL EVENTS AND ACTIVITIES.
408.1 Organized Group Special Events and Activities Defined.
An Organized Group Special Event or Activity is any event or activity which:
a) is advertised or noticed in any publication, poster, electronic posting,
social media, or flyer; or
b) requests or requires a fee be paid for participation; or
c) may be attended by twenty (20) or more people.
408.2 Permits. No person shall hold, conduct, organize, or take part in any Special
Event or Activity as defined in section 408.1 on District Lands without written
permission. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as an infraction.
a) Where such unpermitted Special Event or Activity causes direct physical
harm to District Lands, or which is attended by forty (40) or more people,
or which is conducted after official hours, then violation of this sub-section
is punishable as a misdemeanor.
408.3 Individual Participation
. No person shall participate in any Activity or Special
Event on District Lands without written permission when the Activity or
Special Event requires a written permit pursuant to this Ordinance.
408.4 The District may deny a request for a permit when the General Manager or
his/her designee finds that the requested Special Event or Activity or similar
event will disrupt or unreasonably interfere with the normal use, operation,
enjoyment or management of the site or facility, or have an adverse impact on
the ecological or historical characteristics of any District Lands.
Page 9 of 21
SECTION 409. MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES.
409.1 Fireworks. No person shall possess, deposit, give, sell, discharge, set off, or
cause to be discharged, on or into any portion of District Lands any
firecrackers, missiles, rockets, fireworks, explosives, or explosive devices.
409.2 Harmful Substances. No person shall possess, place, or apply any substance
on District Lands harmful to any person, property, wildlife, or vegetation.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
409.3 Golf. No person shall drive, chip, or in any other manner play or practice golf,
or hit golf balls on, over, or into District Lands.
409.4 Model Craft. No person shall operate any self-propelled or remote controlled
drones, model airplanes, boats, automobiles, or other model craft of any kind
or description on, over, or into any portion of District Lands or Water Areas of
the District, except in Designated Areas, or by written permit. When allowed,
model craft shall be operated in compliance with posted or adopted rules and
regulations.
409.5 Human Flight. No person shall hang-glide, parachute, parasail or engage in
any human flight on, over, or into District Lands, except by written permit in
Designated Areas. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a
misdemeanor.
409.6 Skating, Scooters, Skate Boards and Other Coasting, Sledding or Sliding
Devices. No person shall roller skate, in-line skate, grass skate, grass ski,
grass sled or operate a go cart, self propelled or motorized scooter, a self-
propelled or motorized skate board, or similar device on District Lands
including off road versions of all the listed devices, except on trails or
locations specifically designated for such use.
409.7 Reckless or Negligent Activity. No person shall engage in any recreational
pursuit or activity, or operate any device that recklessly or negligently
endangers the safety of any: person, property, wildlife, natural features or
which interferes with visitor activities. Violation of this sub-section is
punishable as a misdemeanor.
409.8 Possession of a District Lock or Key. Any person who possesses, makes,
duplicates, causes to be duplicated, or uses, or attempts to make, duplicate,
cause to be duplicated, or use, or has in his possession any key to a building or
other area owned, operated, or controlled by the District without authorization
from the person in charge of such building or area or his designated
representative, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
409.9 Segways and Electric Bicycles. No person shall possess or use a Segway,
electric powered bicycle, or similar device on District Lands including off road
versions of all the listed devices, except on trails or locations specifically
designated for such use.
SECTION 410. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES.
Page 10 of 21
410.1 General. No person shall possess or consume alcoholic beverages except beer
and wine, and only as part of a picnic meal.
410.2 Designated Area. No person shall possess or consume alcoholic beverages in
an area that has been declared by the General Manager or his/her designee or
an authorized representative to be an area where alcohol use is prohibited.
SECTION 411. SIGNS.
411.1 Defacement. No person shall remove, deface, change, mark, or otherwise
alter any sign duly erected or posted on District Lands. Violation of this sub-
section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
411.2 Unauthorized Signs. No person shall post or fasten any notice, including but
not limited to, any bill, advertisement, directional or informational sign, or
inscription whatsoever on any tree, fence, building, monument, sign, bulletin
board, utility pole, lighting fixture, or other property on District Lands, without
written permission.
411.3 Obeying Signs. No person shall fail to obey the directions of a posted
regulatory sign.
SECTION 412 NUDITY. No person shall expose any part of the pubic or anal region or
genitalia while on District Lands in Public View.
CHAPTER V.
PRESERVE USES - RIDING/HIKING TRAILS
SECTION 500. RIDING / HIKING TRAILS.
500.1 Trail Use Speed Limit. All users of District Lands shall comply with all
established trail use speed limits. The maximum speed for all trail uses is 15
miles per hour, unless otherwise posted. Bicyclists and equestrians are
required to slow to 5 miles per hour when passing others or approaching blind
turns.
500.2 One-way Trails. No person shall operate a bicycle or unicycle or similar
device, or ride or lead a saddle horse, pony, mule, or other such animal on a
one-way trail in a direction or travel designated or signed to prohibit such use.
500.3 Gates. Any person opening a gate shall close the gate.
500.4 Dangerous Trail Use. No person shall run or jog in such a way as to endanger
hikers, equestrians, bicyclists or others using District Lands.
SECTION 501. SADDLE ANIMALS.
Page 11 of 21
501.1 Closed Areas. No person shall ride, drive, or lead a Saddle or Pack Animal on
any trail, roadway or established firebreak designated or signed to restrict
horse use. Saddle or pack animals must stay on Designated Trails, roadways
which are Designated Areas for such use, and established firebreaks.
501.2 Unsafe Use. No person shall ride, drive, or lead any saddle or pack animal in
a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger public property, or the life,
limb, or property of any person or animal, including the rider. No person shall
allow his/her saddle or pack animal to stand unattended or insecurely tied.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
501.3 Carts and Wagons. No person shall possess or operate a cart, wagon, or
similar device attached to any animal on District Lands without a written
permit.
SECTION 502. BICYCLES.
502.1 Closed Areas. No person shall possess or operate a bicycle, unicycle or
similar device on District Lands except on trails or roadways designated by the
District for such use.
502.2 Unsafe Operation. No person shall operate a bicycle or unicycle or similar
device in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger public property, or
the life, limb, or property of any person or animal including the rider.
Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
502.3 Helmet Violations.
a) No person eighteen years or older shall operate a bicycle or unicycle or
similar device upon District Lands unless that person is wearing a properly
fitted and fastened bicycle helmet. Such bicycle helmets must meet the
standards of either the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) or the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC), or standards subsequently established by those entities.
b) Except in designated parking areas, no person shall possess a bicycle or
unicycle or similar device on District Lands without also possessing a
bicycle helmet. Such bicycle helmets must meet the standards of either the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or the United States
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), or standards subsequently
established by those entities
502.4 Walk-Only Zones. No person shall ride a bicycle or unicycle or similar device
on a section of trail designated or signed as a walk-only zone. Any person
may dismount and walk a bicycle through a walk-only zone.
502.5 Mechanical Operation. No person shall operate a bicycle, unicycle or similar
device on District Lands that does not have properly functioning brakes, drive
train, seat and steering.
Page 12 of 21
502.6 Headsets and Earplugs. A person operating a bicycle, unicycle or similar
device on District lands may not wear a headset covering, or earplugs in, both
ears. This prohibition does not apply to any person using a prosthetic device
that aids the hard of hearing or any other medical device required to be worn
for medical purposes.
SECTION 503 CLIMBING
503.1 Climb In Designated Areas Only. No person shall climb or rappel on any
rocks, boulders, caves, cliffs, any other geologic formations, or trees on
District Lands except in Designated Area.
503.2 Placing Anchors Prohibited. No person shall place any permanent anchors or
bolts in rock, soil, trees or other natural or manmade features on District Lands
in a designated climbing area unless specific written authorization has been
granted by the District in advance. Violation of this sub-section is punishable
as a misdemeanor.
503.3 Possession of Tools. No person shall possess tools used for installing anchors,
bolts or clearing vegetation from geologic formations, including but not
limited to wire brushes, scrapers, drills, or rock hammers on District Lands.
except in a designated parking area, or with written permission.
SECTION 504 TRESPASS ON DISTRICT LANDS: Trespass on District Lands is unlawful
under Section 602 of the Penal Code. As defined in the Penal Code trespass
includes, but is not limited to, destruction of property and unauthorized entry
on to District Lands or private property.
CHAPTER VI.
PRESERVE USES - COMMERCIAL/REVENUE
SECTION 600. COMMERCIAL SOLICITING.
600.1 General. No person shall solicit, sell, hawk, or attempt to solicit, sell, or hawk,
or otherwise peddle any goods, wares, merchandise, liquids, edibles for human
consumption, or distribute commercial circulars, pamphlets, or flyers on
District Lands except by written permission. Violation of this sub-section is
punishable as a misdemeanor.
SECTION 601. GRAZING.
601.1 General. No person shall allow cattle, sheep, goats, or any animal to graze,
browse, or feed on District Lands except with written permission. Violation of
this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
SECTION 602. HARVESTING AND PLANTING.
Page 13 of 21
602.1 General. No person shall plant, cultivate, harvest, or attempt to plant,
cultivate, or harvest any plant or agricultural crop on District Lands except
with written permission. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a
misdemeanor.
602.2 Possession of Tools. No person shall possess equipment, tools or supplies for
the cultivation or removal of plant life including, but not limited to shovels,
rakes, hoes, garden hoses, irrigation equipment, fertilizer, herbicides,
insecticides, or wheelbarrows on District Lands except in a designated parking
area, or with written permission.
SECTION 603. COMMERCIAL FILMING.
603.1 General. No person shall conduct a filming operation involving the use of film
equipment, lighting, props, or other similar materials, except for a single still,
motion picture, video, digital or other camera, for commercial purposes on
District Lands except pursuant to a permit authorizing such activity. This
section shall not apply to the commercial operation of cameras as part of the
bona fide reporting of news. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a
misdemeanor.
SECTION 604 COMMERCIAL USES.
No person shall engage in commercial activities on District lands, without
prior written permission from the District.
CHAPTER VII.
PRESERVE FEATURES - PROTECTION
SECTION 700. HUNTING, FISHING, COLLECTING AND FEEDING.
700.1 Hunting. No person shall possess, hunt, pursue, molest, disturb, injure, trap,
snare, take, net, poison, introduce, release or harm or attempt to hunt, pursue,
molest, disturb, injure, trap, take, net, poison, introduce, release or harm any
mammal or bird, or any other wild animal living or dead. This section shall
include taking of any part of the mammal or bird. Violation of this sub-section
is punishable as a misdemeanor.
700.2 Fishing. No person shall possess, take, fish for, net, molest, disturb, injure,
poison, collect, introduce, release or harm any or attempt to take, fish for, net,
molest, disturb, injure, poison, collect introduce, release or harm any fish
except by written permit in any District Water Area except in areas declared by
the District to be permitted fishing areas, where state laws regulate the taking
of game fish.
700.3 Carry or Possess Fishing Equipment. No person shall carry, possess, set, leave
or deposit any fishing equipment or similar devices in, on, or into any portion
of District Lands or District managed body of water.
700.4 Collecting Reptiles, Amphibians or Mollusks. No person shall possess, take,
fish for, net, molest, disturb, injure, poison, collect, introduce, release or harm
Page 14 of 21
or attempt to take, fish for, net, molest, disturb, injure, poison, collect,
introduce, release or harm any reptiles, amphibians, or mollusks living or dead,
except by written permit.
700.5 Collecting Insects. No person possess, shall take, net, collect, introduce,
release, poison or attempt to take, net, poison, collect, introduce, or release any
insects or arthropods living or dead, except by written permit.
700.6 Feeding. No person shall feed any animal on District Lands or deposit any
food, salt or edible material on any District Lands for that purpose without
written permission.
700.7 Collection of Animal, Bird, or Reptile Parts. Except by written permit, no
person shall take, collect, possess any animal, bird, or reptile body parts
including, but not limited to: antlers, skulls, fur, bones, skin, or feathers.
SECTION 701. ANIMALS.
701.1 Dogs.
a) No person shall have more than three dogs per person within areas where
dogs are allowed on District Lands.
b) No person shall allow or have a dog on District Lands except in those
areas designated by the District. This subsection shall not apply to:
1) guide and service dogs under physical control, specifically trained to
assist the blind, deaf, or disabled;
2) guide and service dogs in training to assist the blind, deaf, or disabled,
and under physical control, and participating in a training program,.
3) use authorized by written permit.
c) Leash Required. No person shall allow or have a dog on District Lands,
unless the dog is at all times under control, and on a leash not to exceed 6
feet, or on a self-retracting leash with a maximum extended length of 25
feet. The leash must be held by person responsible for the dog and must be
made of material and construction sufficient to restrain the dog. Electronic
or other “invisible leashes” do not meet the leash requirement. The self-
retracting leash must have the capability of being retracted and locked in a
position not to exceed 6 feet. Within a designated area, no person shall
have or allow a dog on a lead greater than 6 feet when:
1) Within 100 feet of any parking area, trailhead, picnic area,
campground, horse stable, public roadway, restroom, visitor center,
ranger station, or other place or structure of public assembly;
2) Within 50 feet of any person that is not the person or persons who
entered District lands with the dog; or
3) Within 50 feet of any District Water Area.
4) When the dog is not visible to the owner.
Page 15 of 21
d) Off-Leash Areas. Dogs shall be permitted off leash only in areas
specifically designated and signed by the District as off-leash areas. No
person shall allow or have a dog in an off-leash area unless the dog is at all
times under the verbal or radio collar control, and in sight of, its owner or
person responsible for the dog. The owner or person responsible for the
dog shall have a leash in his/her possession at all times.
e) Nuisance Dogs. No person shall allow or have on District Lands a dog that
is a nuisance to people, other animals, or property. This includes, but is not
limited to: growling, excessive barking, scratching, jumping on any person
or animal, or challenging in any manner, people, animals, or property.
f) Dogs in Water Areas. No person responsible for a dog shall allow said dog
to enter any District Water Area unless it is specifically designated to allow
such entry.
g) Dangerous Dog. No person shall allow or have on District Lands a dog
that exhibits dangerous behavior including, but is not limited to: attacking,
biting or causing injury to any person or animal. Violation of this section is
a misdemeanor.
701.2 Disturbance or Injury to Wildlife. No person shall allow a dog, cat, or
domesticated animal, even if leashed, to disturb, chase, molest, injure, or take
any kind of wildlife, whether living or dead, or remove, destroy, or in any
manner disturb the natural habitat of any animal on District Lands. Violation
of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
701.3 Horses and Livestock. No person shall keep, raise or allow cattle, horses,
sheep, or other livestock on District Lands, unless pursuant to a lease, license,
written permit, or other entitlement of use granted by the District. Violation of
this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
701.4 Other Pets. No person shall allow or have any pet, domesticated animal, or
other animal on District Lands, unless specifically permitted by another
section of these regulations.
701.5 Removal of Dog Excrement. No person responsible for a dog shall allow its
excrement or feces to remain on District lands.
701.6 Abandoned Animals. No person shall abandon or release a dog, cat, fish,
fowl, or any other living creature, wild or domestic, on District Lands without
written permission.
701.7 Depositing of Animal Remains. No person shall bury, leave, scatter or
otherwise deposit animal remains on District lands, except for cremated animal
remains as specified in Section 807.
Page 16 of 21
SECTION 702. NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES.
702.1 Plants. No person shall possess, damage, injure, take, place, plant, collect, or
remove any plant, fungi, tree, or portion thereof, whether living or dead,
including, but not limited to flowers, lichens, mosses, mushrooms, bushes,
trees, tree limbs, tree branches, vines, grass, cones, seeds, and deadwood
located on District Lands.
702.2 Possession of Gathered Wood Prohibited. No person shall transport or possess
a tree or unmilled wood on District Lands without satisfactory evidence of
lawful acquisition, such as a sales receipt or written authorization from the
owner of the land from which the tree or wood was acquired.
702.3 Geological Features. No person shall possess, damage, injure, take, collect,
remove, or attempt to damage, injure, take, collect, any earth, rocks, sand,
gravel, fossils, minerals, features of caves, or any object or artifact of
geological or paleontological, interest located on District Lands. Violation of
this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
702.4 Archeological Features. No person shall possess, damage, injure, take, collect,
remove, or attempt to damage, injure, take collect, or remove any object of,
archeological, or historical interest located on District Lands. Violation of this
sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
702.5 Special Permission. Special written permission may be granted to remove,
treat, disturb, or otherwise affect plants, animals, or geological, historical,
archeological, or paleontological materials solely for research, interpretive,
educational, or operational purposes.
702.6 Destruction of Habitat. No person shall remove, destroy, or in any manner
disturb the natural habitat of any animal, bird, or reptile including, but not
limited to: mammal, bird, fish, mollusk, reptile, amphibian, except by written
permit.
702.7 Unpermitted Diversion of Water. No person shall divert water from any
surface water, ground water, or water storage facility on District Lands without
the express written permission of the District.
SECTION 703. UNLAWFUL DEFACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE.
703.1 Unlawful Defacement. No person shall cut, carve, deface, write, paint, mark,
or alter any natural or biological feature, or any fence, wall, building,
monument, or other property on District Lands. Violation of this sub-section
is punishable as a misdemeanor.
703.2 Unlawful Construction. No person shall encroach upon, erect, construct,
install, or place or attempt to encroach upon, erect, construct, install, or place
any structure, building, shed, fence, trail, road, culvert, drainage structure,
bridge, jump, ramp, barricade, trench, barrier, fortification or wall, equipment,
Page 17 of 21
material, sign, banner, or apparatus of any type or for any purpose constructed
of native or imported materials on, below, over, or across a preserve except by
written permission, specifying in detail the work to be done and the conditions
to be fulfilled pursuant to the terms of such authorization. Flagging,
surveying, and marking conducted for the purpose of constructing or installing
such features, shall be considered an attempt to erect, construct, install or place
such features, and is prohibited. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as
a misdemeanor.
703.3 Unlawful Maintenance. No person shall perform, or cause any mowing,
trimming, cutting, grooming, spraying, grading, or moving of any soils on
District Lands or perform any such grounds maintenance for any purpose
except by written permission. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a
misdemeanor.
703.4 Possession Of Construction Or Maintenance Tools And Supplies. No person
shall possess any tools used for construction or maintenance on District Lands,
including but not limited to shovels, McCleods, Pulaskis, mattocks, rakes,
saws, axes, chainsaws, wood, hammers, nails, drills, saws, or similar
equipment or supplies for the purpose of unlawful construction, maintenance
or encroachment on District Lands except in a designated parking area, or with
written permission.
703.5 Surveillance Systems. Installation or maintenance of surveillance systems on
District lands, including wildlife cameras, or other similar encroachments is
prohibited except where authorized by permit.
CHAPTER VIII.
DISTRICT LANDS OPERATIONS - GENERAL
SECTION 800. RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE
SECTION 801. PARKING.
801.1 Restrictions. No person shall park a motor vehicle, except an authorized
emergency vehicle, or when in compliance with the directions of a peace
officer, ranger, or District employee, in any of the following places:
a) In areas where prohibited by “NO PARKING,” or other posted signs;
b) On or obstructing any fire road or fire lane;
c) On or obstructing any trail;
d) In such a place or manner as would block or obstruct any gate, entrance,
or exit;
e) In such a place or manner as to take up more than one marked parking
space in any authorized parking area;
f) In such a place or manner as to block or obstruct the free flow of traffic or
to obstruct the ability to remove a parked vehicle;
g) Within 15 feet of a fire hydrant;
h) Adjacent to any curb painted red;
Page 18 of 21
i) On any District Lands after Official Hours as defined in Section 805.3
except pursuant to a written permit;
j) In areas signed for permit parking on District Lands without a written
permit;
k) In any space designated for disabled parking in an unpaved parking lot,
except when displaying a disabled placard as defined in California Vehicle
Code.
l) In any other place on District Lands not designated by the District as an
authorized area.
SECTION 802. OPERATION OF MOTORIZED VEHICLES: OFF-ROAD VEHICLES
802.1 General. No person shall operate, propel, or leave standing a motorized
vehicle on District Lands. Motor vehicle includes, but is not limited to,
motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, off-road vehicles, mopeds, “dirt-bikes,” gas
powered bicycles, and similar vehicles. Violation of this sub-section is
punishable as a misdemeanor.
802.2 Exceptions. This section shall not apply to:
a) emergency vehicles operated within the scope of official use;
b) roads, trails, or paths, which may from time to time be set aside and posted
by the District for the use of specifically designated vehicles;
c) roads and parking areas open to the public for motor vehicle use during
regular open hours.
SECTION 803. SPEED LIMITS.
803.1 General. No person shall drive or operate a vehicle, motor vehicle, or bicycle
on District Lands at a speed greater than the posted speed limit, or as otherwise
specified in any District Ordinance, rule or regulation. No person shall drive or
operate a vehicle or motor vehicle, ride a horse, or ride a bicycle at a speed
greater than reasonable given weather, visibility, traffic, presence of other
users, surface and width of the trail or road, or which may damage natural or
cultural resources or wildlife.
803.2 Reckless Driving. No person shall drive or operate any vehicle, motor vehicle,
bicycle upon District Lands in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of
persons, property, natural resources or wildlife. Such conduct shall constitute
reckless driving. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
803.3 Unsafe Driving. No person shall drive in an unsafe manner. This includes,
but is not limited to: spinning of the vehicle, breaking traction and exhibition
of speed.
Page 19 of 21
SECTION 804. ABANDONED VEHICLES.
804.1 72 Hours. No person shall permit a vehicle to be parked or left standing on
District Lands for 72 consecutive hours or more except in camping areas
pursuant to a valid permit.
804.2 Removal. Any vehicle parked or left standing in violation of this Section may
be removed as provided in the Vehicle Code of the State of California.
804.3 Abandonment. Whenever a District ranger has reasonable grounds to believe
that a vehicle has been abandoned on District Lands, the vehicle may be
removed as authorized by Vehicle Code Section 22669.
SECTION 805. PROHIBITED AREAS AND CLOSURES.
805.1 Authority for Closures. To ensure the safety and health of persons, to protect
natural resources, to provide for proper planning of District Lands, to avoid
interference with development, construction, and management, or to provide
for security, safeguarding, and preservation of District Lands, the Board of
Directors, General Manager or his/her designee or an authorized representative
may declare an area, trail, road, or facility closed, prohibited, or limited to
further entry by the general public.
805.2 Types of Closures
a) Temporary or Regular Closures. District employees may make
temporary or regular closures of a portion of District Lands to the
general public for public safety, or to deal with an immediate or ongoing
management need. The declaration may include such reasonable classes
of persons who may enter, in the conduct of authorized activities or
official duties, as the General Manager or his/her designee or an
authorized representative may prescribe. No person shall, without
written permission issued by the District, enter or remain in an area of
District Lands or facility designated as a Temporary or Regular Closure
area.
b) Sensitive or Hazardous Area Closures. No person shall, without a
written permit issued by the District, enter or remain in an area of
District Lands or facility designated as a Sensitive or Hazardous Area,
and declared closed, prohibited, or limited by the General Manager or
his/her designee or an authorized agent. Sensitive areas may include
those with cultural, historical or biological significance. Such
designation may include, but is not limited to, specified areas of land,
trails, geologic or cultural features, facilities or structures. Violation of
this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
805.3 After Official Hours Use Prohibited. No person shall enter or remain on
District Lands after “Official Hours,” which are defined as the period of one-
half hour after official Sunset to one-half hour before official Sunrise the
following day without a written permit. The times for Sunrise and Sunset shall
Page 20 of 21
be determined by the U.S. Naval Observatory’s official postings for Los Altos,
California.
805.4 Bicycle Operation After Hours. No person shall possess or operate a bicycle,
unicycle, or similar device on District lands after Official Hours.
805.5 Posting of Closures. An area shall be considered closed when notice is posted
at trailheads and gates officially designated and maintained by the District.
805.6 Failure to Vacate a Closed Area. No person shall fail to leave a Closed Area,
when notified of the closure by a Peace Officer. Violation of this sub-section
is punishable as a misdemeanor.
805.7 Off Trail Use. No person shall enter or remain in an area off of a designated
trail, when they are on District Lands in an area or preserve that has been
designated or signed to prohibit off trail use. Violation of this sub-section is
punishable as a misdemeanor.
SECTION 806. USE FEES.
806.1 Nonpayment of Fees. No person shall use District Lands or facilities without
payment of any prescribed fee or charge. Any fee or charge established by the
Board for use of District Lands or facilities shall be paid in advance of such
use, unless later payment has been authorized by the General Manager or
his/her designee or an authorized representative.
SECTION 807. SCATTERING OF CREMATED REMAINS
807.1 Regulations for the Scattering of Cremated Remains. No person shall scatter
any cremated human or animal remains (cremains) without first having
obtained a written permit from the District, and shall abide by the permit
conditions which shall include, but not be limited to, the following conditions:
a) The scattering of cremains is prohibited: within 1,000 feet of any
residence or dwelling, within 500 feet of any creek, stream, or other body
of water or within 50 feet of any road or trail.
b) Cremains must be scattered, must not be left in a pile, and must not be
readily visible to the public.
c) No containers for the cremains, identification tags, vases, flower pots, or
other associated non-organic materials, or non-native plants, may be left at
the site.
d) No memorial, plaque, or other site marker may be left at the site.
e) Any person scattering cremains on District lands shall possess and present
a valid District permit when scattering cremains.
f) The scattering of cremains for commercial purposes is prohibited.
Page 21 of 21
SECTION 808 AIRCRAFT & HELICOPTER OPERATIONS.
808.1 Except in the case of emergency or for search and rescue, or fire fighting or
law enforcement operations no person shall land any aircraft including any
airplane, helicopter, hot air balloon or any contrivance used or designed for
flight in the air, excluding unpowered human flight as further authorized under
these regulations, on District Lands except by written permit. Violation of this
sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.
Attachment 2
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Proposed Bail Schedule
For New Regulations
R-14-09
SECTION Regulation Title
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
2
0
1
4
Ba
i
l
A
m
o
u
n
t
Misdemeanor or
Infraction Comment
200.5 Failure to comply with permit conditions $35 Infraction Covers all forms of permits issued
407.5 Order to Vacate $75 Infraction New regulation to deal with people
who continue to be disruptive after
having performed an additional
offence.
409.8 Possession of District Lock or Key $100 Misdemeanor New regulation to deal with people
who use a District lock or key to
gain illegal access to District lands
or facilities.
409.9 Segways and Electric Bicycles $35 Infraction New regulation deals with new
technologies being used on District
lands.
411.3 Obeying Signs $35 Infraction New regulation requiring that posted
signs be obeyed.
604 Commercial Uses $35 Infraction New regulation which requires that
all commercial activities occurring
on District lands must obtain permit
in advance.
700.7 Collection of Animal Parts $25 Infraction New regulation dealing with
collecting of antlers and other
animal body parts.
701.1(g) Dangerous Dog $100 Misdemeanor New regulation to deal with dogs
which pose a danger to people and
other animals.
701.7 Depositing of Animal Remains $35 Infraction New regulation deals with problem
of people who bury dead pets,
which have been mistaken for
human remains when animals dig
them up.
702.6 Destruction of Habitat $100 Infraction New regulation deals with problem
of habitat destruction.
703.5 Surveillance Systems $35 Infraction New regulation deals with people
who have installed wildlife and other
surveillance systems on District
lands.
702.7 Unpermitted Diversion of Water $100 Infraction New regulation deals with theft of
water.
803.3 Unsafe Driving $75 Infraction New regulation deals with lower
level offence than 803.2, where
there is no one else in the parking
lot and damage is only to the
surface of the parking lot.
R-14-23
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 7
AGENDA ITEM
Authorization to Amend a Contract with Geoinsite Environmental Management Inc., for
Additional Grading Oversight for the Mount Umunhum Demolition Project at Sierra Azul Open
Space Preserve
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the General Manager to execute a contract amendment with Geoinsite Inc., of Los
Gatos, CA, for a time and materials not-to-exceed amount of $12,000 to complete additional
grading oversight required for the demolition project at Mount Umunhum.
SUMMARY
A contract was awarded to Geoinsite Inc., (Geoinsite) on November 11, 2012 (R-12-114) for
geotechnical and geologic engineering consulting, site observation, and report preparation for the
grading associated with the demolition of structures at the former Almaden Air Force Station at
Mount Umunhum. The proposed amendment amount of $12,000 includes the cost for additional
observation for site restoration grading and slope re-contouring at the former Housing and
Cantonment areas. The funds for the requested amendment are included in the approved
FY2013-14 budget for the Mt. Umunhum demolition project.
BACKGROUND
In 1986, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) acquired the former Almaden
Air Force Station (Almaden AFS) and all of its remaining facilities on Mount Umunhum and
Mount Thayer (R-86-20) with the intent to restore the area to a natural condition and provide
public access. In December 2009, the United States Congress appropriated $3.2 million for
cleanup of Mount Umunhum. Due to a favorable bidding environment in FY2009-10, the initial
hazardous materials cleanup work completed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers
resulted in only a partial expenditure of the allocated federal appropriation, in the amount of
$1,895,229. The remaining federal appropriation, $1,304,771, was transferred to the District for
demolition of structures on site. On September 12, 2012, the Board approved an award of
contract to American Wrecking Inc. for the demolition of structures at Mount Umunhum (with
the exception of the radar tower) (R-12-90).
A separate District-funded project, the Mount Umunhum Environmental Restoration and Public
Access Project (Restoration Project), conducted the public planning and California
Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act (CEQA/NEPA) review
R-14-23 Page 2
processes to develop the final Mount Umunhum site plan and project description, which included
the demolition of structures (except the radar tower). On June 12, 2012, the Board approved the
adoption of a Final Environmental Impact Report for the Restoration Project, approved the Phase
I Demolition (not including the radar tower) (R-12-59), and approved the Mitigation Monitoring
Response Plan for the Phase I Demolition.
DISCUSSION
Geologic/geotechnical consulting services in support of the Phase I Demolition work were
required to ensure that the grading and backfill within the footprint of demolished structures was
completed in accordance with the contract documents and complied with CEQA/NEPA
mitigation measures for drainage and erosion control. In addition, Santa Clara County requires
that onsite observation of grading activities be conducted and a confirming letter be issued by the
geotechnical consultant. Geoinsite’s original scope of work included site observation, an as-built
report, and a confirmation letter for grading directly associated with the demolition of structures.
The amendment is for additional site observation beyond what was originally included in the
initial scope of work specifically related to the re-grading and re-contouring of the Housing and
Cantonment areas. The main elements of the revised scope of work include:
• Assessment & recommendation for slope infill and compaction requirements for
comprehensive re-contouring of approximately three acres of existing benched hillside;
• Site observation of re-contouring work to ensure infill completed in accordance with
recommendations, in appropriate lifts and adequately compacted;
• Guidance on drainage & erosion control and swale development associated with re-
contouring.
The cost of the additional grading observation, $12,000, covers twelve additional days of site
observation.
FISCAL IMPACT
The current FY 2013-14 Budget has sufficient funds to cover the proposed contract amendment
amount. The District’s FY2013-14 Budget includes $1,674,949 for completion of the demolition
project on Mount Umunhum.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
No Board Committee review is required for this portion of the Project.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice of this Agenda Item was provided per the Brown Act. No additional notice is
required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
On June 12, 2012 (R-12-59), the Board approved the adoption of a Final Environmental Impact
Report for the Mount Umunhum Environmental Restoration and Public Access Project, approved
the Phase I Demolition (not including the Radar Tower), and approved the Mitigation
Monitoring Response Plan for the Phase I Demolition.
R-14-23 Page 3
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the General Manager would execute a contract
amendment with Geoinsite to fund the required grading observation for the Phase I Demolition at
Mount Umunhum.
Responsible Department Head:
Meredith Manning, Co-Acting Planning Manager
Prepared by:
Gina Coony, Planner III
R-14-10
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 8
AGENDA ITEM
Authorize the General Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Interschola, Inc., for Disposal
of District Property and to Approve the Disposal of District Assets, Excluding Real Property
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize the General Manager to enter into an agreement with Interschola, Inc., to assist
District staff with the sale and/or disposal of District property, excluding real property.
2. Adopt a resolution authorizing the General Manager to approve the disposal of District
assets, excluding real property, where the anticipated fair market value of the individual asset
is $25,000 or less.
SUMMARY
The District owns many surplus pieces of equipment, tools, furniture, etc., that are obsolete, no
longer needed, or have been replaced with newer, more efficient, safer, or otherwise improved
options. Currently, District vehicles are the only equipment sold, via public auction, when they
are replaced. The District uses First Capital Auction, Inc., to manage the auction of the vehicles
on behalf of the District. The General Manager recommends entering into an agreement with
InterSchola, Inc., to manage the auction of non-vehicle surplus property, excluding real property,
for the District, and recommends Board authorization for the General Manager to approve the
disposal of District property where the estimated fair market value of the individual asset is
$25,000 or less. Approval of this agreement will be at “no cost” to the District and is anticipated
to generate a moderate amount of income.
DISCUSSION
Background
The California Government Code provides a procedure for counties and cities to follow in the
sale, lease, or disposal of surplus personal property (defined as non-real property). Specifically,
for example, the code states that counties may sell or lease surplus personal property to the
highest bidder at a public auction, and public notice of the sale must be posted five days prior to
the auction. (Government Code sections 25504-25507, 25363.)
The District’s enabling legislation, Public Resources Code (PRC) 5500, provides specific
guidance for the disposal of real property but not for personal property. A survey of other
special districts indicates that most organizations follow similar guidelines to those governing
R-14-10 Page 2
counties’ disposal of surplus personal property as a best practice and sell them at a public
auction.
Surplus District Personal Property
Currently, District vehicles – which include trucks, tractors, mules, etc. – are the only surplus
personal property sold by the District. When a District vehicle meets the replacement criteria, it
is decommissioned and sold at a public auction by First Capital Auction, Inc., who manages the
auction process on behalf of the District. Upon sale of the vehicles, First Capital Auction remits
the auction proceeds to the District, less a 7% commission. This auction service applies to
vehicles only and no other surplus District personal property.
The District owns many items it no longer uses that are considered scrap or surplus personal
property. Examples include: tools, power saws, pruners, mowers, office furniture, and electronic
equipment. Once this equipment has reached the end of its useful life, no longer works, or is no
longer needed, it is stored at one of the offices, donated, or disposed of as garbage. The District
does not lease or sell the items.
The sale of surplus District personal items would provide the following benefits: reduce District
disposal costs, allow surplus goods to be reused or recycled and thus diverted from the landfill,
and recoup a portion of the original purchase cost. However, the time it takes to prepare for,
manage, and complete the auctions exceeds current staff capacity. Other agencies that handle
auctions in-house have a dedicated purchasing department with multiple staff who are focused
and experienced in managing these types of transactions. Typically, using auction websites, staff
from these agencies will photograph the item, write a description, post the auction on the
website, manage the auction, receive payment, arrange for the buyer to pick up the property, and
complete the associated paperwork. Currently, the District has one Management Analyst in the
Operations Department with multiple responsibilities with the capacity to only manage an
outside auction service provider for the disposal of District vehicles. Since the District in unable
at this time to manage auctions in-house, staff contacted three organizations and identified two
that can assist the District with the auction process for the disposal of additional surplus property.
The third organization, Government Liquidation, was contacted but did not respond.
Outside Auction Service Providers
Public Surplus
The first organization, Public Surplus, hosts a website where public agencies can post items for
auction. There is no fee for the listing agency (Seller). Instead, Public Surplus charges Buyers a
10% premium on sold items and the Seller receives 100% of the auction proceeds. For an
additional fee of 8%, which is added to the Buyer’s premium, Public Surplus will provide
Enhanced Auction Services to assist the Seller with the auction process, which include: taking
photographs, gathering and writing descriptions, creating the auctions, and providing onsite
assistance for item preview and pickup. Presumably, Buyers would reduce their bids to offset
the two premiums. The Buyer sends payment to Public Surplus who then sends the Seller a
check with the auction proceeds.
Services not covered by Public Surplus, which would have to be performed by District staff
include: provide public notice of the auction, manage on-site inspections of surplus items by
prospective buyers, pack and ship items (if applicable), and prepare items for pickup (if
applicable).
R-14-10 Page 3
Because the District does not provide any compensation to Public Surplus for these services, no
contract would be required. The District would register as a Seller on the Public Surplus website
and agree to the terms and conditions of use. When selling items on the website, the District can
include its own terms and conditions to address liability and indemnity requirements for Buyers.
InterSchola, Inc.
The second organization, InterSchola Inc., provides a full service solution for managing the sale
of surplus and obsolete property for public agencies, utilizing eBay as the auction website. In
addition to providing the same Enhanced Auction Services as Public Surplus, InterSchola
performs the following:
• Visits client sites and compiles inventory of surplus items
• Determines the appropriate auction strategy for each item to be sold
• Sends listings and suggested start prices to the agency for approval
• Provides public notice of the auction
• Markets items to an extensive database of buyers in each auction category, including via
email, Craigslist, Google adwords, and Trade Advertising
• Manages on-site inspections of items by prospective buyers
• Packs and ships items (if applicable)
• Coordinates on-site pick-up of items by Buyer (if applicable)
• Markets unsold items through email campaigns, salvage partners, and InterSchola’s
Surplus Store
InterSchola’s fee structure is a commission that is based on the item or lot sold, and the
percentage of the commission varies depending on the complexity of the sale. InterSchola
charges a lower commission for higher priced items and also offers volume discounts. After sale
of the item, InterSchola retains its commission from the sale proceeds and sends the balance to
the client, which averages 60% to 70% of the item sale price.
Recommended Vendor
The General Manager recommends the Board approve a contract with InterSchola to manage the
sale and disposal of District surplus personal property. Although Public Surplus also provides
auction services, those services are much more limited than those offered by InterSchola, and
would require significantly more District staff time to administer. InterSchola would manage the
entire disposal process – from inventorying surplus items through sale and Buyer pick-up. The
contract with InterSchola is non-exclusive and would not prevent the District from using Public
Surplus, or other organizations, for other auctions. Given the current staff capacity limitations,
the General Manager recommends contracting with Interschola and, as capacity allows, explore
the use of Public Surplus for District surplus personal property auctions.
Delegation of Authority
Staff had identified two items for immediate auction: a Bomford tractor boom flail mower and a
Billy Goat gas powered vacuum. The General Manager recommends that the Board approve the
sale of these two items and seeks authorization to work with InterSchola to identify other surplus
District property to sell. To maximize organizational efficiency in the future, rather than
seek Board approval to sell surplus items as they become available, the General Manager
also seeks Board authorization to sell or dispose of District surplus personal property
where the estimated fair market value of the property is $25,000 or less.
R-14-10 Page 4
FISCAL IMPACT
Sale of District surplus property will generate additional income for the District. The amount
received by the District will be reported to the Board at the end of each year.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
No Board Committee review is required.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice of this Agenda Item was provided per 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
Upon approval by the Board of Directors, the General Manager would enter into a contract with
Interschola, Inc., for the sale and disposal of District surplus personal property for items with fair
market value of $25,000 or less.
Attachment:
1. Draft Resolution Authorizing the General Manager to Approve the Disposal of Low
Value Surplus Personal Property
Prepared and reviewed by:
Kate Drayson, Administrative Services Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 14-__
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AUTHORIZING THE GENERAL MANAGER
TO APPROVE THE DISPOSAL OF LOW VALUE SURPLUS PERSONAL PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the District from time to time has occasion to dispose of certain personal
property including but not limited to equipment, tools, and furniture that has reached the end of
its useful life, no longer works, or is no longer needed to carry out District operations; and
WHEREAS, Public Resources Code section 5540 empowers the District to hold, use,
enjoy, and lease or dispose of real and personal property of every kind, and rights in real and
personal property, within or without the district, necessary to the full exercise of its powers; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors desires to authorize the General Manager or his/her
designee to sell or otherwise dispose of low value personal property for the benefit of the District
when such property is no longer useful or necessary to carry out District operations, or is
considered surplus.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District hereby authorizes the General Manager or designee
to sell or dispose of surplus personal property with a fair market value of $25,000 or less, and
further directs the General Manager or designee to report any revenues received by the District
resulting from the sale of such personal property to the Board at the end of each fiscal year.
* * * * * * * * * *
R-14-21
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 9
AGENDA ITEM
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the
Mindego Ranch Area of Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve and Approval of an Amendment to
the Russian Ridge Use and Management Plan
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the
Proposed Use and Management Plan Amendment (U&M Plan), in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as set forth in the Resolution attached to this
report.
2. Approve the Russian Ridge U&M Plan Amendment for the Mindego Ranch area of the
Preserve.
SUMMARY
The proposed Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve Use and Management Plan Amendment
(U&M Plan) calls for specific action items for the Mindego Ranch area of the Preserve,
including pond habitat improvements for the San Francisco garter snake, a conservation grazing
program to reduce fuel loads and manage grasslands, opening the Peninsula Open Space Trust
(POST) Donor Circle to the public, designating conservation management units to protect
sensitive habitat, and ongoing routine maintenance and operations activities. An Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared and circulated pursuant to CEQA. The
IS/MND concluded that the proposed U&M Plan Amendment, with mitigation, would not result
in significant impacts on the environment. No immediate costs are associated with approval of
this Agenda Item; however, future implementation of the U&M Plan Amendment would require
budget allocations as part of future fiscal year budgets. Should the Board approve this item, the
General Manager anticipates requesting $215,000 for Fiscal Year 2014-15 to initiate
implementation.
DISCUSSION
The Mindego Ranch property (refer to Attachment 2, Mindego Ranch Location Map) was added
as part of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (Preserve) in 2008. A Preliminary Use and
Management Plan maintaining status quo management was approved as part of the purchase
(refer to Report R-08-38). After purchasing the property, the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District (District) conducted biological surveys that confirmed the existence of a
R-14-21 Page 2
significant population of San Francisco garter snake (SFGS) on the property. Because of the
biological sensitivity of this species and its endangered, fully-protected status, which includes
federal regulation of activities within its habitat, the District has conducted long-term planning
and developed land management recommendations that are fully consistent with the
requirements of the Endangered Species Act. These land management recommendations form
the basis of the proposed U&M Plan. District staff conferred with stakeholders throughout the
planning process, including trail users, the San Mateo County Farm Bureau, and the Cuesta La
Honda Common Interest Guild (which manages a drinking water diversion at Mindego Creek
just downstream of Mindego Ranch). Stakeholder feedback was incorporated into the U&M
Plan, as described below.
The goal of the proposed U&M Plan is to protect and enhance habitat for sensitive wildlife
species at Mindego Ranch, while responsibly integrating land management activities and
ecologically-sensitive public access.
The proposed U&M Plan includes the following elements:
• Habitat Enhancement Actions;
• Conservation Grazing;
• Hiking and Equestrian Access to the Peninsula Open Space Trust Donor Circle;
• Maintenance and Operations projects.
Habitat Enhancement Actions
The District contracted with expert herpetologists to develop measures to protect and enhance
populations of SFGS and other sensitive species on Mindego Ranch. These measures include
(detailed in Attachment 3):
1. Designation of SFGS core habitat areas as Conservation Management Units, which are
closed to general public access.
2. Eradication of non-native fish and bullfrogs at Mindego Lake, which prey upon SFGS’s
native prey base (California red-legged frog (CRLF) and Pacific tree frog), including:
a. Temporary draining of Mindego Lake to eliminate non-native fish.
b. Implementation of a management program to eliminate bullfrogs.
3. Enlargement of smaller ponds that have partially filled in with sediment and are heavily
colonized by aquatic vegetation. Loss of open water habitat has reduced overall habitat
quality and impairs successful breeding by CRLF.
4. Installation of livestock exclusion fencing in select pond areas to manage livestock. This
would allow cattle to drink at specific locations to help maintain open water habitat while
excluding them from portions of the pond to ensure adequate growth of emergent and
perimeter vegetation, consistent with CRLF protection.
Conservation Grazing
Establishment of conservation grazing at Mindego Ranch is a cost-effective strategy to maintain
ideal grassland-to-brush ratios for SFGS, control invasive weeds, reduce wildland fuel loads,
maintain open water habitats in shallow ponds for CRLF, and promote native plant diversity.
Significant infrastructure improvements as well as active management and monitoring are
essential to meet conservation grazing objectives.
Consistent with the Grazing Management Plan prepared for the property (Attachment 4), the
proposed U&M Plan includes low initial stocking rates (approximately 35 cow-calf pairs in a
R-14-21 Page 3
year-round operation) and the installation of the following water system improvements to protect
both water quality and sensitive habitat:
• Five new troughs at strategic locations to evenly distribute cattle across the property
• Two new water tanks to provide livestock water throughout the dry months
• An electric (solar) pump to distribute the livestock water
• 8,000 feet of new, buried PVC water line to supply the water troughs
Protection of Cuesta La Honda Guild Drinking Water Watershed
Mindego Ranch is partially within the drinking water watershed of Cuesta La Honda Guild
(Guild watershed), which seasonally diverts water (October 1 through May 31) from Mindego
Creek to supply drinking water to approximately 280 residences within the Town of La Honda.
District staff conferred with the Guild throughout the planning process. Early on, the Guild
identified a potential issue associated with the presence of cattle within the watershed, i.e. the
possible introduction of Cryptosporidium into the surface water from which the Guild draws.
Cryptosporidium is a pathogenic protozoan that causes intestinal infections. Cryptosporidium is
spread via cysts, which are most often produced by newborn calves infected with the pathogen.
Identification of these cysts in the water source could trigger the need for costly water treatment
facilities.
Many of the project site’s natural features, including existing dense vegetation and steep
topography, help minimize the ability of cattle to access the Guild’s watershed, per the
Management Plan. These natural barriers create an approximately 500-foot minimum buffer
from the Mindego Creek watercourse. This natural barrier is not continuous. The District will
construct exclusionary fencing at breaks in the natural barrier so that full exclusion can be
achieved. In addition, the proposed Grazing Plan includes several management measures to keep
cattle away from water sources, including the strategic placement of water troughs and salt licks
away from water bodies.
Active management and monitoring of the grazing land, as proposed in the U&M Plan, would
also limit storm water runoff rates and soil erosion to further impede pathogens from entering
water courses. For example, the monitoring of vegetation response and forage utilization and
distribution would ensure that grazing is adequately distributed throughout the property and that
no single area is grazed too heavily (refer to Attachment 4 for more details).
Even with these various project features that serve to reduce the potential for contamination of
the Guild’s water supply, District staff is mindful of this issue and has actively worked with the
Guild to identify the following revised specific mitigation measures (see Attachment 7 for
revision details) to further minimize the potential for Cryptosporidium from District cattle to
enter their water supply:
• Exclude cattle from the Mindego Creek watershed via fencing and existing natural
barriers (dense vegetation and steep topography) during the period the Guild draws water
from Mindego Creek, from September 1 through May 31 (except during the 2-day
processing period; see below). This period encompasses the typical rainy season as well
as a precautionary buffer. This measure would avoid the potential for cattle excrement to
be carried to Mindego Creek via rainwater runoff.
• Calves will be excluded entirely from Mindego Lake and Big Spring at all times via
existing pasture fencing.
R-14-21 Page 4
• During the typical 2-day processing that occurs in winter, cattle would be confined to a
secure holding field/corral along the southern border of the Mindego Creek watershed.
No cattle will be moved if precipitation (rain) occurs or is forecasted with greater than a
70% probability in the next 72-hour period to prevent fecal material from entering the
water via surface runoff. The holding field/corral vicinity would be monitored regularly
for signs of concentrated surface water flow (e.g., gullies and rills). If such signs are
detected, proper drainage improvements would be installed to prevent concentrated
flows.
• Monitoring shall occur weekly during the rainy season and at least 2 days per week
during the calving season. Should livestock be detected in summer pastures between
September 1 and May 31, or calves detected in ponds at any time, the District will notify
the Guild and immediately take action necessary to secure the animals in a holding
pasture until the location of the breach can be identified and repaired. Additional fencing
would be installed wherever and whenever existing barriers are found to be ineffective.
• Locate cattle water troughs and salt/mineral supplements at least 800 feet away from
surface water bodies to disperse cattle away from wetland and riparian areas (see
Attachment 4).
• Restrict supplemental feeding, except in the following circumstances: 1) distribution of
supplements (vitamins, minerals, protein) to aid in achieving District resource
management goals, livestock health, and livestock movement and 2) feeding in the
corral/holding pen (when cattle are off-loaded and held or shipped from the premises).
• Adjust stocking rates as necessary to maintain appropriate Residual Dry Matter (RDM)
standards and conduct annual monitoring of RDM.
• Continue the feral pig reduction program. Feral pigs currently occur in the area and are
also a potential source of Cryptosporidium. Reducing pig populations in the watershed
reduces the potential for water supply contamination, reduces the risk of disease
transmission to domestic livestock, protects native vegetation and sensitive habitat areas,
and is a an overall benefit to the project.
Public Access
To minimize potential impacts to the highly sensitive SFGS, the proposed U&M Plan limits the
expansion of additional public access to the following:
• Allowing public access to the existing donor recognition circle via the existing ranch
driveway and donor circle path. The donor circle path would be open to hiking only.
Maintenance and Operations
Major maintenance and operations projects include the following:
• Road erosion treatment projects
• Removal of existing dilapidated structures (includes two ranch houses, barn and corral)
CEQA COMPLIANCE
An IS/MND was prepared for the Project (Attachment 1). The public comment period began on
November 26, 2013 and ended on January 6, 2014.
Determination
Mitigation measures incorporated into the proposed project reduce potentially significant impacts
to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazards, and hydrology/water quality to
less-than-significant levels. These mitigation measures include dust control measures during trail
and infrastructure construction, preconstruction surveys, watershed protection and avoidance
R-14-21 Page 5
measures for special-status plants and wildlife. The proposed project will therefore not have a
significant effect on the environment.
Public Review and Comments
The District received two written comment letters: one from Cuesta La Honda Guild regarding
potential environmental impacts of the proposed U&M Plan, and one from the San Mateo
County Resource Conservation District offering to partner on the implementation of the habitat
enhancement elements. Please see the attached comments and the District’s Response to the
IS/MND Comments (Attachment 7).
CEQA Findings
The Board Findings required by CEQA to adopt the IS/MND and the Mitigation Monitoring
Program are set out in the attached Resolution (Attachment 8). On the basis of the Initial Study,
staff determined that the proposed project would not result in a significant effect on the
environment because the mitigation measures described in the IS/MND are incorporated as part
of the project implementation. Changes incorporated into the MND in response to comments
received during the public review period provide clarification of the project, specifically related
to frequency of monitoring of the cattle herd and steps taken if cattle are found outside the
appropriate pastures. In addition, minor changes were made to measures to more fully prevent
impacts to water quality as a result of re-introducing cattle grazing on Mindego Ranch. Staff
concludes that, with these modifications, the conclusions set out in the MND regarding potential
adverse impacts arising from the project remain valid. No modification exceeds any threshold of
significance established in the MND. Therefore, the General Manager recommends that the
Board find that the environmental review for the Mindego U&M Plan is adequate, the addition of
new information in the MND clarifies, amplifies, and makes insignificant modifications to the
MND that do not require recirculation of the MND pursuant to Section 15073.5(c)(4) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT
The District intends to implement the U&M Plan incrementally over the next 5-10 years. Top
priority actions include installing grazing infrastructure, implementing site management
measures for the remnant landfill, removing hazardous structures, contracting with a grazing
tenant, and improving ponds. The FY2014-15 Budget (anticipated to be approved by the Board
on March 26, 2014) is expected to include $215,000 to begin implementing these priority
actions.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
On November 13, 2012, the Planning and Natural Resources Committee reviewed and
recommended approval of the proposed U&M Plan to the full Board. The Board subsequently
tentatively approved the U&M Plan project description for the purposes of conducting
environmental review at its regular meeting of May 8, 2013 (refer to Report R-13-17).
PUBLIC NOTICE
A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was submitted to the State
Clearinghouse of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research on November 26, 2013,
stating that the public review period would start on November 26, 2013 and end on January 6,
2014. The Notice of Intent was submitted to the San Mateo County Clerk for posting and mailed
to interested parties, and property owners of land located adjacent to or within 300 feet of
R-14-21 Page 6
Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The Notice of Intent, Mitigated Negative Declaration, and
Initial Study were made available for public review at the District’s Administrative Office, on
the District’s website, and at the Woodside Library and the La Honda Post Office. Notices were
also posted at main trailhead entrances to the Preserve.
Property owners of land located adjacent to or within 300 feet of Russian Ridge Open Space
Preserve and interested parties have been mailed written notices of this proposed Approval of the
U&M Plan. All legal notice requirements of the Brown Act have been met.
PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND INPUT
The proposed U&M Plan incorporates input from the following stakeholder groups:
• Trail users: representatives of the biking, equestrian and hiking communities (site visit
held August 31, 2012);
• Agricultural community: the San Mateo County Farm Bureau (Farm Bureau) (site visit
held September 14, 2012, formal presentation given November 6, 2012);
• Watershed: the community of Cuesta La Honda Guild (site visit held November 6, 2012,
attendance at Guild Board meetings held February 20 and April 17, 2013).
• Consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was initiated in October
2012. It is anticipated that a USFWS Recovery Permit that includes all proposed actions
will be issued in early 2014.
NEXT STEPS
If the Board approves the General Manager’s recommendations, staff would file a Notice of
Determination with the San Mateo County Clerk and submit any remaining application materials
for the USFWS Recovery Permit that would authorize activities within project area. Once the
Recovery Permit is secured, top priority actions of the U&M Plan would be implemented,
including installing grazing infrastructure, reintroducing cattle, and opening the area to the
public. Other actions would be implemented as additional funding is secured.
Attachment(s)
1. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2. Mindego Ranch Location Map
3. Habitat Enhancement Projects Map
4. Grazing Infrastructure Map
5. Public Access Map
6. Mitigation Monitoring Plan
7. Response to IS/MND Comments
8. Resolution: CEQA Findings
*Attachments can be found on the District website:
http://www.openspace.org/about_us/meetings.asp
Online Reference documents
Habitat Enhancement Projects Map and SFGS Habitat Management Plan
[http://www.openspace.org/plans_projects/mindego_ranch.asp
Grazing Infrastructure Map and Grazing Plan
[http://www.openspace.org/plans_projects/mindego_ranch.asp
R-14-21 Page 7
Mindego Ranch Road and Trail Erosion Inventory
(http://www.openspace.org/plans_projects/mindego_ranch.asp)
Responsible Department Head:
Meredith Manning, Co-Acting Planning Manager and Senior Planner
Prepared by:
Gretchen Laustsen, Planner II
Graphics prepared by:
Gretchen Laustsen, Planner II
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan
Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PREPARED FOR:
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
November 2013
13010027.01
May 201L1
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan
Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for:
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
Contact:
Lisa Bankosh
Open Space Planner III
Phone: 650.691.1200
Fax:650.691.0485
glaustsen@openspace.org
Prepared by:
Ascent Environmental, Inc.
455 Capitol Mall, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA 95814
www.ascentenvinc.com
Contact:
Mike Parker, AICP
Project Manager
916.444.7301
November 2013
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................. iii
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Introduction and Regulatory Guidance ........................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Why this Document? .................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Summary of Findings .................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Environmental Permits ................................................................................................................. 1-3
1.5 Document Organization ............................................................................................................... 1-3
2 BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Project Background ...................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Project Location ............................................................................................................................ 2-3
2.4 Site Description ............................................................................................................................ 2-3
2.5 Description of Proposed Project .................................................................................................. 2-6
3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .......................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................................... 3-4
3.2 Agriculture and Forest Resources ................................................................................................ 3-9
3.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 3-13
3.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 3-19
3.5 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3-28
3.6 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 3-32
3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................ 3-37
3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................. 3-40
3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................................... 3-47
3.10 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................... 3-54
3.11 Mineral Resources ...................................................................................................................... 3-56
3.12 Noise ........................................................................................................................................... 3-57
3.13 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................. 3-61
3.14 Public Services ............................................................................................................................ 3-63
3.15 Recreation .................................................................................................................................. 3-66
3.16 Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................................ 3-67
3.17 Utilities and Service Systems ...................................................................................................... 3-70
3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................................................... 3-73
4 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................... 4-1
5 LIST OF PREPARERS ......................................................................................................................... 5-1
Table of Contents Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
ii Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Appendices (on CD – see back cover)
A SFGS Habitat Management Plan
B Grazing Plan
C Special Status Species
D Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations
E Construction Noise Calculations
F Archaeological Survey Report
G Historic Resource Analysis
Exhibits
Exhibit 2-1 Regional Location ......................................................................................................................... 2-4
Exhibit 2-2 Ranch Location ............................................................................................................................. 2-5
Exhibit 2-3 SFBS Habitat Enhancement .......................................................................................................... 2-9
Exhibit 2-4 Grazing Infrastructure ................................................................................................................ 2-10
Exhibit 2-5 Public Access .............................................................................................................................. 2-12
Exhibit 2-6 Road Maintenance ..................................................................................................................... 2-13
Exhibit 3.1-1 View of Mindego Hill from the East Gate ..................................................................................... 3-5
Exhibit 3.1-2 Northwest View from the Top of Mindego Hill ............................................................................ 3-5
Exhibit 3.1-3 View of Existing Onsite Water Tank with Off-Site Rolling Hills in the Background ...................... 3-6
Exhibit 3.1-4 View of Mindego Lake .................................................................................................................. 3-6
Tables
Table 3.7-1 Summary of Estimated Emissions of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent Associated with
Project-Related Activities (MT CO2e/year) ................................................................................. 3-39
Table 3.12-1 Equipment Reference Noise Levels ............................................................................................ 3-59
Ascent Environmental Table of Contents
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND iii
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
AC&W Aircraft Control and Warning
AFS Air Force Station
APNs Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
ARB California Air Resources Board
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s
CAA federal Clean Air Act
CAAA federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan
CO2 carbon dioxide
cy cubic yards
dBA A-weighted decibels
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FUDS Formerly Used Defense Sites,
GHG greenhouse gas
GSA General Services Administration
GWP global warming potential
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
Hillsides HS
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IS Initial Study
IS/Proposed MND Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration
MROSD Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
MT/year metric tons per year
Table of Contents Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
iv Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
N2O nitrous oxide
NORAD North American Aerospace Defense Command
NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Service
OHP State Office of Historic Preservation's
OSHA Occupation Safety and Health Administration
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
PELS Permissible exposure limits
PRC Public Resources Code
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SFBAAB San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin
SHWW San Jose Water Works
TAC toxic air contaminants
TWA Time-weighted average limit
USACE US Army Corps of Engineers
VMT vehicle miles traveled
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 1-1
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY GUIDANCE
This Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/Proposed MND) has been prepared by the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (District) to evaluate the potential environmental effects resulting
from implementation of the proposed Use and Management Plan (U&M Plan) for the Mindego Ranch property
(project site) located within the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve (RROP). Ascent Environmental, Inc. has been
retained by the District to prepare this analysis on their behalf. The project site is a 1,047 acre former cattle
ranch located 2 miles east of the community of La Honda in the Santa Cruz Mountains, within unincorporated
San Mateo County
This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section
15000 et seq.). An initial study (IS) is prepared by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[a]), and thus to determine the appropriate
environmental document. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a “public agency shall
prepare…a proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration…when: (a) The Initial Study shows
that there is no substantial evidence…that the project may have a significant impact on the environment, or (b)
The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects but revisions to the project plans or proposal are agreed
to by the applicant and such revisions would reduce potentially significant effects to a less-than-significant
level.” In this circumstance, the lead agency prepares a written statement describing its reasons for concluding
that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, does not
require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). By contrast, an EIR is required when the
project may have a significant environmental impact that cannot clearly be reduced to a less-than-significant
effect by adoption of mitigation or by revisions in the project design.
1.2 WHY THIS DOCUMENT?
As described in the environmental checklist (Chapter 3), the proposed project would not result in any
unmitigated significant environmental impacts. Therefore, an IS/Proposed MND is the appropriate document for
compliance with the requirements of CEQA. This IS/Proposed MND conforms to these requirements and to the
content requirements of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15071.
Under CEQA, the lead agency is the public agency with primary responsibility over approval of the proposed
project. The District is the lead agency for the proposed U&M Plan. The District has directed the preparation of
an analysis that complies with CEQA. The purpose of this document is to present to decision-makers and the
public information about the environmental consequences of implementing the proposed project. This
disclosure document is being made available to the public for review and comment. CEQA requires a minimum
20-day public review period for IS/MNDs. Due to the holidays, MROSD will make the IS/Proposed MND available
for a 40-day public review period from November 26, 2013 to January 6, 2014.
Introduction Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
1-2 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Supporting documentation referenced in this document is available for review at the MROSD office:
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
Phone: (650) 691-1200
Comments should be addressed to:
Lisa Bankosh, Project Manager
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
Phone: (650) 691-1200
Fax: (650) 691-0485
E-mail comments may be addressed to: linfante@openspace.org
If you have questions regarding the IS/Proposed MND, please call Lisa Bankosh at (650) 691-1200. If you wish to
send written comments (including via e-mail), they must be postmarked by January 6, 2014.
After comments are received from the public and reviewing agencies, the District may (1) adopt the MND and
approve the proposed project; (2) undertake additional environmental studies; or (3) abandon the project. If the
project is approved and funded, the District may proceed with the project.
1.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Chapter 3 of this document contains the analysis and discussion of potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project.
Based on the issues evaluated in that chapter, it was determined that the proposed project would have either
no impact or a less-than-significant impact related to all but six of the issue areas identified in the Environmental
Checklist, included as Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. These include the following issue areas:
agricultural resources,
geology and soils,
greenhouse gas emissions
land use and planning,
mineral resources,
noise,
population and housing,
public services,
recreation,
transportation/traffic,
utilities and service systems, and
mandatory findings of significance.
Ascent Environmental Introduction
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 1-3
Potentially significant impacts were identified with respect to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources,
cultural resources, hazards, and hydrology/water quality; however, mitigation measures included in the
IS/Proposed MND would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
In addition to District approval, the project may require Section 404 Permit from the US Army Corps of
Engineers, Compliance with Endangered Species Act Section 7 as enforced by the US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Compliance with California Department of Fish and Game Code Sections 1602 and 2080.1, Section 401
certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, notification of demolition and possible approval of
an asbestos plan by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), and issuance of planning
entitlement, as well as grading permits by San Mateo County.
1.5 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION
This IS/Proposed MND is organized as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter provides an introduction to the environmental review process. It describes
the purpose and organization of this document as well as presents a summary of findings.
Chapter 2: Project Description and Background. This chapter describes the purpose of and need for the
proposed project, identifies project objectives, and provides a detailed description of the proposed project.
Chapter 3: Environmental Checklist. This chapter presents an analysis of a range of environmental issues
identified in the CEQA Environmental Checklist and determines if each of a range of impacts would result in no
impact, a less-than-significant impact, a less-than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated, or a
potentially significant impact. If any impacts were determined to be potentially significant, an EIR would be
required. For this project, however, none of the impacts were determined to be significant after implementation
of mitigation measures.
Chapter 4: References. This chapter lists the references used in preparation of this IS/Proposed MND.
Chapter 5: List of Preparers. This chapter identifies report preparers.
Introduction Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
1-4 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-1
2 BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The project would implement the proposed Use and Management Plan (U&M Plan) for the 1,047 acre Mindego
Ranch Property within the District’s Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The proposed U&M Plan focuses on
habitat restoration projects to benefit resident populations of California red-legged frog and San Francisco
garter snake. Other planned actions include re-introduction of cattle grazing to the property, road and trail
maintenance to reduce erosion, and routine patrol activities. The U& M Plan also includes minimal public access
to the property, namely opening access to an existing donor recognition site to hikers and equestrians.
2.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The project area, a 1,047-acre former cattle ranch, was added to the District’s RROSP in 2008. A Preliminary Use
and Management Plan, which maintained status quo management on the Mindego Ranch property, was
approved as part of the purchase (MROSD 2008). Subsequently, the District conducted biological surveys on the
property which documented the existence of a population of San Francisco garter snake (SFGS), a federally-
listed endangered species. Because of the biological sensitivity of this species, which includes federal regulation
of activities within its habitat, the District has engaged in long-term planning to ensure that future District public
access and land management objectives are fully consistent with the requirements of the Endangered Species
Act.
District staff has worked closely with resource specialists to develop land management recommendations for
Mindego Ranch, including pond restoration, re-introduction of cattle grazing, and road and trail improvements
to reduce erosion and facilitate adequate maintenance and patrol of the property. These recommendations
have been consolidated into the proposed U&M Plan for Mindego Ranch. The U&M Plan is intended to guide
stewardship of the property for the next twenty to thirty years.
In 2012, the District approved very limited public access to Mindego Ranch in the form of a hiking/equestrian
trail to the summit of Mindego Hill (the “Mindego Hill Trail; estimated to be constructed in 2014 and open to the
public in 2015) and prohibited off-trail use due to the presence of sensitive habitats and wildlife (MROSD 2012).
Aside from opening an existing donor recognition site to the public, this U&M plan does not propose further
access to the property.
2.2.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLANS
The following documents are incorporated into the U&M Plan and will guide implementation for several
components, including habitat restoration, grazing management, and roadway improvements:
San Francisco Garter Snake Habitat Management Plan. This habitat management plan was prepared
specifically for the proposed project by Biosearch in September 2012. The management plan provides
USFWS-compliant strategy to encourage the recovery of SFGS by improving habitat conditions for SFGS and
California red legged frog (CRLF), a primary food source for SFGS. Habitat management actions include
temporarily draining Mindego Lake to eradicate non-native species, and removing sediment and vegetation
from other ponds on the property to improve breeding habitat for CRLF. The habitat enhancement actions
were designed to benefit the SFGS and would be implemented under an endangered species recovery or
enhancement permit issued by the USFWS.
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-2 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Road and Trail Erosion Inventory: Mindego Ranch Area. This report, prepared by Timothy C. Best, CEG, in
November 2012, inventories the condition and erosion potential along existing roads and trails into and
within Mindego Ranch, focusing on potential risk for future sediment delivery to streams, and locations
where road or trail upgrades are needed. The report identifies feasible repairs to minimize erosion and
repair damaged roads. The report also includes an assessment of long-term maintenance requirements.
Mindego Hill Ranch Grazing Management Plan. This grazing plan was prepared specifically for the proposed
project by Sage Associates in October 2012. The grazing plan provides appropriate management practices
for a conservation grazing program, including soil and water conservation, erosion control, pest
management, nutrient management, water quality, and habitat protection associated with the onsite
grasslands that are proposed for grazing.
2.2.2 OTHER APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS AND STUDIES
The following planning documents and technical studies, which are referenced throughout this IS/MND, apply
directly or indirectly to the Mindego Ranch property and the proposed project.
Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Area. The Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Area (Service
Plan) was adopted with the Coastal Annexation EIR in 2003. The Service Plan includes guidelines and
implementation actions for the Coastside Protection Area. Many of these guidelines and actions include
mitigation measures identified in the Coastal Annexation EIR. The guidelines and implementation actions in
the Service Plan apply to the entire Mindego Ranch property.
Resource Management Policy Document. The District adopted updated Resource Management Policies in
2011, which define the practices used by the District to protect and manage District lands. These policies
apply to all District lands, including the entire Preserve. The Resource Management Policies are available for
review on the District’s website at http://www.openspace.org/
plans_projects/resource_policies.asp.
Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Lands. The District adopted these
regulations for use of District lands in 1993, and most recently revised them in 2004. These policies apply to
all District lands, including the entire Preserve.
Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch. The Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District (District) prepared an IS/MND in 2009 for herbicide application. Mitigation measures
incorporated into the project include restrictions on pesticide applications and control methods within
specified areas surrounding Big Spring, Mindego, and Knuedler Lakes, which provide habitat for special
status species, including CRLF and SFGS. The project was approved on May 27, 2009.
Mindego Gateway Project. Located on property directly east of the project area, the Mindego Gateway
Project is a partnership between MROSD and Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST), which intended to provide
public access to the Mindego Hill Area of RROSP. This project will connect the existing Mindego Ridge Trail
to the summit of Mindego Hill via the Mindego Hill Trail. The Mindego Hill Trail will be restricted to hikers
and equestrians only and average three feet in width. A new parking lot/staging area and a commemorative
site to honor the conservation achievements of former POST president Audrey Rust. An IS/MND was
prepared for the project in February 2012, and the project was approved June 13, 2012.
Approval of Closure-in-Place. This letter from the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board,
dated September 28, 2012 approves the proposed closure-in-place of an onsite landfill (which reportedly
contains 15,000 to 20,000 cubic yards of fill consisting of soil, tree stumps, concrete, and other construction
debris, auto bodies, and other materials). The letter also identifies required site management measures,
including a stormwater runoff control plan, closure and signage of the filled area, enforcement of access
restrictions, and slope inspection.
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-3
Positive Archaeological Survey Report (PASR) and Finding of No Adverse Effect to Archeological Resources.
This report was prepared for the proposed project in February 2013 by Mark G. Hylkema MA, RPA
Archaeologist.
Historical Resource Analysis for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Proposed Mindego Ranch
Use and Management Plan. This report was prepared on July 17, 2013 for the proposed project by Ascent
Environmental in order to evaluate the historical significance of the onsite structures for the purposes of
CEQA. Criteria for determining historical significance has been developed by the California Register of
Historical Resources (CRHR) and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), which rests on twin factors of
significance and integrity. Based on this criteria, discussed in greater detail in this report, the onsite
structures do not appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR and are not considered to be
historically significant for the purposes of CEQA.
2.3 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is defined by the boundaries of the Mindego Ranch Property, located 2 miles east of the
community of La Honda in the Santa Cruz Mountains, within unincorporated San Mateo County (See Exhibit 2-1
and 2-2). The project site lies near the headwaters of Mindego Creek and Alpine Creek, which are both
tributaries to San Gregorio Creek. The site is approximately 1 mile west of the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is accessed from Alpine Road via a gravel ranch road. Mindego Ranch is now part of the western portion of
the RROSP. The only structures on project site are two vacant single-family residences and a barn. Surrounding
land uses include rural residential with some minor, non-commercial agricultural activities.
2.4 SITE DESCRIPTION
Mindego Ranch covers 1,047 acres and is part of the 3,137-acre RROSP. Elevations on the project site range from
approximately 700 feet above sea level along Mindego Creek to 2,143 feet at the top of Mindego Hill. Many
slopes are steep with deeply cut drainages. The topography of the area is influenced by the San Andreas fault
zone. The San Mateo County General Plan designates the project site as Agriculture – Grazing Lands.
2.4.1 ONSITE VEGETATION AND FORESTS
Mindego Ranch supports a mosaic of upland plant communities within four general habitat types:
Developed/Ruderal, Mixed Evergreen Forest, Non-native Grassland, and Coyote Brush Scrub. These habitat
types are described briefly below and in greater detail in Section 3.4 Biological Resources.
California Annual Grassland is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs including star-thistle, wild oats,
wild radish, etc. with occasional native species.
Mixed Evergreen Forest is dominated by a canopy of native trees including oaks, bays, buckeye, and maple
with an understory of native shrubs and herbs including poison oak, California hazelnut, blackberry, etc.
Coyote Brush Scrub is dominated by coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), with native shrubs and herbs present
including poison oak, California blackberry, toyon, etc.
Developed/Ruderal Habitat consists of areas developed by roads, residences, and other structures, along
with ruderal (highly disturbed) areas dominated by weedy, non-native grasses and forbs.
The upper slopes of Mindego Ranch consist of grassland vegetation with occasional stands of mixed hardwood
and coniferous forest dispersed throughout the hills and drainages. Understory shrubs have encroached on
what once were pasture lands for cattle; many invasive non-native plants have spread over the formerly open
landscape.
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-4 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Exhibit 2-1 Regional Location
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-5
Exhibit 2-2 Ranch Location
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-6 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
2.4.2 ONSITE STREAMS, WATERSHEDS, AND AQUATIC HABITAT
Within Mindego Ranch, flows from several natural springs were captured by ranchers who, at some point in the
past, constructed earthen berms to create Upper Pond, and Big Spring, Mindego, and Knuedler Lakes to serve as
cattle stock ponds. These are described briefly below and in greater detail in Section 3.4 Biological Resources.
Mindego Lake covers approximately 5.4 acres and is composed primarily of open water with depths greater
than four feet throughout most of the lake. Herbaceous wetland vegetation dominated by a mixture of
native and non-native species grows in shallow areas along the lake fringe. Small stands of willow (Salix sp.)
grow along the southern perimeter of the lake near the water line. A seep wetland feeds into the lake from
the east.
Upper Pond covers approximately 0.15 acre and is composed of a dense cover of herbaceous wetland
vegetation dominated by native species, such as bulrush, water cress, and soft rush. Very little open water is
present and the pond appears shallow due to sediment accumulation.
Big Spring covers approximately 1 acre and is composed of a multilayered tree canopy with a dense
herbaceous understory. Native tree and shrub species grow around the pond fringe. Big Spring supports an
extensive amount of riparian habitat that is beneficial to a variety of wildlife.
Knuedler Lake covers approximately 1.15 acres, with the majority of the lake composed of a dense cover of
emergent wetland vegetation. The periphery of the lake is dominated by a mixture of native and non-native
herbaceous wetland species. A seep wetland occurs on a slope above the southeastern portion of the lake.
Mindego Creek is a perennial stream that traverses the property and eventually drains into San Gregorio
Creek and then out to the Pacific Ocean.
Rodgers Gulch is an intermittent stream located on the property.
Mindego Creek and Alpine Creek watersheds, within both of which the project site is located, are
tributaries to San Gregorio Creek and part of the San Gregorio Creek basin.
2.4.3 ONSITE STRUCTURES
Two ranch houses and one barn are located on the project site. The Old True Residence, also known as
Grandma’s House, is a one and one-half story front-gabled home with attached garage and board-and-batten
cladding. The residence was built by the True family in the late 1950s. It is in poor condition with extensive dry
rot and the roof and doors shows signs of neglect. The barn associated with the Old True Residence is a side-
gabled saltbox with a corrugated roof and is in poor condition, with the roof collapsing and boards missing from
the walls. The second residence was built in the late 1970s or early 1980s.
2.4.4 PUBLIC ACCESS
Mindego Ranch has not yet been opened to general public access, however small docent-led tours are currently
offered. Public access to the summit of Mindego Hill via a new, planned hiking and equestrian trail was
approved in 2012 as part of the Mindego Gateway Project. As of this writing, the Mindego Hill Trail has not yet
been constructed.
2.5 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed U&M Plan would direct future land management, operations, and public access actions and
activities at Mindego Ranch. The goal of the U&M Plan is to protect and enhance habitat for sensitive wildlife
species, while responsibly integrating land management activities and limited public access at Mindego Ranch.
The proposed U&M Plan elements are described individually below.
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-7
2.5.1 HABITAT ENHANCEMENT ACTIONS
The District contracted with expert herpetologists to perform in-depth surveys and recommend measures to
protect and enhance populations of SFGS and other sensitive species on the ranch. (See Exhibit 2-3.) The core
habitat areas for these species would be designated as Conservation Management Units (CMUs), which would
be managed for resource protection rather than public recreation (for more information, refer to Appendix A
SFGS Habitat Management Plan). Other than occasional docent-led tours, no public access would be permitted
within the CMUs. The Habitat Management Plan also includes physical improvements to improve aquatic habitat
for SFGS:
Eradicate non-native fish and control bullfrogs at Mindego Lake to improve SFGS’s native prey base,
primarily California red-legged frog (CRLF) and Pacific tree frog, as a long-term ecosystem benefit. This
involves the following steps:
a. Temporarily drain Mindego Lake to eliminate non-native fish that prey upon larval CRLF.
b. Initiate a management program to eliminate the bullfrogs which are aggressive, introduced predators of
the CRLF.
Increase capacity of smaller ponds that have partially filled in with sediment and are heavily colonized by
aquatic vegetation. Loss of open water habitat has reduced overall habitat quality and impairs successful
breeding by CRLF.
Install livestock exclusion fencing in select areas of all four ponds to manage livestock. This would allow
cattle to drink at specific locations to help maintain open water habitat while excluding them from portions
of the pond to ensure adequate growth of emergent and perimeter vegetation, consistent with CRLF
protection.
2.5.2 CONSERVATION GRAZING
Establishment of conservation grazing at Mindego Ranch is a cost-effective strategy to maintain ideal grassland-
to-brush ratios for SFGS, control invasive weeds, reduce wildland fire fuel loads, maintain open water habitats in
shallow ponds for CRLF, and promote native plant diversity, as well as support a traditional Coastside land use.
Significant infrastructure improvements as well as active management and monitoring are essential to meet the
objectives of conservation grazing. A grazing management plan was prepared for the property by Sage
Associates in 2008, which includes several recommendations to protect water quality on and off the property,
and habitat on the project site. As recommended in the grazing assessment, the proposed U&M Plan includes
low initial stocking rates (approximately 35 cow-calf pairs in a year-round operation) and the following water
system improvements (See Exhibit 2-4; for more information, refer to Appendix B, Grazing Plan):
Install five new troughs at strategic locations to evenly distribute cattle across the property (See Exhibit 2-3)
Install two new water tanks to provide livestock and wildlife water throughout the dry months
Install an electric (solar) pump to distribute the livestock water
Install 8,000 feet of new, buried PVC water line to supply the water troughs
Mindego Ranch is partially within the drinking water watershed of Cuesta La Honda Guild, which diverts water
from Mindego Creek to supply drinking water to approximately 280 residences within the Town of La Honda. A
potential threat posed by cattle grazing to downstream drinking water quality is the possible introduction of
Cryptosporidium to the water supply. Cryptosporidium is a pathogenic protozoan that can cause intestinal
infections which can cause illness and even fatality to children and other sensitive populations. Cryptosporidium
is spread via hardy cysts, which are most often produced by newborn calves infected with the pathogen.
Contamination of the water supply with even trace levels of cysts could trigger the need to install extremely
costly water treatment procedures.
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-8 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Many of the project site’s natural features help reduce cattle access to Mindego Creek, including existing dense
vegetation and steep topography. These natural features create an approximate 500-foot minimum buffer from
the Mindego Creek watercourse. In addition, the proposed Grazing Plan includes several measures to keep cattle
away from water sources, including strategic placement of water troughs and salt licks away from water bodies,
as well as installation of exclusionary fencing.
Proposed active management and monitoring of the grazing land would also limit stormwater runoff rates and
soil erosion, which further eliminate the potential for cysts to enter water courses. For example, MROSD would
monitor vegetation response and forage utilization and distribution to ensure that grazing is adequately
distributed throughout the property and that no single area is grazed too heavily. Please see Appendix B, for a
description of the Rangeland-Habitat Health and Residual Dry Matter (RDM) monitoring program that would be
implemented as part of the proposed U&M Plan.
To further minimize the potential for contamination of the Guild’s water supply, the following measures are
included in the proposed U&M Plan (See Section 3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality for more information):
Cattle would be excluded from the Mindego Creek watershed via a system of fencing and existing natural
barriers (dense vegetation and steep topography) during the period the Guild draws water from Mindego
Creek . This period extends from September 1 through May 31 (except during the 2-day processing period;
see below), encompassing the typical rainy season as well as a precautionary buffer. This measure will avoid
the potential for pathogens which may be present in cattle excrement to be carried to Mindego Creek via
rainwater runoff.
Regular monitoring will be performed by MROSD staff and the grazing tenant during the rainy season to
ensure that no cattle have entered the Mindego Creek watershed. Additional fencing will be installed
wherever and whenever existing barriers are found to be ineffective.
During processing, typically spanning a 2 day period in winter, cattle will be confined to a secure holding
field and corral along the southern border of the Mindego Creek watershed. No cattle will be moved into
the holding field or corral if or when precipitation (rain) occurs or is forecasted with greater than a 70
percent probability in the next 72-hour period to prevent fecal material from entering the water via surface
runoff. The holding field and corral vicinity will be monitored regularly by District staff or other appointed
personnel for signs of concentrated surface water flow (e.g., gullies and rills). If such signs are detected, the
District will ensure that proper drainage improvements are installed to prevent concentrated flows from the
area into the watershed.
Cattle water troughs and salt/mineral supplement will be located at least 800 feet away from surface water
bodies to disperse cattle and other wildlife away from wetland and riparian areas (see Exhibit 2-4).
Supplemental feeding will not be allowed, except in the following circumstances: 1) Distribution of
supplements (vitamins, minerals, protein) to aid in the achievement of District resource management goals,
livestock health and livestock movement and 2) feeding in the corral/holding pen (when cattle are off
loaded and held or shipped from the premises. Any hay should be locally sourced.
Stocking rates identified in the Grazing Management Plan will be adjusted as necessary to maintain
appropriate Residual Dry Matter (RDM) standards. Annual monitoring of RDM shall by conducted by the
District rangeland ecologist.
The District will continue to implement the feral pig reduction program, which has been effective in reducing
the feral pig populations. (Note that feral pigs currently occur in the area and are also a potential source of
Cryptosporidium. Reducing pig populations in the watershed reduces existing potential for contamination of
the water supply, reduces the risk of disease transmission to domestic livestock, protects native vegetation
and sensitive habitat areas and is a an overall benefit to the project.)
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-9
Exhibit 2-3 SFBS Habitat Enhancement
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-10 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Exhibit 2-4 Grazing Infrastructure
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-11
2.5.3 PUBLIC ACCESS
To minimize potential impacts to the highly sensitive SFGS, protective guidelines would be established and
public access on the property would be limited. The proposed U&M Plan would open access to an existing
donor recognition circle, which includes the following specific actions (See Exhibit 2-5):
opening a new section of the Mindego Ranch main driveway that connects to the POST Donor Circle
pathway to hiking and equestrian use,
opening the POST Donor Circle pathway to hiking only,
installing a horse stile at the entrance of the Donor Circle pathway,
designating habitat buffer areas around ponds as Conservation Management Units, where no public access
is allowed,
installing “Closed Area” signage at key locations,
installing a new gate on the Mindego Ranch main driveway just beyond the junction with the Donor Circle
pathway, and
allowing for docent-led tours only within closed areas of Mindego Ranch.
2.5.4 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION
Major maintenance and operations projects that would be implemented as part of the U&M Plan include road
erosion treatment projects and removal of existing structures. Road erosion treatment projects, as prescribed by
the Mindego Ranch Road and Trail Erosion Inventory (Best 2012), would include installing reverse-grade dips
and ditch relief culverts, rocking low-lying segments, replacing a failing culvert along the Mindego Hill Trail, as
well as re-grading, widening, and installing reverse-grade dips on three critical ranch access roads (See Exhibit
2-6).
The dilapidated structures described above, including the two ranch houses, barn and corral, would be
demolished for safety reasons. (It should be noted that the District would remediate or cap soil contaminants in
the corral area as part of structural demolition.)
Additional maintenance activities are included in the San Francisco Bay Water Quality Control Board Landfill
Closure Site Management Measures (landfill closure, signage, restriction enforcement, and slope monitoring)
and the POST Council Circle Management Agreement (trail maintenance actions, grazing responsibilities, and
invasive species control). It is also important to note that the District has existing funding dedicated to future
remediation of the corral area (a remediation plan has not yet been prepared), which would not be accessible to
the public. No additional staffing would be required for operation of the proposed U&M Plan. The proposed
project provides very limited additional public access and amenities and is therefore expected to generate few,
if any, additional vehicle trips (i.e., no more than 2 trips per day).
2.5.5 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Project elements would be constructed as funding becomes available. Due to potential public health, safety
concerns and the need for cost-effective habitat management, demolition of existing structures and installation
of grazing infrastructure is anticipated to occur within the next one to two years. Other project components,
such as pond and habitat enhancement, and public access, would likely occur within 2-to-10 years after project
approval, depending on funding. Project construction would require few pieces of heavy construction
equipment, mostly for demolition of structures and pond restoration. Fewer than 10 construction workers
would typically be onsite at any given time.
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-12 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Exhibit 2-5 Public Access
Ascent Environmental Project Description and Background
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 2-13
Exhibit 2-6 Road Maintenance
Project Description and Background Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
2-14 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-1
3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Project Title: Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD)
330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Lisa Bankosh, 650 691-1200
4. Project Location: Unincorporated San Mateo County
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Same as Lead Agency (MROSD)
6. General Plan Designation: San Mateo County: Open Space, Public Recreation, Timber Production
7. Zoning: San Mateo County: RM (Resource Management), RM-CZ/CD (Resource
Management – Coastal Zone) and TPZ (Timberland Preserve Zone)
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary,
support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
See attached project description.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
(Briefly describe the project’s surroundings)
The Preserve is surrounded primarily by open space, undeveloped private
land, and rural residential uses. Please see attached project description.
10: Other public agencies whose approval is required:
(e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement)
US Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404 Permit)
US Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 7 compliance)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Section 1602
and 2080.1 compliance)
Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401 cert.)
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (notification of
demolition)
San Mateo County Demolition Permit, Grading and
Resource Management Permit
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that
is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology / Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology / Water Quality
Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population / Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation / Traffic Utilities / Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance
None With Mitigation
Environmental Checklist AscertEn4Iiormnatal
DETERMINATION {To be completed by the Lead Ageri y))
Dn the basis cif this initial evaluation:
I find that the propose project could not have a signif,cant effect on ;he environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION w°II be prepared.
I rind that although the proposed project CGJLU have a signif cant eff,oct an the environment, there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the
Qrojr?CC proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLAMATION! will be prepared.
I find that ;he proposed project MAY have Significant effector t^.eenv lie nrnent, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required -
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant
unless mitigated" irn,pact on the environment, but at least one effect ].l has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2} has been addressed by rnitigat.on
•neasy-es based on the earlier analysis as described or, attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only tile effects that remain to be addressed_
El 1 find that although the proposed oroject could Ifave a 5-grtiifiC8r1; effector the environment, because all
potentially significan: effects {a) have been analyzed adequPte'y in an p.ariicr EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATJON pursuant to applicable standards, and (b} have beer. avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, inc:udirg revisions or mitigation rr wasurr.s that are imposed rrpprl
the proposed project, nothing fur:her is required.
Ad4t) 67171. 21/ r
Signature Date
Pi. pai,eie 777
-
Printed Name Title
Midpenfnsula Regional Open Space ListriCt
Agency
611d�priIri ulandgidrlalOpusSpace pistriCt
3.2 MmUego Rinoh Ilse and Management Plan IS/MNU
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-3
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is
adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects
like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained
where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well
as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If
there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.”
The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less
than significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-
referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion
should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,”
describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent
to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential
impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should
normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever
format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-4 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.1 AESTHETICS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I. Aesthetics. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
3.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site has a high degree of visual quality. (See Exhibits 3.1-1 through 3.1-4) The rolling grassland
interspersed with woodland, riparian vegetation, a creek, and several ponds contribute to the site’s high scenic
quality. The project site’s visual character is also defined by the deteriorating rural residential structures, as well
as the remnants of the former onsite cattle grazing operation (including a barn, corral, water tank, and troughs).
The dilapidated onsite structures generally detract from the otherwise natural visual character. Note than none
of the onsite structures meet the criteria for listing as historic resources. (See Section 3.5 Cultural Resources.)
Multiple scenic vistas are located throughout the project site. For example, the project site offers picturesque
panoramas of the surrounding coastal landscape, especially from the top of Mindego Hill, which, on clear days,
offers distant views of the Pacific Ocean. Most places on the project site offer views of rolling hillsides with
dense vegetation in the valleys, as well as a few small ponds.
District policies included in the “Resource Management Policies” document (MROSD 2011) are intended to
reduce District-wide visual impacts. Applicable Resource Management Policies include minimizing evidence of
human impacts by minimizing visibility of infrastructure and maintaining significant natural landscapes by
controlling vegetation to maintain scenic views and requiring tenants to maintain landscapes.
Nighttime views in the project area are very dark and generally free of light pollution. No sources of light or glare
exist on the property.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-5
Exhibit 3.1-1 View of Mindego Hill from the East Gate
Exhibit 3.1-2 Northwest View from the Top of Mindego Hill
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-6 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Exhibit 3.1-3 View of Existing Onsite Water Tank with Off-Site Rolling Hills in the Background
Exhibit 3.1-4 View of Mindego Lake
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-7
3.1.2 DISCUSSION
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less-Than-Significant. Scenic vistas are available from several locations on the project site, especially on top of
Mindego Hill. In addition, the high visual quality of the project site contributes to scenic vistas visible from offsite
locations throughout the project area.
It should first be noted that the existing scenic vistas available at the project site are currently not available to
the public. Implementation of the proposed U&M plan would provide public access to the site and its
outstanding views. This is considered an environmental benefit of the proposed project.
Implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would involve minor physical modifications that would generally
complement and fit in with the existing visual character of the site and surrounding property; these include
demolition of existing deteriorating structures, and improvements to existing roadways, providing public access,
installation of grazing facilities (water tanks and troughs), re-introduction of cattle onto the site, and restoration
of existing ponds. These physical changes would typically not substantially affect existing scenic vistas (either
onsite or offsite). This impact is less than significant.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a state scenic highway. The San
Mateo County General Plan designates Alpine Road as a scenic corridor. The project site (primarily Mindego Hill)
is distantly visible from Alpine Road (over one mile away). Structures on the project site do not meet the
eligibility criteria for listing as a significant historic resource. (See Section 3.5, Cultural Resources) The proposed
project does not include development of any additional structures or construction of any features that would be
clearly visible from Alpine Road. The proposed project would not result in tree removal or removal of rock
outcroppings. Therefore, because the proposed project would not substantially damage scenic resources, the
impact would be less than significant.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
Less-Than-Significant. Mindego Hill trail, a new hiking and equestrian trail to the summit of Mindego Hill, was
approved in 2011 as part of the Mindego Gateway project. Implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would
provide additional hiking and equestrian access to a Donor Circle honoring those who contributed to the
preservation of the property. No public vehicle access would be provided on the project site. Although more
people would be visible hiking and riding horses on the site, the additional number of visitors would not be
substantial and the publically accessible area on the site would be very limited (See Exhibit 2-5). Therefore, there
would not be a substantial change to the existing visual setting.
In addition, re-introduction of cattle grazing on the project site, as well as the installation of minor facilities such
as water tanks and troughs, would be consistent with the visual character of the site, which currently includes
structures and features associated with the former cattle grazing operation.
Other improvements include habitat restoration, primarily associated with the onsite ponds. Although there
would be short-term visual effects associated with the temporary draining of Mindego Lake (to eradicate
invasive species), once the lake is refilled there would be no noticeable change to the visual character of the
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-8 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
onsite pond. Other habitat restoration activities would reduce sedimentation in the ponds, which would
enhance their appearance by enlarging the visible area of water.
Considering all of the above, the proposed project would not result in substantial degradation of the existing
visual character or quality of the site. This would be a less-than-significant impact.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. The proposed project would not include any new structures or other sources of light or glare. Public
access would not be allowed after daylight hours. The project would result in no impact.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-9
3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
II. Agriculture and Forest Resources.
In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997, as
updated) prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining
whether impacts to forest resources, including
timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to information compiled by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including
the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the
Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon
measurement methodology provided in Forest
Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources
Board.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-10 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Mindego Ranch was used for cattle ranching from 1859, when Juan Mendico settled in the area with ranch and
residential infrastructure located northeast of Mindego Lake, until 2008 when the property ownership
transitioned to the District. The ranch contains approximately 330 acres of grassland that are available for cattle
grazing where accessible along ridges, swales and foothill sideslopes.
As of 2010, no areas of the project site were mapped as Farmland of Statewide or Local Importance, Unique
Farmland or Prime Farmland by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. The project site does not
contain any designated “Farmland” per the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). The FMMP
designates the land within Preserve boundaries as either “Grazing Land” or “Other Land.” (Department of
Conservation 2010) The Coastal Protection Program EIR included a measure to amend the Coastal Service Plan’s
definition of “prime agricultural land” to include “land which supports livestock for the production of food and
fiber and which has an annual carrying capacity equivalent to at least one animal unit per acre as defined by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture” (MROSD 2002). Grazing land within the project site has an annual carrying
capacity of less than one animal unit per acre (Sage Associates 2012) and therefore does not meet the
aforementioned criteria. No Prime Farmland exists on the project site.
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965—commonly referred to as the Williamson Act (WA)—enables local
governments to enter into contracts with private landowners for the purpose of restricting specific parcels of
land to agricultural or related open space use. In return, landowners receive property tax assessments which are
much lower than similarly situated properties because they are based upon farming and open space uses as
opposed to full market value. Local governments receive an annual subvention of forgone property tax revenues
from the state via the Open Space Subvention Act of 1971. The easterly 887 acres of the project site are
currently under WA contracts. The District requested non-renewal of these contracts in 2009, but they will
remain in effect throughout the nine-year non-renewal period (until December 31, 2018).
Existing District policies ensure that the District sustains and encourages agricultural viability while minimizing
impacts on the natural environment. Agricultural practices on District lands are guided by the Resource
Management Policies (MROSD 2011) as well as the Coastal Service Plan (MROSD 2003). Resource Management
Policies include guidelines to ensure that grazing supports and is compatible with wildlife and wildlife habitat.
These guidelines include requirements such as inventory and conservation of sensitive habitats, preparation of
site-specific grazing management plans including water quality BMPs, and protection of riparian and aquatic
habitats. The Coastal Service Plan includes several guidelines that direct District purchase of and agricultural
practices on farmland, as well as guidelines to protect farmland by requiring buffers for development and trails
near farmland (where trail use has negative impacts on farming operations). Finally, as part of the Coastal
Protection Program, the District entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Mateo County
Farm Bureau that ensures that all District actions on the Coastside which may impact agricultural operations are
vetted by local farmers and ranchers.
3.2.2 DISCUSSION
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Less-Than-Significant. The FMMP identifies “grazing land” and “other land” on the project site. No Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance occurs on the project site (Department of
Conservation 2010). No agricultural uses exist on the project site. Implementation of the proposed project
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-11
would reintroduce the grazing and ranching operations on approximately 330 acres of project site grassland.
Although the proposed project limited public access, project implementation would expand agricultural use in
the region by increasing available grazing land. The proposed project would also be consistent with the District’s
Resource Management Policies and the Coastal Service Plan, as described above in the Environmental Setting.
The proposed project includes no new trails. The project’s impact to the conversion of Prime, Unique, or
Farmland of statewide importance would be less than significant.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract?
Less-Than-Significant. The San Mateo County General Plan Land Use map indicated that the project site is zoned
RM (Resource Management) and TPZ (Timberland Preserve Zone). These zoning designations provide for park,
open space and recreational uses. Thus, the proposed enhancement of habitat, reintroduction of small-scale
grazing, and opening limited areas of the site to public use and providing minor public access improvements are
consistent with the current zoning.
Implementation of the proposed project would reintroduce grazing on the property while integrating limited
public access. Grazing and ranching are considered allowable agricultural uses under the Williamson Act.
Compatible uses under the WA, as amended, also include “Open Space Use” and “Recreational Use.”
“Recreational Use” is defined under Government Code 51201(n) under the WA as the use of land in its
agricultural or natural state by the public, with or without change, for any of the following: walking, hiking,
picnicking, camping, swimming, boating, fishing, hunting, or other outdoor games or sports for which facilities
are provided for public participation. “Open Space Use” in San Mateo County is defined as the use or
maintenance of land in a manner that preserves its natural characteristics, beauty, or openness for the benefit
and enjoyment of the public within a:
state-designated scenic highway corridor, which includes all lands adjacent to and visible from State Hwy 35
from the Santa Cruz County Line to State Route 92;
wildlife habitat area, defined as a land or water area designated by the Board of Supervisors after consulting
with and considering the recommendation from the Department of Fish and Game, as an area of great
importance for the protection or enhancement of the wildlife resources of the state; or
managed wetlands area, defined as an area diked off from the ocean or any bay, river, or stream to which
water is occasionally admitted, and which, for at least three consecutive years immediately prior to being
placed within an agricultural preserve pursuant to this chapter, was used and maintained as waterfowl
hunting preserve or game refuge or for agricultural purposes.
The District’s mission to preserve, protect, and maintain lands as open space and to support agricultural uses
within the Coastside Protection Area essentially meets the intent and purpose of the WA. Because the District is
a tax-exempt public agency whose mission is to preserve open space, the WA is not necessary to achieve land
conservation objectives on District lands. For these reasons, the District has filed notices of non-renewal with
San Mateo County for lands within the Preserve that are under WA contracts. Non-renewal is the preferred
administrative method of terminating a contract on a parcel of land; the entire non-renewal process requires a
nine-year wind down period. Non-renewal of the WA contracts is an administrative procedure that will not
affect the agricultural use that is currently present on the project site. Consistent with the District’s mission,
agricultural lands will remain protected after non-renewal.
The proposed project includes allowing access on existing trails that would facilitate open space and low
intensity recreational uses, both of which are compatible with proposed cattle grazing in grassland areas of the
property. This mixed use of open space is new to the District but has been successfully operated within San
Mateo County and the San Francisco Bay region. Existing WA contracts were amended by San Mateo County in
September 2012 to allow compatible open space uses on the project site (San Mateo County 2012). Therefore,
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-12 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
the project would result in a less-than-significant impact associated with conflicts with WA contracts. This is
consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR.
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. As mentioned above under “b,” areas of the Preserve are zoned TPZ, which in addition to preserving
timberland, also allows park, open space, and recreational uses. The proposed project would not require a
rezone. Therefore, the project would result in no impact related to conflicts with the zoning of forest land or
timberland. This is consistent with the conclusion of the San Mateo Coastal Protection Program EIR.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Less-Than-Significant. Implementation of the proposed project does not include development of new structures
or facilities that would require substantial tree removal. As mentioned under “b” and “c” above, park, open
space, and recreational uses are consistent with the TPZ zone. The District’s Service Plan includes policies to
avoid physical impacts to existing forest preserves, including establishing buffers. The proposed project does not
include public access within or near the TPZ area (located only on the westernmost area of the project site);
therefore, no buffers are necessary Implementation of the proposed project would result in a less-than-
significant impact. This is consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would not involve other changes that could result in
conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest use. As described in the discussions
under “a” through “d” above, implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would result in no impact related to
conversion of agricultural or forest land. This is consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program
EIR.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-13
3.3 AIR QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
III. Air Quality.
Where available, the significance criteria established by
the applicable air quality management or air pollution
control district may be relied on to make the following
determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
3.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is located in San Mateo County, which lies in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB) and
is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). With respect to ozone, San
Mateo County is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the 1-hour state ambient air quality standard
and the 8-hour state and national ambient air quality standards (ARB 2010). San Mateo County is designated as
unclassified for the national standard for respirable particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10
micrometers or less (PM10) and as nonattainment for the state standard for PM10; and is designated as
nonattainment for the state and national standards for fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of
2.5 micrometers or less (PM2.5) (ARB 2011).
Air quality within San Mateo County is regulated by such agencies as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), and California Air Resources Board (ARB) at the federal and state levels, respectively, and locally by the
BAAQMD. The BAAQMD seeks to improve air quality conditions through a comprehensive program of planning,
regulation, enforcement, technical innovation, and promotion of the understanding of air quality issues. The
clean air strategy of the BAAQMD consists of the development of programs for the attainment of ambient air
quality standards, adoption and enforcement of rules and regulations, and issuance of permits for stationary
sources. BAAQMD also inspects stationary sources, responds to citizen complaints, monitors ambient air quality
and meteorological conditions, and implements other programs and regulations required by the federal Clean
Air Act, federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the California Clean Air Act.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-14 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
The BAAQMD prepared the Draft Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan, which defines a strategy to: (1) reduce emissions
and decrease ambient concentrations of harmful pollutants; (2) safeguard public health by reducing exposure to
air pollutants that pose the greatest health risk, with an emphasis on protecting the communities most heavily
impacted by air pollution; and (3) reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to protect the climate (BAAQMD
2010). In compliance with the requirements set forth in the California Clean Air Act, the plan specifically
addresses the nonattainment status for ozone and to a lesser extent, PM10 and PM2.5.
BAAQMD adopted new thresholds of significance and guidance for the evaluation of projects under CEQA in
early June of 2010 (BAAQMD 2010). These documents provide detailed guidance for evaluating both short-term
construction activities and the long-term operations of new facilities. The BAAQMD adopted the following
quantitative thresholds of significance for the evaluation of criteria air pollutants (CAPs) and precursors
generated by construction and operational activities:
Average daily emissions of 54 pounds per day (lb/day) of reactive organic gases (ROG),
Average daily emissions of 54 lb/day of oxides of nitrogen (NOX),
Average daily emissions of 82 lb/day of PM10 exhaust,
Average daily emissions of 54 lb/day of PM2.5 exhaust,
An incremental increase in the annual average concentration of PM2.5 concentrations greater than 0.3
micrograms per cubic meter, and
Fugitive PM10 and PM2.5 dust with implementation of best management practices for dust control.
Note that BAAQMD defines sensitive receptors as “facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people
with illnesses or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools,
convalescent facilities, and residential areas are examples of sensitive receptors” (BAAQMD 2010). Although not
specifically stated in the BAAQMD definition, people who are active outdoors are considered by the EPA to be
sensitive to criteria air pollutants, such as ozone, and would fall under the “others” category in the BAAQMD
definition (EPA 2012).
It should also be noted that the Coastal Service Plan includes Implementation Action G.6J(i) to reduce fugitive
dust emissions. Because it would be subject to the requirements of the Service Plan, the proposed project would
be required to implement this action.
3.3.2 DISCUSSION
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the County’s land use designation and zoning, does not
include any development of structures, and includes no additional staff. The proposed project would not change
the amount of development projected in the San Mateo County General Plan, and would therefore be
consistent with the population growth and VMT projections for the SFBAAB contained in BAAQMD’s Clean Air
Plan (which is based on general plan projections) and thus would not interfere with the region’s ability to attain
or maintain state and national ambient air quality standards. Also, the proposed project would not result in the
operation of any major stationary emission sources or extensive, ongoing use of heavy-duty off-road equipment.
Thus, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air
quality planning efforts. As a result, there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. This is consistent with
the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-15
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would result in
minor construction activities, such as demolition of the onsite structures already in poor condition, some
removal of sediment and vegetation from ponds, and road improvements. The use of heavy duty equipment
would be minimal and would be limited to the demolition of onsite structures and light earth movement for
road and pond improvements. Therefore, emissions of criteria air pollutants (e.g., NOX, ROG, and Diesel PM)
would be minimal and project construction activities would not result in emissions of criteria air pollutants that
could exceed applicable BAAQMD emissions thresholds. Emissions of criteria air pollutants are not discussed
further. Emissions of fugitive dust (i.e., PM10 and PM2.5) would be of primary concern and therefore is the focus
of this analysis.
The Coastal Protection Program EIR evaluated potential impacts to air quality due to implementation of the
Service Plan, within which Mindego Ranch is included. Impact AIR-1 indicates that typical construction activities
associated with grading for access roads and parking areas, as well as demolition activities, could result in
generation of fugitive dust, including PM10 and PM2.5. The Coastal Protection Program EIR also indicates that
asbestos could be generated by demolition activities, but that long-term emissions associated with
implementation of the Service Plan would not be significant due to the minor use levels of the open space
facilities. Mitigation Measure AIR-1 in the Coastal Protection Program EIR includes standard fugitive dust control
best management practices (BMPs), including watering construction areas, covering haul trucks, daily sweeping,
and hydroseeding inactive construction areas. The proposed project includes activities generally consistent with
the activities described in the Coastal Protection Program EIR. Consistent with the EIR’s conclusion,
implementation of the proposed project could result in a potentially significant impact if standard fugitive dust
control measures are not implemented.
Mitigation Measure 3.3-1
The District shall require all its construction contractors to implement the following basic construction
mitigation measures. This measure incorporates Mitigation Measure AIR-1 of the Coastal Protection Program
EIR. (The measures below provide updated consistency with BAAQMD regulations.)
Basic Construction Mitigation Measures
〉 All exposed and un-compacted surfaces (e.g., staging areas, soil piles, and graded areas,) shall either
be watered two times per day or covered with mulch, straw, or other dust control cover.
〉 All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
〉 All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be collected and removed at least
once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
〉 All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour (mph).
〉 All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building
pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding, dust control covers, or soil binders
are used.
〉 Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the
maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measures
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-16 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
(ATCM) Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.
〉 All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s
specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running
in proper condition prior to operation.
〉 Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency
regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.
BAAQMD’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
Significance after Mitigation
The dust control measures in Mitigation Measure 3.3-1 would result in reductions in both fugitive emissions of
PM10 and PM2.5. Although the exact amount of the reduction cannot be quantified, individual dust control
measures have been shown to reduce fugitive dust by anywhere from 30% to more than 90% and, in the
aggregate, best management practices would substantially reduce fugitive dust emissions from construction
sites (BAAQMD 2010, p. D-47). BAAQMD would consider fugitive PM emissions to be reduced to a less-than-
significant level with implementation of the dust control measures in Mitigation Measure 3.3-1.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less-Than-Significant. The SFBAAB is currently designated as a nonattainment area for state and national ozone
standards and nonattainment for the state PM10 standards and state and national PM2.5 standards. SFBAAB’s
nonattainment status is attributed to the region’s development history. Past, present and future development
projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air
pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment
of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively
significant adverse air quality impacts. As explained in BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines, and consistent with CEQA, if
a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would
be considered significant (BAAQMD 2010).
In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a
project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance
thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts
to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, additional analysis to assess cumulative impacts is
unnecessary.
As discussed in the analysis under item “b” above, the Coastal Protection Program EIR indicates that, with
implementation of dust control measures, project-generated emissions would not exceed applicable thresholds.
Therefore, the proposed would not violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation. Project-generated emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors would not be cumulatively
considerable. This would be a less-than-significant impact with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.3-1.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Criteria air pollutants and precursors; diesel particulate matter emissions; and naturally occurring asbestos are
discussed separately below.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-17
CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS AND PRECURSORS
Less-Than-Significant. The surrounding land uses consist of primarily of rural residences and undeveloped open
space land (the Camp Glenwood property, which serves as a male youth correctional facility, is adjacent to the
southwest corner of the site). Implementation of the proposed U&M Plan would potentially introduce people
participating in physical activity (i.e. hiking and bicycling), which are considered to be sensitive receptors in this
analysis, to air pollutants during construction activities. However, it is District standard practice to restrict public
access near construction zones. Furthermore, as discussed in b) above, project-related construction and
operations would not result in emissions of criteria pollutants or local carbon monoxide emissions that would
result in or contribute substantially to an air quality violation. Fugitive dust emissions associated with
construction-related ground disturbance would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation
of Mitigation Measure 3.3-1. Emissions-generating construction activity would occur at different locations on
the Preserve and not continue at any single location for an extended period. The majority of operational
emissions would be from vehicles traveling to and from the project site, which would not result in localized
concentrations of any CAPs. Therefore, project-related emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to
substantial concentrations of CAPs.
DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER
Less-Than-Significant. Construction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term emissions of diesel
PM from the exhaust of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment used for site preparation (e.g., demolition,
grading, excavation, grading, and clearing); paving; trucks delivering and removing materials from construction
sites; and other miscellaneous activities. According to ARB, the potential cancer risk from the inhalation of diesel
PM is a more serious risk than the potential non-cancer health impacts (ARB 2003). Consequently, for the
purposes of this analysis, the discussion below focuses on cancer rather than non-cancer risks.
The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential
exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Dose is a function of the concentration of a
substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Dose is positively
correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher level of exposure to the
exposed individual. In other words, the risks estimated for an exposed individual are higher if a fixed exposure
occurs over a longer period. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Health Risk
Assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70-
year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the duration of exposure (OEHHA 2001).
The use of mobilized equipment for construction activities would be temporary at any one location, and would
dissipate with increasing distance from the source. In addition, the nearest sensitive receptor is located
approximately 1,500 feet to the south of the nearest potential construction site, which would allow for ample
dissipation of particulates. As mentioned above, with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.3-1, average
daily emissions of PM2.5 exhaust would not exceed BAAQMD’s threshold of significance. For these reasons, and
because of the highly dispersive properties of diesel PM (Zhu et. al. 2002), short-term construction-generated
TAC emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to an incremental increase in cancer risk that exceeds 10 in
one million or a Hazard Index greater than 1.0 of the maximally exposed individual; or result in an incremental
increase in the annual average concentration of PM2.5 concentrations greater than 0.3 micrograms per cubic
meter. This impact would be less than significant.
NATURALLY OCCURRING ASBESTOS
No Impact. Naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) was identified as a TAC in 1986 by ARB. NOA is located in many
parts of California, including the Bay Area, and is commonly associated with ultramafic rocks, according to a
special publication published by the California Department of Conservation, which is now named the California
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-18 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Geological Survey (California Department of Conservation 2002). Asbestos is the common name for a group of
naturally occurring fibrous silicate minerals that can separate into thin but strong and durable fibers. Ultramafic
rocks form in high-temperature environments well below the surface of the earth. By the time they are exposed
at the surface by geologic uplift and erosion, ultramafic rocks may be partially to completely altered into a type
of metamorphic rock called serpentinite. Sometimes the metamorphic conditions are right for the formation of
chrysotile asbestos or tremolite-actinolite asbestos in the bodies of these rocks, along their boundaries, or in the
soil. Exposure to asbestos may result in inhalation or ingestion of asbestos fibers, which over time may result in
damage to the lungs or membranes that cover the lungs, leading to illness or even death.
According to the General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California—Areas More Likely to Contain
Naturally Occurring Asbestos and the Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle, the project site is
not located in areas that are more likely to contain NOA (California Department of Conservation 2000; California
Geological Survey 2007). Therefore, any ground disturbance activity associated with project-related construction
or operations would not to result in the reentrainment of NOA-containing dust. There would be no impact.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less-Than-Significant. The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depend on numerous factors, including the
nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; wind speed and direction; and the presence of sensitive
receptors. Although offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to
considerable distress and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and regulatory agencies.
BAAQMD has established Regulation 7 (Odorous Emissions) to address odor issues. Regulation 7 places general
limitations on odorous substances and specific emission limitations on certain odorous compounds. Project
implementation would not result in any major sources of odor and the project type is not one of the common
types of facilities or activities that are known to produce odors (e.g., landfill, coffee roaster, wastewater
treatment facility). In addition, the diesel exhaust from the use of heavy-duty equipment during construction
and demolition activities would be intermittent and temporary, and would dissipate rapidly from the source
with an increase in distance. Also, construction activity would not occur at any single location for an extended
period of time. There are no portable restrooms or pit toilet restrooms included in the proposed recreational
facilities. Therefore, project implementation would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people. As a result, this impact would be less than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-19
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
IV. Biological Resources. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
3.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Mindego Ranch supports a mosaic of upland plant communities within four general habitat types, including
grassland, coyote brush scrub, mixed evergreen forest, and developed/ruderal. Two perennial streams (Mindego
and Alpine Creeks) and one intermittent stream (Rodgers Gulch) traverse the property. Year-round open water
and seasonal wetlands are found on the property, including Upper Pond, Big Spring, and Kneudler and Mindego
Lakes. Numerous other seeps and springs are present.
The grassland is dominated by non-native grasses and forbs including yellow star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis),
wild oats (Avena sp.), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), Italian ryegrass (Lolium
multiflorum), barley (Hordeum murinum), sheep sorrel (Rumex acetosella), hedgehog dogtail (Cynosurus
echinatus), summer mustard (Hirschfeldia incana), and Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), with occasional
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-20 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
native species including California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), slender tarweed (Madia gracilis), blue wild
rye (Elymus glaucus), purple needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), and soap plant (Chlorogalum pomeridianum).
Coyote brush scrub is dominated by coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), with native shrubs and herbs present
including poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), toyon (Heteromeles
arbutifolia), wood fern (Dryopteris arguta), sticky monkey flower (Mimulus aurantiacus), California coffeeberry
(Rhamnus californica), blue elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), and California sagebrush (Artemisia californica).
Mixed evergreen forest is dominated by a canopy of native trees including Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii),
coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus),
California bay (Umbellularia californica), California buckeye (Aesculus californica), big-leaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum), and madrone (Arbutus menziesii). The understory consists of native shrubs and herbs including
poison oak, California hazelnut (Corylus cornuta var. californica), California blackberry, wood rose (Rosa
gymnocarpa), toyon, oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), wood fern, Douglas iris (Iris douglasiana), trailplant
(Adenocaulon bicolor), and swordfern (Polystichum munitum).
Developed/ruderal habitat consists of areas developed by roads, residences, and other structures, along with
ruderal (highly disturbed) areas dominated by weedy, non-native grasses and forbs. This habitat is associated
with the dirt road system, and the abandoned residence, ranch buildings and corrals near Mindego Lake.
Mindego Lake covers approximately 5.4 acres and is composed primarily of open water, due to water depths
greater than four feet throughout most of the lake. Herbaceous wetland vegetation dominated by a mixture of
native and non-native species grows in shallow areas along the lake fringe. Native species include spreading rush
(Juncus patens), iris-leafed rush (J. xiphioides), spikerush (Eleocharis macrostachya), tall flatsedge (Cyperus
eragrostis), cocklebur (Xanthium sp.), and water cress (Nasturtium officinale). Non-native species include curly
dock (Rumex crispus), rabbits-foot grass (Polypogon monspeliensis), prickly sow thistle (Sonchus asper), and mint
(Mentha sp.). Small stands of willow (Salix sp.) grow along the southern perimeter of the lake near the water
line. A seep wetland, dominated by spike rush, water cress, and curly dock, feeds into the lake from the east.
Uplands around the northern portion of the lake are heavily disturbed and dominated by ruderal, non-native
herbaceous species including milk thistle (Silybum marianum) and Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus).
Knuedler Lake covers approximately 1.15 acres, with the majority of the lake composed of a dense cover of
emergent wetland vegetation dominated by California bulrush (Schoenoplectus californicus), bur-reed
(Sparganium eurycarpum), and cattail. The periphery of the lake is dominated by a mixture of native and non-
native herbaceous wetland species including spikerush, water cress, tall flatsedge, soft rush, curly dock, rabbits-
foot grass, and mint. A seep wetland dominated by spikerush and mint occurs on a slope above the
southeastern portion of the lake.
Big Spring covers approximately 1 acre and is composed of a multilayered canopy of willow, white alder (Alnus
rhombifolia), and wax myrtle (Morella californica), with a dense herbaceous understory of cattail (Typha sp.),
bulrush, water cress, soft rush, and stinging nettle. Native tree and shrub species, including coast live oak,
California bay, California hazelnut, coyote brush, poison oak, and California blackberry grow around the pond
fringe.
Upper Pond covers approximately 0.15 acre and is composed of a dense cover of herbaceous wetland
vegetation dominated by native species, such as bulrush, water cress, and soft rush. Several willows form an
emergent tree canopy above the dense herbaceous wetland vegetation. A berm surrounding the pond is densely
covered with non-native species such as poison hemlock, along with native species such as coyote brush, poison
oak, stinging nettle, and California blackberry.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-21
DISCUSSION
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Twelve special-status wildlife species have potential to
occur on the property (Appendix C): California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), western pond turtle (Emys
marmorata), San Francisco garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos),
white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus), long-eared owl (Asio otus), Vaux's swift (Chaetura vauxi), olive-sided
flycatcher (Contopus cooperi), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus),
San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes annectens), and American badger (Taxidea taxus).
District botanists and CNPS have conducted non-protocol surveys of the project site. No special-status plants
have been observed during previous field surveys of portions of the ranch (Bankosh pers. comm. 2013), but the
entire project site has not be surveyed during the appropriate blooming periods and suitable habitat is present.
Special-Status Amphibians and Reptiles
San Francisco garter snake, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle are known to occur within the
project site. San Francisco garter snake is “Fully Protected” under the Fish and Wildlife Code and is also
protected by the California and federal Endangered Species Acts. San Francisco garter snake use ponds that
support California red-legged frog, which is a prey species for the snake. Critical habitat has not been designated
for San Francisco garter snake. San Francisco garter snake is found only on the San Francisco peninsula in San
Mateo County and the northern portion of Santa Cruz County. Mindego Ranch is situated near the center of
historic its range, but the species was not known to be extant at the project site until 1986 when they were first
identified at Mindego Lake and Knuedler Lake (Biosearch Associates 2012, included as Appendix A of this
IS/MND) In May 2010, an adult San Francisco garter snake was seen basking at Upper Pond, and many
subsequent observations were made during development of a SFGS Habitat Management Plan for the property
(Biosearch Associates 2012).
California red-legged frog is federally listed as threatened and considered a species of special concern by
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). For successful reproduction, this species requires deep pools
in slow-moving streams or ponds with riparian and/or emergent marsh vegetation. The entire project site is
federally designated critical habitat for California red-legged frog (Unit SNM-2). Western pond turtles, which are
considered a species of special concern by CDFW, require still or slow-moving water with instream emergent
woody debris, rocks, or other similar features for basking sites. Pond turtle nests are typically located on
unshaded upland slopes in dry substrates with clay or silt soils.
Implementation of the Use and Management Plan is intended to improve habitat conditions for San Francisco
garter snake, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle by removing predatory fish and reducing the
population of bullfrog, both of which compete and prey upon native frogs and snakes.
Mindego Ranch provides a conservation opportunity as identified in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Recovery Plans for San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog. The primary goal of the San
Francisco Garter Snake Recovery Plan is the protection of 10 significant populations (>200 individuals). Only six
populations were known at the time the Recovery Plan was prepared (i.e., West-of-Bayshore, Crystal Springs &
San Andreas Reservoirs, Laguna Salada/Mori Point, Pescadero Marsh, and Año Nuevo State Reserve). Creation
or protection of significant populations at four additional sites was considered necessary to the recovery of the
subspecies. The transfer of Mindego Ranch from private ownership to the District provided an opportunity to
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-22 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
protect and enhance ~1,000 acres with at least two ponds that support populations of the San Francisco garter
snake. The proposed project site also represents the only population from the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains
that is currently afforded protection. (Biosearch Associates 2012)
Enhancement of essential habitats at Mindego Ranch for the San Francisco garter snake will contribute to the
regional recovery of the species and can promote genetic exchange with nearby populations on the crest of the
Santa Cruz Mountains. Viable San Francisco garter snake populations at Mindego Ranch will also increase the
potential for dispersing San Francisco garter snake to colonize new locations both east and west of the crest of
the Santa Cruz Mountains. The habitat enhancement actions were designed to benefit the SFGS and would be
implemented under an endangered species recovery or enhancement permit issued by the USFWS.
Habitat improvements at Mindego Lake are expected to contribute to the recovery of California red-legged frog
by removing predatory species that severely reduce successful California red-legged frog breeding at the site. It
is likely that California red-legged frog continue to deposit eggs into Mindego Lake, resulting in the potential for
a population sink. The removal of predatory fish from Mindego Lake is expected to directly benefit the local
California red-legged frog population by allowing for increased survivorship of eggs and metamorphs. Habitat
improvements at Big Spring and Upper Pond are expected to result in conditions suitable for California red-
legged frog breeding, whereas current conditions are not suitable Furthermore, core habitat areas for these
species would be designated as Conservation Management Units (CMUs), which would be managed for resource
protection rather than public recreation (See Appendix A); no public access would be permitted within the
CMUs. “Closed Area” signage would be installed at key locations. Re-introducing grazing on the property would
help maintain appropriate grassland habitat for SFGS, and strategic locations of proposed water infrastructure
and fencing would help protect SFGS breeding habitat.
While the habitat enhancement activities are anticipated to benefit these species in the long term, the potential
exists for short term impacts to occur during the draining of aquatic habitat and removal of excess sediment and
vegetation. Individual San Francisco garter snake, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle may
accidentally be injured by construction equipment, smothered during sediment removal, or stranded during
dewatering. This impact is considered significant.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-1
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to San Francisco garter
snake, California red-legged frog, and western pond turtle. This measure incorporates Mitigation Measures BIO
1b, 1j, and 1l of the Coastal Protection Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity to protections for
San Francisco garter snake, California red-legged frog and western pond turtle for habitat enhancement
actions.)
〉 Because San Francisco garter snake is Fully Protected, no take can be authorized under the Fish and
Wildlife Code. Take is defined in Section 86 of the Fish and Wildlife Code as "hunt, pursue, catch,
capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill." Habitat enhancement activities must
ensure that no snakes are taken during implementation.
〉 Because San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog are federally protected and habitat
enhancement activities may affect them, USFWS shall be consulted as required by the Endangered
Species Act. Because potential impacts to aquatic habitat may also require a Section 404 permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (see Discussion under “C” below and Mitigation Measure
BIO 4), consultation with USFWS would occur during the recovery permit process (under Section 10 of
the ESA).
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-23
〉 The District shall implement all conservation measures included in the Biological Opinion issued by
USFWS as a result of the consultation to minimize potential impacts to San Francisco garter snake and
California red-legged frog.
〉 Conservation measures shall include:
o Speed Limits. Use of vehicles on Mindego Ranch should be strictly controlled by the
District to avoid potential take of San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog.
Other than emergencies, access should be limited to necessary patrols and authorized
persons that follow a 5-mph speed limit within 2,000 feet of Mindego Lake, Knuedler
Lake, Upper Pond or Big Spring.
o Worker Education Seminar. Prior to conducting any action that may negatively affect listed
species, all staff, contractors and persons associated with the project must attended a
worker-education seminar delivered by a qualified District biologist or other qualified
biologist. The seminar will include written information regarding identification, natural history,
legal status, onsite observations, and related information. Names and phone numbers of the
biological monitors and CDFW and USFWS contacts should be included in the written
information. The District should maintain a signature sheet to document compliance, which
will be made available upon request.
o Pre-activity Surveys. Prior to ground disturbing actions, pre-activity surveys shall be conducted
by a qualified biologist to search for San Francisco garter snake during periods when they are
active, and to minimize affecting potential San Francisco garter snake cover-sites and
hibernacula during all times of the year.
o Biological Construction Monitoring. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-activity survey for
San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog and western pond turtle prior to
implementing actions that include ground disturbance or other activities that could otherwise
harm either species. The biological monitor shall oversee compliance with this plan and all
associated permits and should be the point of contact for regulatory agencies, if needed. If
protected species are observed within the study area by anyone involved in the project, work
shall cease and the animal will be allowed to move out of the area under its own motivation,
and under the direct observation of the biological monitor (if feasible). If a western pond turtle
nest is discovered, CDFW will be contacted for guidance to protect such a unique resource.
Relocation of any protected species to the nearest appropriate habitat will not be conducted,
unless specifically authorized by the regulatory agencies.
Special-Status Mammals
If present within onsite structures, roosting habitat for pallid bats, which may roost in buildings or other
structures that provide suitable thermal protection, may be affected during demolition of the ranch houses and
barn on the project site. San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and American badger have been detected in the
project vicinity (Biosearch Associates and Coast Range Biological 2011). They both are considered species of
special concern by CDFW. Construction of road repairs and erosion control, as well as installation of water
infrastructure to support conservation grazing could result in disturbance to woodrat houses or badger dens if
they are present in the work areas. This is considered a significant effect.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2
Prior to demolition of structures, surveys for roosting bats within the structures will be conducted by a qualified
biologist. Surveys will consist of a daytime pedestrian survey looking for evidence of bat use (e.g., guano)
and/or an evening emergence survey to note the presence or absence of bats. The type of survey will depend
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-24 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
on the condition of the buildings. If no bat roosts are found, then no further study is required. If evidence of bat
use is observed, the number and species of bats using the roost will be determined. Bat detectors may be
used to supplement survey efforts, but are not required.
If roosts of pallid bats are determined to be present and must be removed, the bats will be excluded from the
roosting site before the structure is removed. A program addressing compensation, exclusion methods, and
roost removal procedures will be developed in consultation with DFG before implementation. Exclusion
methods may include use of one-way doors at roost entrances (bats may leave but not reenter), or sealing
roost entrances when the site can be confirmed to contain no bats. Exclusion efforts may be restricted during
periods of sensitive activity (e.g., during hibernation or while females in maternity colonies are nursing young).
The loss of each roost (if any) will be replaced in consultation with DFG and may include construction and
installation of bat boxes suitable to the bat species and colony size excluded from the original roosting site.
Roost replacement will be implemented before bats are excluded from the original roost sites. MROSD has
successfully constructed bat boxes elsewhere that have subsequently been occupied by bats. Once the
replacement roosts are constructed and it is confirmed that bats are not present in the original roost site, the
structures may be removed or sealed.
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to San Francisco dusky-
footed woodrat and American badger. This measure incorporates Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1c,
BIO-1d, BIO-1f, and BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity to
protections for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and American badger.)
〉 Within 30 days prior to project construction, a qualified biologist shall inspect the work area and
adjacent areas within 50 feet for woodrat houses and badger dens. If none are found, then no
additional measures are necessary.
〉 If a woodrat house is identified within 50 feet of the work area, an exclusion zone shall be erected
around the existing woodrat houses using flagging or a temporary fence that does not inhibit the
natural movements of wildlife (such as steel T-posts and a single strand of yellow rope or similar
materials). The work area shall be relocated as necessary to avoid impacting woodrat houses, even if
avoidance is by only a few feet. If woodrat houses cannot be avoided by the trail, CDFW shall be
contacted for approval to relocate individuals by live-trapping and building a nearby artificial house as
a release site. Approval to relocate shall be acquired from CDFW.
〉 If an occupied badger burrow is identified within 50 feet of the work area, the trail shall be relocated
as necessary to avoid impacting the animal or its den. If an active natal den is discovered, work shall
cease and a qualified biologist or District staff shall monitor the site until the young have dispersed.
Nesting Birds
The other special-status wildlife that could occur on the project site are not expected to be affected by any of
the proposed activities. Special-status birds (golden eagle, white-tailed kite, long-eared owl, Vaux’s swift, olive-
sided flycatcher, and grasshopper sparrow) would not be adversely affected by habitat enhancement,
conservation grazing, limited public access, or maintenance and operation activities as project activities would
not involve removal of terrestrial vegetation and are not expected to occur within their nesting habitat. No
mitigation is required.
Special Status Plants
Actions planned under the U & M Plan, such as roadway erosion and damage repair, construction of
conservation grazing infrastructure (e.g., water tanks, troughs, and water line), could result in smothering,
compaction of soils, or crushing of root systems of special-status plants. This could affect the survival of
Franciscan onion (Allium peninsulare var. franciscanum), Santa Cruz manzanita (Arctostaphylos andersonii),
Kings Mountain manzanita (Arctostaphylos regismontana), Santa Clara red ribbons (Clarkia concinna ssp.
automixa), western leatherwood (Dirca occidentalis), arcuate bush mallow ( Malacothamnus arcuatus), robust
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-25
monardella (Monardella villosa ssp. globosa), and Dudley’s lousewort (Pedicularis dudleyi); therefore, the impact
is considered potentially significant. The following mitigation measure is necessary to reduce potential impacts
to special status plants.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to special-status plants.
This measure incorporates Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1d, and BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection
Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity to protections for special-status plants.)
〉 The District shall utilize qualified District staff or a contractor to conduct protocol-level preconstruction
special-status plant surveys for all potentially occurring species within the project footprint that has not
previously been surveyed. Prior to ground-disturbance or vegetation management in potentially
suitable habitat, surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate blooming period when they are
most readily identifiable in accordance with Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special
Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (DFG 2009). If no special-status plants are
found during focused surveys, the findings shall be documented in a letter report, and no further
mitigation shall be required.
〉 If special-status plant populations are present in the project footprint, the District shall determine if the
population can be avoided by adjusting the project design.
〉 If the impact to special-status plants cannot be avoided, the District shall consult with CDFW and
USFWS, as appropriate depending on species status, to determine the appropriate measures to
ensure no net loss of occupied habitat or individuals. These measures may include preserving and
enhancing existing populations, creation of off-site populations on project mitigation sites through
seed collection or transplantation, and/or restoring or creating suitable habitat in sufficient quantities
to achieve the no-net-loss standard.
Level of Impact after Implementation of Mitigation Measures
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.4-1 through 3.4-3 would reduce impacts to special status wildlife and
plants by implementing conservation measures that would avoid take of the San Francisco garter snake, and
minimize effects on California red-legged frog and western pond turtle. San Francisco woodrat houses and
occupied badger dens would be avoided. Surveys would be conducted for special-status plants and avoidance
and/or compensatory measures would be implemented to minimize potential take of these species or adversely
affect their habitat. This impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Sensitive natural communities are of limited distribution
statewide or within a county or region that provide important habitat value to native species. Most types of
wetlands and riparian communities are considered sensitive natural communities due to their limited
distribution in California. In addition, sensitive natural communities include habitats that are subject to USACE
jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code,
and the state’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, which protects waters of the state. Sensitive natural
communities are of special concern because they have high potential to support special-status plant and animal
species. Sensitive natural communities can also provide other important ecological functions, such as enhancing
flood and erosion control and maintaining water quality.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-26 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
The project site includes freshwater marsh habitat associated with the ponds and aquatic areas, including
Kneudler Lake, Big Spring and Upper Pond. Freshwater marsh is considered a sensitive natural community, but it
is also regulated under Section 404 of the CWA; therefore impacts to freshwater marsh and other aquatic
habitats are discussed under (c) below. No other sensitive natural communities occur on the project site.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The streams, creeks, ponds, and wetlands found in the
project site may be considered waters of the United States and subject to USACE jurisdiction under Section 404
of the CWA and Section 401 certification from Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Areas supporting
riparian or wetland vegetation may also be regulated by CDFW under Section 1600-1616 of the California Fish
and Game Code, which provides for the protection of fish, wildlife, and native plant resources.
The project includes actions to enhance habitat for San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog,
including temporarily draining Mindego Lake to eradicate fish and control bullfrogs, and removing sediment and
vegetation to increase open water habitat at Upper Pond, Big Spring, and Knuedler Lake. Installation of fencing
to limit access of cattle to aquatic habitat would improve water quality and promote wetland vegetation growth
in specific locations.
Maintenance and operational activities to control erosion include installing reverse-grade dips and ditch relief
culverts, rocking low-lying segments, replacing a failing culvert along the Mindego Hill Trail, as well as re-grading,
widening, and installing reverse-grade dips on ranch access roads. Construction activities could result in fill or
discharge to jurisdictional wetlands. Installation of water lines to water tanks and troughs as part of the grazing
infrastructure could affect seasonal wetlands or drainages if the water lines cross aquatic habitats. Loss of
riparian and wetland habitat is a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-4
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize impacts to wetlands and other
waters of the United States. This measure incorporates Mitigation Measure BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection
Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity to protections for wetlands and waters of the United
States.)
〉 Where wetlands or other waters of the United States could be affected by draining ponds, dredging
sediment and vegetation, installation of grazing infrastructure, erosion and damage repair along
roadways, or other activities, a preliminary wetland delineation shall be submitted to USACE for
verification. The wetlands may also be subject to CDFW regulation under Section 1602 of the Fish and
Game Code. No grading, fill, or other ground disturbing activities shall occur until all required permits,
regulatory approvals, and permit conditions for effects on wetland habitats are secured.
〉 If the wetlands are determined to be subject to USACE jurisdiction, projects such as restoration
activities or trail or road crossings may qualify for a Nationwide Permit if certain criteria are met. For
those wetlands that cannot be avoided, the District shall commit to replace, restore, or enhance on a
“no net loss” basis (in accordance with USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW) the acreage of all wetlands and
other waters of the United States that would be removed, lost, and/or degraded with project
implementation. Wetland habitat shall be restored, enhanced, and/or replaced at an acreage and
location and by methods agreeable to USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW, as appropriate, depending on
agency jurisdiction, and as determined during the permitting processes.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-27
Level of Impact after Implementation of Mitigation Measures
Implementation of mitigation measure 3.4-4 would reduce impacts related to wetlands and other waters of the
United States to less-than-significant levels by requiring appropriate consultation with CDFW and/or USACE and
following the appropriate permit procedures, including replacement, restoration, and/or enhancement of
affected wetlands or other waters of the United States on a no net loss basis.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less-Than-Significant. Wildlife corridors are features that provide connections between two or more areas of
habitat that would otherwise be isolated and unusable. Often drainages, creeks, or riparian areas are used by
wildlife as movement corridors as these features can provide cover and access across a landscape.
The project site and surrounding areas provide corridors for movement of large wildlife such as deer, mountain
lions and raptors. The proposed project includes habitat enhancement, conservation grazing, limited public
access, and maintenance and operation activities. Also, no new lighting is proposed that could inhibit the
nocturnal movement of species. The installation of new fencing would follow the District’s wildlife-friendly
fencing design that allows for safe and unimpeded wildlife movement of small and large native species. No
activities would significantly fragment interior habitat, alter watercourses, or impede the movement of fish
throughout the project site. This impact is less than significant.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less-Than-Significant. The San Mateo County General Plan and Local Coastal Program prohibit development
that has significant adverse impacts on sensitive habitat areas. The U & M Plan and mitigation measures
included in this document would minimize potential adverse effects on sensitive habitats to less-than-significant
levels.
The San Mateo County Ordinance Code also governs the removal and trimming of heritage and significant trees.
No tree removal is expected to occur as a result of this project. However, should such a need arise, the District
would follow San Mateo County requirements and remain in compliance with local ordinances. Therefore, this
impact is considered less than significant.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
No Impact. The project area is not subject to an adopted or proposed Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan or other habitat conservation plan. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-28 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
V. Cultural Resources. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
3.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The primary sources referenced for this section are the Positive Archaeological Survey Report (PASR) and a
Finding of No Adverse Effect to Archeological Resources: Mindego Ranch Pond Rehabilitation Project, San Mateo
County, California, prepared by Mark Hylkema MA, RPA (See Appendix F) and the Historical Resource Analysis for
the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Proposed Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan prepared
by Alta Cunningham, MA (See Appendix G). A confidential records search for the project site was conducted in
November 2012 at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) in Rohnert Park, California by Mark Hylkema MA,
RPA.
Mindego Ranch is located within the uplands of the Santa Cruz Mountains, northwest of the San Mateo County
line, and is annexed to the western portion of the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve. The upper slopes of
Mindego Hill consist of grassland vegetation with occasional stands of mixed hardwood and coniferous forest
dispersed throughout the hills and drainages. Lower story shrubs have encroached on what once were pasture
lands for cattle and many invasive non-native plants have spread over the formerly open landscape.
A brief overview of the cultural setting indicates that very little archaeological surveying has been done in the
project region, and only one subsurface excavation has been reported in the Santa Cruz Mountain uplands of
Skyline and Russian Ridges. Nonetheless, the known distribution of prehistoric archaeological sites along with
ethnohistoric records indicates that the uplands of the project region were important to ancient and more
recent Native American societies.
Two ranch houses and one barn, are located on the project site. The Old True Residence is a one- and one-half-
story front-gabled home with attached garage and board-and-batten cladding. The residence was built in 1954
and is in poor condition. The barn, built in the 1890’s, is a side-gabled saltbox with a corrugated roof and is in
poor condition, with the roof collapsing and boards missing from the walls. The second residence, the True
Ranch, was built in the late 1970s or early 1980s and is in poor structural condition. This two-story house has an
L-shape floor plan and board-and-batten cladding.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-29
3.5.2 DISCUSSION
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in Section 15064.5?
Less-Than-Significant. Two structures located on the project site, the Old True residence, and the barn, are of
historic age. The structures have not been previously identified as appearing eligible for listing or designation in
the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or San Mateo
County Listing of Historical and Archaeological Resources.
Eligibility for listing on the NRHP and CRHR rests on twin factors of significance and integrity. A property must
have both significance and integrity to be considered eligible. Loss of integrity, if sufficiently great, will
overwhelm historical significance a property may possess and render it ineligible. Likewise, a property can have
complete integrity, but if it lacks significance, it must also be considered ineligible.
The structures on the project site do not appear to be significant with respect to the history of ranching in San
Mateo County, nor did any persons associated with these structures make significant contributions to history at
the local, state, or national level. The architectural style of the Old True residence, associated barn, is not an
important example of a master builder or designer. In addition, these structures are dilapidated. (See Historic
Resources Analysis, Appendix G.)
Therefore, the Mindego Ranch structures do not appear to be eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHR and are
not considered to be historically significant for the purposes of CEQA. The proposed demolition of these
structures would be considered a less-than-significant impact.
b, c) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological or
paleontological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The records search conducted for the proposed project
revealed three previously recorded prehistoric archaeological sites within two miles of the project location. Only
one site, SMA-85, was found to be located within the project site. Recent investigations at SMA-85 (Hylkema and
Cearley nd.) have found that while the variety and sources of the lithic debitage scattered throughout the site
boundaries are significant and may allow for a determination of eligibility to the National Register under
Criterion D, the site lacks subsurface stratigraphic integrity; and the surface lithic scatter has been altered by
historic ranching activities (See the PASR included as Appendix F).
It is unlikely that operation of the proposed project would result in the discovery of archaeological or
paleontological resources, as the goal is to protect and enhance habitat for sensitive wildlife species, while
responsibly integrating land management activities and limited public access at Mindego Ranch. However, the
potential exists to encounter previously undiscovered or unrecorded archaeological and paleontological sites
and materials during construction, maintenance, and operations projects including road erosion treatment
projects and removal of existing structures. If such resources were to represent “historical resources” or “unique
archaeological resources” as defined by CEQA, any substantial change to or destruction of these resources
would be a potentially significant impact.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-30 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Mitigation Measure 3.5-1
The District shall implement Mitigation Measure CUL-2 from the Coastal Protection Program EIR:
Protocol for Unexpected Discovery of Archaeological and Paleontological Cultural Materials.
In the event that any cultural resources are exposed during construction, work at the location of the find will
halt immediately within 10 meters (30 feet) of the find. If an archaeologist is not present at the time of the
discovery, the District will contact an archaeologist for identification and evaluation in accordance with CEQA
criteria.
A reasonable effort will be made by the District and archaeologist to avoid or minimize harm to the discovery
until significance is determined and an appropriate treatment can be identified and implemented. Methods to
protect finds include fencing, covering remains with protective material and culturally sterile soil or plywood. If
vandalism is a threat, 24-hour security shall be provided. During this evaluation period, construction
operations outside of the find location can continue preferably with an archaeologist monitoring any
subsurface excavations.
If the resource cannot be avoided, the archaeologist will develop an appropriate Action Plan for treatment
within 48 hours to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects. The District will not proceed with construction
activities that could affect the discovery until the Action Plan has been reviewed and approved. The treatment
effort required to mitigate the inadvertent exposure of significant cultural resources will be guided by a
research design appropriate to the discovery and potential research data inherent in the resource in
association with suitable archaeological field techniques and analytical strategies. The recovery effort will be
detailed in a professional report in accordance with current archaeological standards. Any non-grave
associated artifacts will be curated with an appropriate repository.
Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of this Mitigation Measure would require the performance of professionally accepted and
legally compliant procedures for the discovery of archaeological and paleontological resources and would,
therefore, reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on documentary research, no evidence suggests that
any prehistoric or historic-era marked or un-marked human interments are present within or in the immediate
vicinity of the project site. However, there is a possibility that unmarked, previously unknown Native American
or other graves could be present and could be uncovered during maintenance and operations projects, including
road erosion treatment projects and removal of existing structures. California law recognizes the need to protect
historic-era and Native American human burials, skeletal remains, and grave-associated items from vandalism
and inadvertent destruction and any substantial change to or destruction of these resources would be a
potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measure 3.5-2
The District shall implement Mitigation Measure CUL-3 from the Coastal Protection Program EIR:
Native American Burial Plan (NABP)
1) In the event of an inadvertent discovery of human remains and cultural items during project construction,
the field crew supervisor shall take immediate steps, if necessary, to secure and protect any remains and
cultural materials. This shall include but is not limited to such measures as (a) temporary avoidance by
construction until the remains and items can be removed; (b) posting a security person; (c) placement of a
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-31
security fence around the area of concern; or, (d) some combination of these measures. Any such
measures employed will depend upon the nature and particular circumstances of the discovery.
2) The County Medical Examiner (Coroner) shall be notified by the field crew supervisor or other designated
District manager and informed of the find and of any efforts made to identify the remains as Native
American. If the remains are identified as a prehistoric Native American by either a professional
archaeologist under contract to the District or the Medical Examiner’s forensic archaeologist, the Medical
Examiner is responsible for contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours
of notification of the find. The Medical Examiner may choose to document and remove the remains at
his/her discretion depending on the circumstances of the discovery. The NAHC then designates and
notifies a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD has 24 hours to consult and provide recommendations
for the treatment or disposition, with proper dignity, of the human remains and grave goods [Note: Other
culturally affiliated Native Americans [Indians] may be consulted by the MLD during the consultation and
recommendation process to determine treatment of the skeletal remains].
3) Each burial and associated cultural items shall be stored as a unit in a secure facility, which shall be
accessible to the MLD and other Native American representative(s) or their designated alternates upon
prior arrangement.
4) The remains and associated cultural items shall be reburied in a secure location as near as possible to the
area of their discovery or at an off-site location acceptable to the MLD that has minimal potential for future
disturbance. The reburial shall be done in a manner that shall discourage or deter future disturbance.
Reburial shall be conducted by persons designated by the MLD, with the assistance, if requested, of the
District’s field crew. The location shall be fully documented, filed with the NAHC and the California
Historical Resources Information System, Northwest Information Center, California State University,
Sonoma and treated as confidential information.
5) If the NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD fails to make a recommendation, or the District or
designate rejects the recommendation of the MLD and mediation (as per Section 5097.94 subdivision (k))
fails, reinterment of the human remains and associated cultural items associated shall take place with
appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
6) For security reasons, no news releases, including but not limited to photographs, videotapes, written
articles, or other such means that contains information about human remains or burial-related items of
Native American origin shall be released by any party during the discovery, recovery and reburial unless
approved by the MLD.
7) Any disputes that arise among the MLD and representatives of affected Native American groups and/or
between the District or designate and the MLD concerning cultural affiliation or the ultimate disposition of
Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and unassociated funerary objects shall
be resolved according to the dispute resolution procedures in Section 5097.94 of the State of California
Public Resources Code.
8) The Archaeological Data Recovery/Native American Burial Treatment Report(s) shall be prepared by
professional archaeologists. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the following: project overview;
ethnographic section; previous archaeological research in the region and on-site; circumstances of
discovery; recovery procedures and techniques; artifact analysis; faunal analysis; osteological analysis and
interpretation; and, conclusions. The MLD and other interested Native American representative(s) shall be
provided an opportunity to review the report and submit comments within the same time period as
accorded any other reviewers.
9) Objects not associated with the human remains and recovered from private land shall be transferred to
the District. If curation of any objects is required, curation will be at repository approved by the District.
Repositories can include the History Museums of San Jose collections, the Tiburon Archaeological
Research Group, San Francisco State University and the Collections Facility, Department of Anthropology,
Sonoma State University, Rohnert Park.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-32 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VI. Geology and Soils. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to
California Geological Survey Special Publication
42.)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-
B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
3.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is located in the RROSP within the headwaters of the Mindego Creek and Alpine Creek
watersheds. The preserve is characterized by moderate to steep mountainous terrain dissected by narrow and
steep-gradient ephemeral to perennial streams. Slopes range from 10% near the ridge tops to 75+% locally along
the slopes near valley bottoms of the larger tributaries. The hillslopes are slightly convex, rounded toward the
ridge tops with local steep streamside slopes found at the base of the hillsides. The ground is locally benchy,
consistent with deep-seated landsliding. Elevations range from 900 feet along the valley bottom of Alpine Creek
to 2,143 feet at the top of Mindego Hill. Ridgetops tend to be open grassland with lower slopes forested (Best
2012).
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-33
Mindego Hill is a prominent feature at the end of a south- and west-trending ridge that separates Mindego
Creek to the north from Alpine Creek to the south. A one-mile long existing paved and gravel patrol road
(Mindego Hill Road) extends along the ridgetop from Alpine Road, accessing several old homes and ranch
buildings (Best 2012).
The project area is situated on the western flank of the Coast Range Physiographic Province of Northwest
California, a series of coastal mountain chains paralleling the pronounced northwest-southeast structural grain
of northwest California. The area is geologically active, dominated by the northwest-southeast trending San
Andreas Fault Zone (SAFZ), located about 5 miles to the northeast (Best 2012).
Geology of the area is dominated by a sequence of tightly folded and faulted Tertiary-age volcanic and clastic
marine sediment and rocks. The majority of the project site is mapped as underlain by Mindego Basalt and
related volcanic rocks (Tmb) with smaller amounts of Lambert Shale (Tla), Monterey Mudstone (Tm), and
sandstone of the Tahana Member of the Purisma Formation (Tpt). Mindego Basalt is described as extrusive flow
breccia and intrusive medium to coarse crystalline rock (Best 2012).
Overlying bedrock is a thin mantle of colluvium and soil of varying thicknesses. Near surface soils are primarily a
sandy clayey silt (SC-SM) to gravelly clayey sand (GC). The soils are generally well-drained, but can be seasonally
wet and inherently prone to erosion especially where water is concentrated. Roads crossing these soils,
especially in the open grasslands, tend to rut easily with winter use, and large gullies form where road runoff is
concentrated and discharged off the road. A brief inspection of nearby ranch areas showed that many
year-round roads routed through the open grassland areas are rocked to prevent them from rutting in the soft
soils (Best 2012).
The geomorphology of the area is consistent with both shallow and deep-seated landsliding. Several large-scale
deep-seated landslide complexes ranging from a few acres to over 60 acres are found in the project site with
many of the roads crossing these slides. These slides are characterized by a somewhat cohesive slide mass with
a relatively deep failure plane extending 30 feet or more into bedrock. These slides are characterized by bench
and irregular topography; rate of movement is generally slow and episodic with most slides vegetated. Due to
the proximity of the San Andreas and San Gregorio fault zones to the plan area, high ground accelerations
experienced during earthquakes are a contributing factor in the reactivation of many of the deep-seated
landslides within the area. Future movement on these slides may be possible during large earthquakes or storms
and could result in damage to existing roads and trails (Best 2012). Many shallow landslides have occurred in
recent years from high-intensity and long-duration rainstorms (e.g., 1982 and 1996 storms). These
rainfall-activated landslides are typically shallow debris slides and debris flows restricted to near surface soils
and weathered bedrock. Such slides most commonly occur on steep slopes (greater than 65%) along streams or
in shallow and steep ravines and swales. Some shallow landslides are road-related, caused by the placement of
fill on already steep slopes, and/or by concentration of road runoff.
3.6.2 DISCUSSION
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (Refer to California
Geological Survey Special Publication 42.)
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-34 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed U&M Plan would permanently preserve the area as open space. The
proposed project includes demolition of onsite structures. No additional structures would be developed as part
of the proposed project. Visitors to the project site would be primarily outside and would not typically be
directly exposed to risk from rupture of an earthquake fault. In fact, the project site would be considered a
relatively safe place to be during an earthquake event. This impact is considered less than significant. Note that
visitors may be subject to indirect events induced by fault rupture, most notably landslides. Risk to visitors from
landslides is discussed below under “iii and iv”.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less-Than-Significant. As indicated above under “i”, the proposed project involves removal of the existing onsite
structures. No structures would be developed on the project site. Visitors would be relatively unexposed to
hazards associated with seismic ground shaking. The impact is considered less than significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less-Than-Significant. Liquefaction and other seismic-related ground failure primarily affect structures. Because
the proposed project would remove the existing structures from the project site and would not result in
construction of any new structures, impacts would be less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
Less-Than-Significant. As described above under “Environmental Setting,” landslides have occurred in the past
on the project site. Future landslides on the site may occur regardless of land use activities. However, providing
public access to the project site, including providing access to trails in areas prone to landslides, could increase
the exposure of the public to risks associated with landslides.
The EIR for the Coastal Protection Program analyzed the impacts of increased public exposure to dangers from
geologic hazards and found that with careful site planning, hazard areas can be avoided and the risk to public
safety can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Mitigation Measures GEO-1a and GEO-1b from the
Coastal Protection Program EIR require surveys to identify unstable slopes in landslide areas, as well as
monitoring and regular maintenance of trails.
In 2012, a Road and Trails Inventory was prepared by Timothy Best in 2012 for the project site. The report,
which is included as part of the proposed U&M Plan, identifies specific trail and roadway segments that require
improvements associated with drainage, erosion, slope failure, and blockage at stream crossings. The report
recommends treatments for improving these trails and roadways, including cleaning existing drainages;
installing new/replacement culverts, slough walls, dips, berm breaks, energy dissipaters; reshaping and rocking
the road; and re-grading roads (Best 2012).
In addition, District Resource Management Policies (GS-1, GS-2) require avoidance of high-risk areas subject to
landslides, liquefaction, faulting, flooding and erosion, as well as monitoring of soil erosion and slope failure and
avoiding construction in problem areas.
Implementation of the recommended treatments in the Road and Trails Inventory is consistent with Mitigation
Measures GEO-1a and GEO-1b from the Coastal Protection Program EIR, and is also consistent with District
Resource Management Policies. Because the District will resolve the priority issues, and will continue to monitor
these facilities as required by policy, this impact is less-than-significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-35
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less-Than-Significant. The project site is located in the moderately steep to very steep hills of the Santa Cruz
Mountains. Erosion hazard ratings for these soils are characterized as moderate to high, based largely on slope
and soil type. Road grading and repair and the reintroduction of grazing into portions of the site both have the
potential to increase soil erosion and instability in the steep portions of project site. The existing roads were
studied in the Road and Trail Inventory (Best 2012) for their potential contribution to soil erosion. The report
includes recommended road improvements to minimize the erosion potential of existing roads and trails. (See
discussion under “a-iv” above.)
Grazing operations on District lands are guided by Resource Management Policies, which aim to ensure that
grazing is compatible with and supports wildlife and habitat. Specific Grazing Management policies include
requirements to prepare site-specific grazing management plans that include BMPs, managing access to water
features and supplying supplemental water supply as needed to protect water quality, and monitoring water
quality in ponds, wetlands, and water features (to name a few). The proposed U&M Plan includes reintroduction
of grazing on the site. Recommendations for the appropriate reintroduction of grazing in the project site were
provided in the Mindego Hill Ranch Grazing Management Plan (Sage 2012). These recommendations include
specifications and conservation management practice standards from the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS), the University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE), and California Construction
Handbook, including: prescribed grazing; water well, water pipelines, water troughs or tanks for livestock and
wildlife water; spring development; road stock pond, and gully maintenance items such as rock rip rap, earth
dike water bar diversions, slope drains, outlet and inlet protection for culverts, and straw bale barrier
placement. Specific rangeland conservation management practices include the following:
adherence to carrying capacity limitations to prevent overgrazing;
rotation of grazing based on season;
maintaining specific performance standards for slope vegetation (residual dry matter) length and cover;
placement of salt/mineral supplement away from water sources and away from public-used trails and
roads;
restriction of supplemental feeding except under specific circumstances;
installation of watering infrastructure consistent with the specifically recommended size and location (away
from natural water sources to benefit wildlife and away from public roads and trails);
repairs to existing fencing and installation of new fencing to limit livestock access to natural water sources
and riparian areas;
repairs and maintenance of roadways and roadway infrastructure, including drainage and erosion control
features;
monitoring predator activity (coyotes and mountain lions) and continued feral pig management;
controlling specifically identified invasive plants;
monitoring (using photo documentation) and maintaining riparian functionality within the watershed; and
using vegetative filter strips to remove sediment and reduce pollutants from entering riparian and wetland
systems.
All of the recommendations described above would substantially reduce any excessive erosion caused by road
and trail, maintenance and use, as well as re-introduction of cattle onto portions of the ranch. These
recommendations are consistent with those local and regional resource and livestock management practices
that are encouraged by various local, state and federal agencies including but not limited to the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, California EPA, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, University of
California Cooperative Extension, the Agricultural Commissioner's Office for San Mateo County, Natural
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-36 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Resource Conservation Service, Resource Conservation Districts, Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. The recommendations in the Road and Trail Inventory and the Grazing Management Plan
are incorporated into the proposed U&M Plan.
In addition, re-grading and maintenance of roads would result in minor soil disturbance. There are currently
District-wide requirements in place to protect water quality during maintenance activities. As outlined in the
District’s Best Management Practices and Standard Operating Procedures for Routine Maintenance Activities in
Water Courses, which has been reviewed and approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
and California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the District follows specifications and guidelines designed to
protect water quality. Additionally, maintenance work in watercourses will meet standards and be consistent
with the current RWQCB Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for routine maintenance activities on District
lands. These standards would be followed, as applicable, based on site conditions and specific project
requirements.
Because the District would implement the above-described measures to reduce soil erosion, impacts associated
with erosion would be less-than-significant with implementation of the proposed project.
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less-Than-Significant. Generally, impacts associated with unstable soils relate to potential damage to
structures. The proposed project would remove existing structures from the site and would not develop any
new structures. Therefore, no structures would be affected by unstable soils. Landslide-related hazards
associated with proposed public access are addressed under “a-iv” above. Project-related impacts related to
unstable soils are less than significant.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less-Than-Significant. Similar to the discussion under “c” above, substantial risk to life or property would
generally occur to habitable buildings, which could experience compromised structural integrity due to
expansive soils. The proposed project involves demolition of all existing onsite structures and does not include
construction of any new structures. Therefore, similar to “c” above, the impact is less than significant.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
waste water?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any proposed restrooms and would therefore not require any
septic system of other form of waste water disposal. No impact would result.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-37
3.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
3.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Certain gases in the earth’s atmosphere, classified as greenhouse gases (GHGs), play a critical role in
determining the earth’s surface temperature. GHGs are responsible for “trapping” solar radiation in the earth’s
atmosphere, a phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect. Prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse
effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur
hexafluoride.
Human-caused emissions of these GHGs in excess of natural ambient concentrations are responsible for
intensifying the greenhouse effect and have led to a trend of unnatural warming of the earth’s climate, known
as global climate change or global warming. It is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50
years can be explained without the contribution from human activities (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change [IPCC] 2007). By adoption of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,
and Senate Bill (SB) 97, the State of California has acknowledged that the effects of GHG emissions cause
adverse environmental impacts.
Emissions of GHGs have the potential to adversely affect the environment because such emissions contribute,
on a cumulative basis, to global climate change. Although the emissions of one single project will not cause
global climate change, GHG emissions from multiple projects throughout the world could result in a cumulative
impact with respect to global climate change.
Legislation and executive orders on the subject of climate change in California have established a statewide
context and a process for developing an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions. Given the nature of
environmental consequences from GHGs and global climate change, CEQA requires that lead agencies consider
evaluating the cumulative impacts of GHGs, even relatively small (on a global basis) additions. Small
contributions to this cumulative impact (from which significant effects are occurring and are expected to worsen
over time) may be potentially considerable and therefore significant.
Therefore, the global climate change analysis presented in this section estimates and analyzes the GHG
emissions associated with construction- and operations-related activities that would occur under the proposed
U&M Plan for Mingedo Ranch.
The BAAQMD is the local agency overseeing air quality considerations in San Mateo County. On June 2, 2010 the
BAAQMD adopted new CEQA significance thresholds including a threshold for GHGs of 1,100 metric tons MT
CO2e/yr for evaluating operation-related emissions (BAAQMD 2010). This threshold was designed to establish the
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-38 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
mass emissions level at which a project’s contribution would be considered a significant environmental impact
under CEQA. The threshold was developed based on overall projections of development in the region, and how the
region would come into compliance with the goals established by AB 32.
On March 5, 2012 the Alameda County Superior Court issued a judgment finding that the BAAQMD had failed to
comply with CEQA when it adopted these thresholds. The court did not determine whether the thresholds were
valid on the merits, but rather found that the adoption of the thresholds was a project under CEQA. The court
issued a writ of mandate ordering the BAAQMD to set aside the thresholds and cease their dissemination until
the BAAQMD had complied with CEQA.
CEQA gives lead agencies discretion whether or not to classify a particular environmental impact as significant.
Ultimately, formulation of a standard or “threshold” of significance requires the lead agency to make a policy
judgment about where the line should be drawn distinguishing adverse impacts it considers significant from
those that are not deemed significant. This judgment must, however, be based on scientific information and
other factual data to the extent possible. (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[b]).
Although the Alameda County Superior Court has ordered the BAAQMD to cease dissemination of the previously
adopted threshold of 1,100 MT CO2e/yr, the court has made no finding on the applicability or the merits of the
quantitative threshold. BAAQMD states that lead agencies will need to determine appropriate air quality
thresholds to use for each project they review based on substantial evidence that they should include in the
administrative record for the project. One resource BAAQMD provides as a reference for determining
appropriate thresholds is the CEQA Thresholds Options and Justification Report developed by staff in 2009
(BAAQMD 2009). The CEQA Thresholds Options and Justification Report outlines substantial evidence supporting
a variety of thresholds of significance.
Therefore, because the proposed project would result emissions of GHGs from construction and regular
maintenance, and is located within the BAAQMD’s jurisdiction for which these thresholds were determined to
be applicable, the County considers the threshold of 1,100 MT CO2e/yr to be an acceptable threshold for CEQA
significance with regards to GHG emissions.
3.7.2 DISCUSSION
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
Less-Than-Significant. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a noticeable increase in
visitation. Any additional vehicle trips generated during operation of the project would be negligible. Therefore,
greenhouse gas emissions associated with increased vehicle trips would be minimal. Proposed construction
activities include limited heavy construction equipment associated primarily with the road and drainage repair,
demolition, and some of the habitat restoration features, including removal of sediment from lakes. To estimate
GHG emissions, GHG modeling was conducted using the BAAQMD-approved California Emissions Estimator
Model, Version 2001.1.1 (CalEEMod). A summary of estimated GHG emissions is provided below in Table 3.7-1.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-39
Table 3.7-1 Summary of Estimated Emissions of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
Associated with Project-Related Activities (MT CO2e/year)
Construction-Related Activities (average annual) 132*
Operations (mobile- and area sources, energy use) --
Cattle 159**
Total 291
BAAQMD Threshold of Significance 1,100
Notes:
MT/year = metric tons per year; CO2e = carbon dioxide-equivalent
Detailed assumptions and modeling output files are included in Appendix D, including construction and methane emissions from cattle.
Any emissions from vehicle trips and power usage would be negligible and therefore were not modeled.
Emissions associated with construction activities were estimated using the BAAQMD-approved CalEEMod model.
*This is for the first year of construction. The model shows that future construction years have lower GHG emissions.
**Emissions from cattle were modeled based on widely accepted emission factors, not CalEEMod. For details see Appendix D.
Source: Modeling Conducted by Ascent Environmental 2013.
Based on the modeling conducted, project-related activities would result in 291 MT per year (MT/year) of CO2e
emissions. These emissions levels would be less than BAAQMD’s threshold of significance of 1,100 MT/year.
Thus, project-generated emissions would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of GHGs. As a
result, this impact would be less than significant.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less-Than-Significant. As discussed under item a) above, the total GHG emissions associated with this project
would be less than BAAQMD’s threshold of 1,100 MT/year. Because BAAQMD’s threshold is based on the
emissions reduction targets established by AB 32 for the year 2020 project-generated GHG emissions would not
conflict with any other applicable plans, policies, or regulations established for the purposes of reducing GHG
emissions. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-40 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and/or accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
3.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
During the purchase of the property, POST, the previous property owner, contracted with an environmental firm
to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II Investigations Report (“Phase I / Phase II
Report”). The Phase I / Phase II Report identified two areas where soil contamination levels exceeded current
RWQCB ESLs and Cal EPA DTSC screening levels. These areas included the corral area where spraying of cattle
with chemicals to control pests may have occurred, an unpermitted landfill located near the True residential
structure (which itself is proposed for demolition). The presence of residual-level concentrations of petroleum
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-41
hydrocarbons (below RWQCB ESLs) was noted around the perimeter of the Main House garage driveway, likely
due to vehicle maintenance.
The investigations indicate that residual chemicals consistent with organochlorine pesticides are present in the
soil at the corral at levels exceeding current California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2
(“RWQCB”), Environmental Screening Levels (“ESLs”) and California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA),
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), California Human Health Screening Level. Lead and petroleum
hydrocarbon impacted soils are present in the landfill at levels exceeding current RWQCB ESLs.
Since the time that the Phase I and Phase II Reports were prepared, the District hired Geocon Consultants, Inc.
to further investigate the contamination associated with the existing landfill. In their November 2011 report,
Geocon found that the levels of contaminants of concern in the landfill soil and groundwater generally do not
exceed environmental screening levels and do not present a threat to human health and the environment.
Geocon also investigated the geotechnical conditions of the landfill, including an evaluation of the slope stability
under static and seismic conditions. The slope stability analysis indicates the landfill is stable for open space use
with no structural improvement in its current configuration.
The Phase I and Phase II Reports indicate the presence of residual-level concentrations of petroleum
hydrocarbons in soils near the perimeter of the Main House garage driveway, i.e., at concentrations below
RWQCB residential ESLs. No chlorinated solvents (i.e., degreasing solvents) were detected, with the exception of
a low concentration of Freon detected in one soil sample.
In addition to the contaminants discussed above, numerous buildings and structures exist on the project site
which, given the ages of the various structures, suggest that a potential exists for the presence of asbestos-
containing materials and lead paint associated with these structures.
3.8.2 DISCUSSION
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less-Than-Significant. District Ordinance 93-1, Section 409.2 prohibits the general public from possessing or
using harmful substances on District lands. The proposed project does not include routine use of hazardous
materials in the Preserve with the exception of small quantities of common household hazardous materials such
as pesticides, fuels, oils, lubricants, solvents, and detergents. A controlled amount of pesticides would
occasionally be applied in grazing operations and for vegetation management. Pesticide applications would
comply with label instructions and all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Implementation of the
proposed U&M Plan would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. This impact is less
than significant.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Existing structures on the project site may contain building
materials that contain lead and asbestos. The proposed project involves demolition of dilapidated structures,
which may include these hazardous materials. California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 8, Section 1529
"Asbestos" is enforced by Cal OSHA and sets very strict exposure limits for employees engaged in abatement
and remediation activities and requires employers to perform an initial exposure assessment as well as daily
monitoring of employee exposure. Section 1529 also includes a list of specific compliance measures including
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-42 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
(but not limited to) vacuum cleaners with HEPA filters, wet methods, ventilation systems with HEPA filters,
isolation/containment of asbestos dust-generating areas, as well as prohibitions against use of compressed air
to remove asbestos without a ventilation system, dry sweeping/shoveling of asbestos, and use of high-speed
abrasive disc saws without proper point of cut ventilators. Additional, more stringent, compliance measures are
provided specific to Class I and Class II asbestos removal.
Furthermore, BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2 also regulates activities involving handling of asbestos related to
demolition, renovation, and manufacturing. Demolition of any structures containing asbestos would be subject
to this Rule. Rule 2 prohibits visible emissions of asbestos. BAAQMD's Rule 2 requires wet methods or use of
HEPA filter-fitted ventilation systems, use of leak-tight chutes for getting materials to the ground, use of plastic
barriers and HEPA filter-fitted ventilation systems to contain areas being stripped. Rule 2 also requires an
asbestos survey, including materials sampling and lab testing, to be performed by a qualified consultant prior to
abatement activities to determine the category of asbestos. Specific disposal methods are also required under
Rule 2.
Similar to its regulations for asbestos handling, CCR (Title 8, Section 1532.1) contains lead exposure limits for
employees engaged in demolition activities. Also similar to its asbestos regulations, CCR requires employers to
prepare exposure assessments and exposure monitoring. CCR Section 1532.1 also includes methods of
compliance, including but not limited to preparation of a compliance program, mechanical ventilation,
respiratory protection, protective clothing and equipment, specific housekeeping practices, medical surveillance
(including biological monitoring), temporary removal of exposed employees, signage and postings, and
appropriate record keeping.
Handling of asbestos and lead is regulated by state law and BAAQMD rules. These rules include guidelines to
minimize exposure of construction workers (including monitored and enforceable exposure limits) and release
of these substances into the environment. Because the proposed project would be required to comply with the
CCR and BAAQMD rules, demolition activities associated with the proposed project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or environment.
Public access onto the project site would be allowed within a very limited area (See Exhibit 2-5). General public
use of the project site would be primarily limited to low-intensity, non-motorized, and non-emitting uses,
including hiking and equestrian use. The possibility of the incidental release of motor vehicle oil, grease, or fuel
is therefore limited to the infrequent use of the trails and roads by District patrol and maintenance vehicles,
tenant vehicles, occasional emergency responders, and vehicles and machinery used during the temporary
construction process. Any release of minor amounts of hazardous material resulting from the limited vehicular
use does not pose a significant hazard to the public. Impacts related to water quality are addressed in the
Hydrology and Water Quality section of this IS.
As described above in the Environmental Setting, the Phase I and Phase II reports prepared for the property
indicate a few areas on the project site with existing contamination including the corral, the landfill, and the
Main House garage driveway.
Contamination associated with the Main House garage driveway is limited primarily to residual levels of
petroleum hydrocarbons at concentrations below RWQCB residential ESLs and a low concentration of Freon
detected in one sample. Because the levels of contamination are below residential ESLs, and because no public
access or earth work would occur in this area, implementation of the proposed project would not expose
visitors, staff, or construction workers to risk of exposure to existing contamination.
The District will remediate or cap soil contaminants in the corral area as part of structural demolition in this
area. Although a remediation plan has not yet been prepared, no public access would be allowed in the vicinity
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-43
of the corral and no roadway improvements would occur within the vicinity of the corral. (See Exhibit 2-6.)
Therefore, because visitors, staff, and construction workers would not come into contact with the contaminated
soil associated with the corral, remediation of this area is not necessary prior to implementation of the other
components of proposed project, including public access. In addition, because no groundwork would be
performed in the corral area prior to the remediation, no significant disturbance of contaminated soil would
occur and, therefore, no increased emission of contaminated stormwater runoff would occur. The future
remediation plan for the corral area would be prepared in accordance with EPA and Cal EPA regulations and in
coordination with RWQCB (and DTSC if appropriate).
Regarding the existing landfill, the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) reviewed
Geocon’s report evaluating the contamination associated with the landfill and issued a memorandum approving
“Closure in Place” of the existing landfill with implementation of site management measures, which are
incorporated as mitigation measures below. These measures include implementation of a stormwater runoff
control plan, designation of the landfill as a “closed area,” enforcement of access restrictions, and inspection of
slopes associated with the landfill to ensure erosion is not occurring.
Due to the existing contamination associated with the existing landfill, site management measures are required
by RWQCB for closure in place. These measures are included in the proposed U&M Plan and include the
following:
implementation of a site-specific Stormwater Runoff Control Plan to divert surface runoff away from the
landfill area;
designation of the landfill area as a “closed area” with signs posted;
enforcement of the access restrictions with the areas identified on District preserve maps; and
inspection of site slopes associated with the landfill area following significant rain events to ensure slope
erosion is not occurring.
Implementation of these measures would reduce impacts associated with exposure of the public, District staff,
and construction workers to hazardous materials associated with the landfill. However, although the restriction
of access associated with the corral reduces potential risk of exposure, it is important to appropriately
communicate the restriction to District staff and visitors. Lack of appropriate signage and identification on
preserve maps could result in a potentially significant impact related to hazardous materials exposure.
Therefore, the following mitigation measure includes signage requirements to ensure no unauthorized visitors,
staff, or construction workers access the area.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-1
The District shall designate the corral area as a “closed area” and install signs to alert the public and District
staff that the area is closed. After the corral area remediation is completed according to RWQCB (and/or
DTSC) standards, the signage may be removed from the corral area. The District shall also enforce the access
restrictions and note the restrictions on District Preserve maps.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. As discussed under “a” above, the proposed project would not result in the use, transport, or
disposal of substantial hazardous materials. In addition, the project site is not located within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school. The nearest school is La Honda Elementary School, located at the end of Sears
Ranch Road, over 1.5 miles west of the project site boundary. No impact would occur.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-44 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code §65962.5 and, as a result, would it create
a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less-Than-Significant. The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites (Cortese) List is a planning document used by
the State, local agencies, and developers to comply with the CEQA requirements in providing information about
the location of hazardous materials release sites. Government Code section 65962.5 requires the California
Environmental Protection Agency to develop at least annually an updated Cortese List. DTSC is responsible for a
portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other State and local government agencies are required
to provide additional hazardous material release information for the Cortese List. DTSC's EnviroStor database
provides DTSC's component of Cortese List data.
The 2007 Phase I and Phase II states that representatives at the RWQCB, DTSC, and BAAQMD indicated that no
file information for the Subject Property was identified at their respective agencies. The search of DOGGR well
records on-line indicates that no oil and gas wells are located on or within one-half mile of the project site,
based on the coordinates of reported well locations provided by DOGGR. San Mateo County Health Services
Agency files contained no files or references to chemical use or releases on the project site or other
documentation related to aboveground or underground storage tanks, or chemical use violations (EKI 2007).
Ascent Environmental searched DTSC’s EnviroStor database in 2013 and verified that no additional issues have
been identified since the 2007 Phase I and Phase II reports (DTSC 2013).
The proposed project site is not identified on the Cortese list or other State and county hazardous materials lists;
therefore, impacts are less than significant.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is not located within two miles of a public airport and is not located within an airport
land use plan. No impact would occur.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Less-Than-Significant. A private airstrip is located approximately 1.25 miles northwest of the project site, off of
Langley Hill Road. The runway approach angles at a northeast/southwest direction, with Langley Hill impeding
aircraft associated with landing strip from maintaining a low altitude in the vicinity of the project site. The
proposed project does not include any structures or activities that could cause safety hazards associated with air
traffic. The proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. There are no adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans affecting the
project area. The proposed project includes limited public access for recreation. No structures are proposed. No
public vehicle access is proposed. The proposed project would provide appropriate emergency vehicle access.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project would result in no impact. See Section 3.16, Public Services for
more detailed discussion regarding emergency response.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-45
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project would decrease risk of wildland fire
due to the re-introduction of grazing on the property, which would reduce onsite fuels by controlling vegetation
during the fire season, and also due to the demolition of existing dilapidated structures.
The risk to the recreating public posed by potential wildland fires was analyzed in the Coastal Protection
Program EIR. The Coastal Protection Program EIR concludes that, based on the District’s existing management of
steep and heavily vegetated lands on the Bay side of the Peninsula, public access to District-managed lands does
not present a significant risk of loss, injuries, or death as a result of wildland fire. While fire protection within
current District boundaries is provided by the jurisdictional local fire departments and CAL FIRE, the District
works cooperatively with these jurisdictional fire agencies to reduce fire risk by assisting them to respond
quickly and effectively to wildland fires. The District maintains fire breaks to slow or arrest the spread of
wildland fires, and a system of District maintained fire roads ensures adequate access to remote areas. District
lands are patrolled routinely by trained staff members in vehicles equipped with wildland fire suppression
equipment, providing first response assistance until the jurisdictional fire agencies arrive and take over the
scene. The addition of public use and District staff presence would result in an increased ability to detect and
respond the appropriate fire agencies when fires occur.
District Ordinance 93-1 Section 404 prohibits fires and smoking on District lands. In addition, District Rangers will
regularly patrol the project site and are trained and equipped for initial response in the Incident Command
System (ICS) for fire suppression, assisting with the response of jurisdictional fire agencies to the scene of a fire.
The District’s radio and repeater system combined with ranger patrols and staff on call 24 hours per day enables
prompt and effective communication with emergency service providers in the event of a wildland fire or
emergency response call. Additionally, the District purchased a 1,500 - 2,000-gallon maintenance-style water
truck that is available to deliver water for mutual aid calls to assist in fire suppression activities.
The Coastal Protection Program EIR concludes that although the project would not expose the public to
significant risk from fire, it would increase the need for coordination with other agencies in fire suppression. This
coordination is necessary to ensure swift and adequate response to wildland fire. Furthermore, construction
activities on the project site could also result increased ignition risk. Consistent with the Coastal Protection
Program EIR’s conclusion the impact is considered potentially significant.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2a
The District shall implement the following applicable mitigation measures incorporated directly from the
Coastal Protection Program EIR:
〉 The District shall select indigenous plant materials and/or seed mixes utilized along trails for their low
maintenance and drought and fire resistant characteristics to minimize additional fuel available to
wildland fires to the extent feasible. (Coastal Protection Program EIR Mitigation HAZ-2a)
〉 The District shall limit trail use to low-intensity hiking, bird watching, bicycling, equestrian use,
environmental education and other similar low hazard uses, and prohibit smoking, camping,
picnicking, fireworks and off-road vehicle use. (Coastal Protection Program EIR Mitigation HAZ-2e)
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-46 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2b
To further reduce the potential for wildland fire ignition beyond the Coastal Protection Program EIR mitigation,
the following additional mitigation measure is required:
〉 In order to reduce fire ignition risk, the District currently requires the following measures for all
maintenance and construction activities within the Preserve:
o All equipment to be used during construction and maintenance activities must have an
approved spark arrestor.
o Grass and fuels around construction sites where construction vehicles are allowed to be
parked will be cut or reduced.
o Mechanical construction equipment that can cause an ignition will not be used when the
National Weather Service issues a Red Flag Warning for the San Francisco Bay Area.
o Hired contractors will be required to:
- Provide water and/or fire extinguisher to suppress potential fires caused by the work
performed.
- Remind workers that smoking is prohibited at the work site and on any District land per
contract conditions and District Ordinance.
- Maintain working ABC fire extinguishers on all vehicles in the work area.
- Contact both Mountain View Dispatch at (650) 968-4411 and CAL FIRE, Skylonda, at
(650) 851-1860 for emergency response in the event of a fire.
Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.8-2a (which incorporates mitigation from the Coastal Protection
Program EIR) and Mitigation Measure 3.8-2b (which is in addition to the Coastal Protection Program EIR
mitigation) would reduce potential impacts associated with wildland fire risk by increasing coordination with
local and State fire protection services, reducing fuels near trailheads, prohibiting open fires and smoking, and
requiring ignition risk reductions for construction and maintenance activities. Consistent with the conclusion of
the Coastal Protection Program EIR, implementing these mitigation measures would reduce the impacts to a
less-than-significant level.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-47
3.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
IX. Hydrology and Water Quality. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level that would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial on- or off-site erosion or
siltation?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in on- or off-site flooding?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
that would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
3.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is located within the San Francisco Coastal South watershed area and, more specifically, is
located within the headwaters of Mindego Creek and Alpine Creek watersheds, tributaries to San Gregorio Creek
and part of the San Gregorio Creek basin. The San Gregorio Creek basin has been classified as an impaired water
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-48 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
body due to sedimentation/siltation and high levels of coliform by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality
Control Board’s 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies in the San Francisco Bay Region.
The project site is partially within the drinking water watershed of Cuesta La Honda Guild (Guild watershed),
which diverts water from Mindego Creek to supply drinking water to the Town of La Honda.
Erosion and sedimentation issues currently persist on the project site due to drainage issues associated with
onsite roads and trails. A Road and Trail Inventory was conducted for the project site by Timothy Best, CEG, in
November 2012. A total of 39 sites were inventoried along the 9.1 miles of roads. Inventoried sites included all
stream crossings, areas of poor road drainage, and landslides. Of the 39 sites inventoried, 14 have a Moderate to
High treatment priority and are recommended for some corrective measures to reduce the potential for
sediment delivery or to repair damaged segments of the road. The principal issues with the roads in Mindego
Ranch are:
Drainage: Poor road drainage (lack of cross drains) has caused erosion and damage to the main Mindego
Ranch Road. It has also been a contributing factor in several fill failures.
Weathering of the cutbank: Roads that cross steep ground in grassland areas are prone to the raveling and
sloughing of the cutbank. Without maintenance, material that is deposited on the roadway renders the road
impassable.
Fill slope failures: There are three road fill failures that have narrowed the road and where remedial
measures are necessary to reopen the road or to widen the road for improved access. One of these failures
is along Knuedler Lake Trail, and two are on East Mindego Ranch Road.
Stream Crossings: There are eleven watercourse and swale crossings (2 culverts and 9 earth fords). The
most significant problem is at plugged culvert where the road is blocked and the crossing fill is starting to
wash out. Mitigation of this site is required to prevent further erosion and sediment discharge into the
streams. Four other crossings have a moderate treatment priority to either reopen the road past them or to
prevent outlet erosion.
3.9.2 DISCUSSION
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less-Than-Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in the Environmental Setting above, there are
erosion and sedimentation issues on the site associated with several sections of roads/trails in need of repair. As
part of the Road and Trail Inventory (Best 2012) recommendations were made and are incorporated into the
proposed U&M Plan. These recommendations/project components include installing reverse-grade dips and
ditch relief culverts; rocking low-lying segments; replacing a failing culvert along Mindego Hill Trail; and
regrading, widening, and installing reverse-grade dips on three critical ranch access roads. Implementation of
these roadway improvements are anticipated to result in a long-term benefit to surface water quality by
reducing erosion and sedimentation.
In addition to District Policies, runoff water quality is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Program (established through the federal Clean Water Act). The NPDES program objective is to
control and reduce pollutant discharges to surface water bodies. Compliance with NPDES permits is mandated
by State and federal statutes and regulations. Locally, the NPDES Program is administered by the Water Board.
According to the water quality control plans of the Water Board, any construction activities, including grading,
that would result in the disturbance of one acre or more would require compliance with the General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activity (Construction General
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-49
Permit). The project includes a total disturbance area of approximately three acres and would be subject to
compliance with the Construction General Permit.
Current District-wide requirements protect water quality during maintenance activities. As outlined in the
District’s Best Management Practices and Standard Operating Procedures for Routine Maintenance Activities in
Water Courses, which has been reviewed and approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
and California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the District follows specifications and guidelines designed to
protect water quality. Additionally, maintenance work in watercourses will meet standards and be consistent
with the current RWQCB Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for routine maintenance activities on District
lands. These standards would be followed, as applicable, based on site conditions and specific project
requirements.
In addition, no public vehicle access would be allowed on the project site. Only hikers and equestrians would be
allowed on the site and only within a very limited area (See Exhibit 2-5). Therefore, there would be minimal
erosion caused by the public’s use of onsite roads and trails. Also, the number of cattle that would graze onsite
would be limited by the specific stocking number identified in the Grazing Management Plan (SAGE Associated
2012), which varies depending on slope and other factors. This greatly reduces the potential for erosion due to
overgrazing of the site.
The Coastal Protection Program EIR addressed impacts associated with water quality. The EIR concludes that the
Coastal Protection Program project would result in overall benefit to the regions watersheds and water quality.
However, the EIR also recognizes that the Santa Cruz Mountains are known for intense rainfall with large volume
flows through creeks and drainages. The Coastal Protection Program area is windward of incoming storms and
would receive intense rainfall capable of eroding and destabilizing project area trails. Roads and trails that are
not properly maintained could cause substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. The Coastal Protection
Program EIR includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts associated with trail erosion.
Consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR, impacts associated with the proposed
project are considered potentially significant and the Coastal Protection Program EIR’s mitigation measures are
incorporated, as applicable. (Note that potential impacts associated with pathogens in surface water caused by
proposed cattle grazing is discussed under “f” below.)
Mitigation Measure 3.9-1
〉 Storm water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) as listed in this section shall be implemented
to reduce potential water quality impacts. BMPs include (Coastal Protection Program EIR Mitigation
HYD-1b):
o Flow of runoff from drainage structures will be directed to vegetated areas, away from creeks
and drainages as is practical.
o Conduct any trail maintenance work during low flow periods
o Use erosion and sediment control measures to minimize water quality impacts and ensure no
sediment at heavily traveled trails flows into creeks. These measures include:
- Silt Fences
- Straw Bale Barriers
- Brush or Rock Filters
- Storm Drain Inlet Protection
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-50 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
- Sediment Traps
- Sediment Basins
- Erosion Control Blankets and Mats
- The District shall prevent erosion on steep slopes by using erosion control material
according to manufacturer’s specifications.
o If soil is to be stockpiled for any reason at creeksides, no run-off will be allowed to flow back to
the creek.
Significance after Mitigation
Consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR, implementing these mitigation measures
would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre existing
nearby wells would drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project does not involve groundwater pumping or interference with
groundwater recharge. Water infrastructure improvements associated with implementation of the conservation
grazing program involve increased storage and distribution of an existing developed spring. Furthermore, the
District acquired water rights with acquisition of the Mindego Ranch property, and water use on the site would
be consistent with these rights. Impervious surfaces would not be added to the site, and groundwater recharge
would not be adversely affected. Impacts associated with groundwater depletion and recharge would be less
than significant.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial on- or off-site erosion or siltation?
Less-Than-Significant. Overall, the proposed project seeks to maintain and improve the existing drainage
patterns on the site. Impervious surfaces would not be added to the project site; therefore, the rate of runoff
would not substantially increase. As described under “a” above, the proposed project includes measures to
repair existing drainage issues associated with onsite roads. The project also incorporates mitigation measures
from the Coastal Protection Program EIR, including trail design guidelines and BMPs. Removal of approximately
75 to 125 cubic yards of sediment from Big Spring pond would occur during the dry season and would be placed
in a field north of the Upper Pond to dry. Once the sediment dries it would be spread into the field and reseeded
with native species, spread on nearby roads, or otherwise naturalized and would not alter drainage patterns.
The sediment in the field would naturally re-absorb into the soil, and the surrounding vegetation of the field
would prevent transportation of silt into other onsite watercourses. Also, although the rate of stormwater
would not increase under the proposed project, the proposed draining of Mindego Lake would result in dry-
season runoff into nearby watercourses, which if done improperly, could result in erosion and siltation of nearby
watercourses. The proposed project includes measures (see the SFGS Habitat Management Plan included as
Appendix A) such as pumping water through multiple outlets onto a grassy slope using energy dissipaters and
three lines of hay bales lined with filter fabric. Only clear water would be allowed to continue downstream into
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-51
the watershed. The proposed project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff such
that on- or off-site erosion or siltation would occur. This impact is considered less than significant.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in on- or off-site
flooding?
Less-Than-Significant. Impervious surfaces would not be added to the project site; therefore, the rate of runoff
would not substantially increase. Overall, the proposed project seeks to maintain and improve the existing
onsite drainage patterns. As described under “a” above, the proposed project incorporates mitigation measures
from the Coastal Protection Program EIR, including trail design guidelines and BMPs. The proposed project also
includes measures to repair existing drainage issues associated with onsite roads. The proposed project would
not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff such that on- or off-site flooding would occur.
This impact is considered less than significant.
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project would not adversely affect the drainage patterns or rate of runoff
on the project site because the project seeks to maintain or improve the existing drainage patterns. As described
under “a” above, the proposed project incorporates mitigation measures from the Coastal Protection Program
EIR, including trail design guidelines and BMPs. The proposed project would not substantially increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff such that exceedance of drainage system capacity would occur. This impact is less
than significant.
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less-Than-Significant. Non-point source pollution results from land use practices where waste is not collected
and disposed of in some identifiable manner. Non-point sources of pollution include: urban drainage,
agricultural runoff, road construction activities, mining, grassland management, logging and other harvest
activities, and natural sources such as effects of fire, flood, and landslide. Management of rangeland and
cropland may have an effect upon water quality, but there is currently very little regulation. Agriculture
operations need to be proactive in determining what standards are likely necessary and implementing their own
monitoring protocols in order to determine whether they will be in compliance.
As mentioned above under Environmental Setting, the project site shares the Cuesta la Honda Guild watershed,
which, during the wet season, diverts water from Mindego Creek to supply drinking water to the Town of La
Honda. As described above, the proposed habitat restoration, roadway/trail improvements, and public access
would not adversely affect water quality within the watershed. However, the proposed re-introduction of cattle
grazing on the project site has raised some concerns regarding the drinking water supply.
All animal waste contains nutrients and may also contain pathogens. When animal wastes are concentrated (as
is often the case in dairies and confined animal feeding operations) surface runoff can carry excess nutrients and
pathogens into nearby water bodies. If not properly managed, livestock grazing also has the potential to lead to
contamination of surface waters. As described in Section 2 “Project Description,” Cryptosporidium is a
pathogenic protozoan, spread via cysts produced primarily in newborn calves. Cryptosporidium can enter
surface waters through contact with the waste from infected animals, provided that the waste is fresh or has
not fully dried (Atwill 1998). If consumed by humans the microorganism can potentially cause intestinal
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-52 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
infections in sensitive populations. Contamination of the water supply with these cysts could trigger the need for
costly water treatment procedures to be put in place.
As described in Section 2 “Project Description,” in addition to the natural features of the project site, such as
dense vegetation and steep topography, that reduce cattle access to Mindego Creek, the proposed Grazing Plan
includes several measures to keep cattle away from water sources, including strategic placement of water
troughs and salt licks away from water bodies, as well as installation of exclusionary fencing. The proposed
Grazing Plan would also prevent overgrazing by active monitoring and management, which further reduces
potential for cysts to enter waterways. (See Appendix B, Grazing Plan.)
To further minimize the potential for contamination of the Guild’s water supply, the following measures are
included in the proposed U&M Plan:
Cattle would be excluded from the Mindego Creek watershed via a system of fencing and existing natural
barriers (dense vegetation and steep topography) during the period the Guild draws water from Mindego
Creek . This period extends from September 1 through May 31 (except during the 2-day processing period;
see below), encompassing the typical rainy season as well as a precautionary buffer. This measure will avoid
the potential for pathogens which may be present in cattle excrement to be carried to Mindego Creek via
rainwater runoff.
Regular monitoring will be performed by MROSD staff and the grazing tenant during the rainy season to
ensure that no cattle have entered the Mindego Creek watershed. Additional fencing will be installed
wherever and whenever existing barriers are found to be ineffective.
During processing, typically spanning a 2 day period in winter, cattle will be confined to a secure holding
field and corral along the southern border of the Mindego Creek watershed. No cattle will be moved into
the holding field or corral if or when precipitation (rain) occurs or is forecasted with greater than a 70
percent probability in the next 72-hour period to prevent fecal material from entering the water via surface
runoff. The holding field and corral vicinity will be monitored regularly by District staff or other appointed
personnel for signs of concentrated surface water flow (e.g., gullies and rills). If such signs are detected, the
District will ensure that proper drainage improvements are installed to prevent concentrated flows from the
area into the watershed.
Cattle water troughs and salt/mineral supplement will be located at least 800 feet away from surface water
bodies to disperse cattle and other wildlife away from wetland and riparian areas (see Exhibit 2-4).
Supplemental feeding will not be allowed, except in the following circumstances: 1) Distribution of
supplements (vitamins, minerals, protein) to aid in the achievement of District resource management goals,
livestock health and livestock movement and 2) feeding in the corral/holding pen (when cattle are off
loaded and held or shipped from the premises. Any hay should be locally sourced.
Stocking rates identified in the Grazing Management Plan will be adjusted as necessary to maintain
appropriate Residual Dry Matter (RDM) standards. Annual monitoring of RDM shall by conducted by the
District rangeland ecologist.
The District will continue to implement the feral pig reduction program, which has been effective in reducing
the feral pig populations. (Note that feral pigs currently occur in the area and are also a potential source of
Cryptosporidium. Reducing pig populations in the watershed reduces existing potential for contamination of
the water supply, reduces the risk of disease transmission to domestic livestock, protects native vegetation
and sensitive habitat areas and is a an overall benefit to the project.)
Implementation of these project components, in combination with the natural barricades to water courses,
would minimize the potential for cysts to migrate into surface water used for potable supply. The monitoring
measures would ensure no significant risk to humans associated with Cryptosporidium from proposed onsite
cattle. The impact would be less than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-53
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any new housing or other structures. Furthermore, the
project site is located over 700 feet above sea level and is not located within or near a flood zone. Therefore,
there would be no impact related to flood hazards and housing.
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect
flood flows?
No Impact. As indicated under “g” above, the proposed project does not include any structures and the project
site is not located within the 100-year flood zone. Therefore there would be no impact associated with impeding
or redirecting flood flows.
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Less-Than-Significant. Public access would not be provided near onsite stream channels. In addition, staff would
not typically access the project site during a heavy storm event. Impacts from exposure to flooding would be less
than significant.
j) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less-Than-Significant. The project site is more than 700 feet above sea level at its lowest point. Seiche or
tsunamis from the Pacific Ocean are located too far away to impact the site. The soil conditions and potential for
prolonged rain events have the potential to produce mudflows. A mudflow could expose District personnel or
members of the general public to potentially life threatening situations if they were present while a mudflow
event occurred. As described in the Coastal Protection Program EIR (p. Page IV-H-8), the low probability of such
an event and the limited likelihood of District personnel or the public to be in harm’s way during an intense
storm necessary to precipitate such an event reduce this potential impact to a less than significant level.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-54 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
X. Land Use and Planning. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, a general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
3.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is located in the rural western portion of unincorporated San Mateo County in the Santa Cruz
Mountains. The property is currently used as an open space preserve and for agricultural operations. There are
no occupied structures within the project site boundaries; therefore there is no established residential
community located within the vicinity of the proposed roadway/trail and habitat improvements.
The San Mateo County General Plan designates the Preserve as Open Space, Public Recreation and Timber
Production, which allow for resource management, recreation and agricultural uses. The Preserve is zoned RM
(Resource Management), RM-CZ/CD (Resource Management – Coastal Zone) and TPZ (Timberland Preserve
Zone). These zoning designations provide for park, open space and recreational uses.
The San Mateo County Trails Plan identifies the project area as a route for the Harrington Creek Trail and the
Bay Area Ridge Trail.
3.10.2 DISCUSSION
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. There are no occupied structures on the project site; therefore, no established community exists
within the immediate vicinity of the proposed improvements. The community of La Honda is located
approximately one mile to the west of the project site. Because the proposed project would be an extension of
an existing open space preserve, and is located in a rural area used primarily for agriculture, timber production,
grazing, and open space uses, the proposed project would not divide an established community. Consistent with
the conclusion of the San Mateo Coastal Protection Program EIR, the project would result in no impact.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-55
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project site is designated as General Open Space and Timber Protection by
the San Mateo County General Plan. The purpose of the General Open Space land use designation is to ensure
maintenance of open space character and protection of natural resources, and generally to direct new
development to existing rural service centers. The purpose of the Timber Production designation is to protect
productive timber resources. The proposed project will result in permanent protection of the site for open
space, compatible agriculture, and natural resource management, which is consistent with these General Plan
designations.
Use and management of the project site as an open space preserve with on-going livestock grazing operations is
also consistent with the County’s Resource Management (RM) and Timber Preserve Zone (TPZ) zoning
designations. The project proposes to use the property for habitat and watershed management, livestock raising
and grazing, and docent-led low intensity recreation, all compatible uses within the RM and TPZ Zoning Districts.
(See Section 3.2 “Agricultural and Forest Resources” for a more detailed discussion regarding consistency with
agricultural designations and policies, including WA contracts.)
The project would operate and would be managed in conformity with the provisions of the Service Plan for the
Coastside Protection Program, which sets forth guidelines to help inform the District’s decision-making and
delivery of District services within the Coastal Protection Program area in which the project site is located.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact associated with land use
plan/policy conflict.
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
No Impact. The proposed project does not contain areas subject to a habitat conservation plan or natural
communities conservation plan. No impact would result.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-56 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XI. Mineral Resources. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
3.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Mineral Resource Zone-2 (MRZ-2) indicates the existence of a deposit that meets certain criteria for value and
marketability. According to the County of San Mateo General Plan, the project site is not located in an area
designated MRZ-2, although the General Plan does indicate that there is a limestone deposit on the southeast
portion of the project site (San Mateo County 1985).
3.11.2 DISCUSSION
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value
to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. According to the San Mateo General Plan, the project site is not located in an area designated MRZ-2
(San Mateo County 1985). The proposed roadway/trail and habitat improvements would not limit the ability to
access the limestone deposit identified by the San Mateo General Plan. The Coastal Protection Program EIR
indicates that implementation of the Service Plan would result in no impacts to Mineral Resources. Consistent
with the EIR’s conclusion, the proposed project would result in no impact.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. See the discussion under “a” above. Although the San Mateo General Plan identifies a limestone
deposit on the site, the proposed improvements would not limit the availability of the mineral resource.
Consistent with the conclusion of the Coastal Protection Program EIR, the proposed project would result in no
impact.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-57
3.12 NOISE
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XII. Noise. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local,
state, or federal standards?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
3.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Existing conditions are governed by the presence of noise-sensitive receptors, the location and type of noise
sources, and overall ambient levels. Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to consist of those uses
where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where a quiet setting is
an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the
potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels.
Additional parks and recreation areas are also generally considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels.
These noise-sensitive land uses are also considered vibration-sensitive.
The project site is located two miles east of the community of La Honda in the Santa Cruz Mountains, within
unincorporated San Mateo County (See Exhibit 2-1). The project site lies near the headwaters of Mindego Creek
and Alpine Creek and is approximately 1 mile west of the crest of the Santa Cruz Mountains.
There are no sensitive receptors located on the project site, only two vacant single-family residences and a barn.
The nearest offside sensitive receptors include residential properties located approximately 1,500 feet to the
south of Knuedler Lake and approximately 2,500 feet to the northeast of the existing onsite structures. (Camp
Glenwood, a male youth correctional facility, is located over 0.5-mile to the west of Knuedler Lake and
approximately 1.5 miles west of the existing onsite structures.)
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-58 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
The existing noise environment is primarily influenced by vehicle traffic from surrounding roadways. The level of
vehicle traffic could vary depending on the size of the nearby roadway and time of the day (i.e., peak traffic
hours). Other noise sources that may contribute to the existing noise environment consist of human activity
from low-impact recreational activities (e.g., sightseeing, hiking, biking, horseback riding) taking place nearby,
noise from nearby residential neighborhoods (e.g., landscape maintenance, dogs barking, people talking),
aircraft flyover, and natural sounds such as leaves rustling and birds chirping.
San Mateo County has established noise guidelines and standards to protect citizens from potential hearing
damage and other adverse physiological and social effects associated with noise. Applicable policies and
regulations are contained in the San Mateo Zoning Regulations.
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO ZONING REGULATIONS
SECTION 6163.6 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
All uses, facilities and operations must conform to the following performance standards:
1. Noise. No use, facility or operation shall create any unusually loud, uncommon noise which would disturb the
neighborhood peace.
The maximum noise level permitted, measured at the building site boundary, shall be:
Time of Day Maximum Noise Level (dBA)
30 Minutes in Any Hour 15 Minutes in Any Hour 5 Minutes in Any Hour
7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55 60 65
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 50 55 60
Short-term construction noise may exceed these standards, providing that all construction activities are limited
between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
3.12.2 DISCUSSION
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local,
state, or federal standards?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project would result in demolition of existing structures and various site
improvements such as installing new troughs for livestock, new PVC water lines, , and installing a new gate at
the Mindego Ranch main entrance. In addition, a new electric solar pump for conveying water to livestock
troughs would be installed. Solar electric motors are not typically considered noise generating equipment and
would not be audible at the nearest offsite sensitive receptors (i.e., residences located approximately 1,500 feet
to the south of the nearest potential construction site). This noise source is not discussed further.
Demolition, construction, and maintenance activities associated with onsite improvements would result in the
loudest noise levels. Noise would result from the use of heavy construction equipment during the demolition of
existing structures, which will be minimal (i.e., three residential structures already in a dilapidated state),
construction, and maintenance of proposed site improvements (e.g., new troughs for livestock, PVC water lines,
, installing a new gate at the Mindego Ranch main gate, road erosion treatment such as installing reverse grade-
dips and ditch relief culverts, and re-grading and widening access roads).
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-59
The site preparation phase typically generates the most substantial noise levels because the onsite equipment
associated with grading, compacting, and excavation are the noisiest. Proposed site preparation activities
include demolition, road re-grading, widening, and vegetation clearing. These activities could require some earth
movement and truck hauling. Therefore, noise-generating equipment that would likely be used includes dozers,
haul trucks, and loaders. Reference noise levels for these types of equipment are shown below in Table 3.12-1
and noise level estimates are shown in Appendix E.
Table 3.12-1 Equipment Reference Noise Levels
Type of Equipment Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 feet
Dozer 85
Dump Truck 84
Front End Loader 80
Source: Data compiled by Ascent Environmental in 2013
Noise generated from these pieces of equipment would be intermittent and short in duration as typical use is
characterized by short periods of full-power operation followed by extended periods of operation at lower
power, idling, or powered-off conditions. However, as a worst-case scenario, if these pieces of equipment were
to operate at full capacity for an entire hour, noise levels could reach up to 49 dBA Lmax at the nearest offsite
sensitive receptors located approximately 1,500 feet to the south of a potential construction area. This worst-
case (and highly unlikely) scenario would not exceed the most stringent San Mateo County noise standard of 55
dBA Lmax for any 30 minute period during the daytime (i.e., 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and if construction or
maintenance activities were to take place outside of the less sensitive hours of the day (i.e., 7:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m.), this noise level would not exceed the most stringent San Mateo County noise standard of 50 dBA Lmax for
any 30 minute period during the nighttime hours (i.e., 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). Overall, these activities would be
spread out over a 10-year period as funding becomes available (except for demolition, which would occur
shortly after the project decision) and therefore noise-generating activities would generally not overlap and
construction noise generation would be minimal as they occur. Noise generating construction and maintenance
activities would not reach levels that exceed applicable noise standards. Thus, proposed noise-generating
activities would not expose nearby noise sensitive receptors to excessive noise levels. This would be a less-than-
significant impact.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
No Impact. The proposed project could involve the use of some heavy-duty construction equipment for various
site improvement activities. These activities include, primarily the demolition of few existing structures and the
site preparation and digging for new piping, as well as some ongoing maintenance and improvements to access
roads and trails. No heavy impact equipment such as drilling or blasting would occur. The types of construction
activities that are proposed include minimal site disturbance and are not the types of activities that could result
in excessive ground vibrations and, therefore, the proposed project would not expose people to excessive
ground vibration. The project would result in no impact.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
No Impact. Major proposed long-term maintenance and operation activities would include road erosion
treatment and habitat restoration, as well as public access to the site.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-60 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
The noise from visitors to the project site (i.e., human speech and laughter) would be limited to the public
access areas, which are located centrally on the site in the same general area that construction noise would
occur (1,500 feet from the nearest residence), and would be far quieter than construction equipment. Likewise,
the visitors would only access the site during daytime hours. Therefore, because the public access would
generate much less noise than construction, and construction, as described under “a” above, would not
generate substantial noise, the limited noise generated by visitors to the site would also not result in substantial
noise at sensitive receptor locations.
Road erosion treatment projects would include installing reverse-grade dips and ditch relief culverts, rocking
low-lying segments, replacing a failing culvert along the Mindego Hill Trail, as well as re-grading, widening, and
installing reverse-grade dips on three critical ranch access roads. Additional maintenance activities include
landfill closure, signage, restriction enforcement, and slope monitoring and trail maintenance actions, grazing
responsibilities, and invasive species control. As described above under “a” the proposed construction and
maintenance activities would be minimal and intermittent over time (i.e., ongoing for the next 10 years). In
addition, these activities would not result in noise levels that exceed any applicable San Mateo County noise
standard and therefore would not expose any nearby sensitive receptors to excessive noise levels. No new
stationary noise sources or land development would be included in the proposed project. Therefore, the project
would not result in any permanent increase in ambient noise levels. There would be no impact.
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less-Than-Significant. As discussed under “a” above, the proposed project would involve the use of some noise-
generating construction equipment. These types of noise-generating equipment do not operate for extended
periods of time and would not exceed any applicable San Mateo County noise standard, during the daytime or
the nighttime. Therefore, this temporary increase in ambient noise would not result in a significant increase in
noise levels at sensitive receptors. This impact would be less than significant.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Response for Items e and f.
Less-Than-Significant. There are multiple airports in San Mateo County (e.g., San Francisco International Airport,
Half Moon Bay Airport, and San Carlos Airport), however based on the San Mateo County Comprehensive
Airport Land Use Plan, the project site is not included in the planning area (or influence areas) as defined by this
plan (City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County 1996). The project site is not located within
2 miles of any other public airport. Additionally, the proposed project would not include any new residential
land uses or permanent structures where people would live or work. It should be noted that there is a small
private (dirt) airstrip located approximately 1.75 miles northwest of the project site. Only small aircraft utilize
this strip and the use is infrequent. Therefore, because the project site is not located within close proximity to
an airport, and the nearby airstrip would not generate substantial noise due to size and frequency of aircraft,
the proposed project would not expose people to excessive noise levels from airports. The impact would be less
than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-61
3.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIII. Population and Housing. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing homes,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
3.13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
According to the US Census Bureau, in 2010 San Mateo County’s population totaled 718,451 with 271,333 total
housing units and an occupation rate of 2.72 persons per household. (US Census Bureau 2012) Located in the
unincorporated area of San Mateo County, the Preserve and the surrounding area are sparsely populated, with
housing consisting mostly of rural residences, farmhouses, and estates.
3.13.2 DISCUSSION
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project does not include construction of new housing or commercial
business. Therefore, no direct population growth would result from implementation of the proposed project. No
additional permanent staff would be needed for operation and maintenance of the proposed project.
Although providing additional public open space would better accommodate the existing and future recreational
needs of the region, open space is not considered “infrastructure” that can support housing/business growth.
These types of infrastructure typically include facilities such as roadways, pipelines, and treatment facilities,
which facilitate development. For example, in areas where wastewater treatment is provided exclusively by
septic systems, which require a substantial amount of space for leach fields, extension of a sewer line to such an
area could facilitate (space necessary for leach fields) higher density development. Opening new open space
areas to public use and implementing other components of the proposed Use and Management Plan would not
result in infrastructure-support facilities and would neither remove nor create such a barrier to growth.
Implementation of the proposed Use and Management Plan would provide a higher quality of life for existing
and future residences and visitors of the region. This impact is less than significant.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-62 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing homes, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Less-Than-Significant. Implementation of the proposed project would involve demolition of two unoccupied
single-family residences and associated structures. These structures are in state of disrepair and are not fit for
habitation. Therefore, removal of these unoccupied residential structures would not require construction of
replacement housing. The impact is less than significant.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As described under “b” above, existing residences proposed for demolition are currently unoccupied
and are in a condition that renders them unfit for habitation. Removal of these structures would not displace
any existing residents and there would be no impact.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-63
3.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIV. Public Services. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, or the need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
3.14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The District participates in fire protection of the Preserve in collaboration with other agencies, and primarily
relies on the jurisdictional fire agencies of CAL FIRE/County of San Mateo Fire Department (CAL FIRE/County
Fire) and La Honda Fire Brigade, with first response and support to the jurisdictional fire agencies by District
staff. Through CALFIRE's Cooperative Fire Protection Program, San Mateo County has contracted with CALFIRE
for Fire Protection since 1962. CAL FIRE/County Fire responds to wildland fires, structure fires, medical
emergencies, motor vehicle accidents, hazardous material spills, swift water rescues, cliff rescues, floods, civil
disturbances, and earthquakes. CAL FIRE/County Fire operates five fire engines out of four county owned fire
stations. These five engines are each staffed with three firefighters, one of which is a paramedic. Additionally, in
declared fire season, one wildland engine is staffed at three of those stations, and one bulldozer is staffed at the
headquarters station (in San Mateo) (San Mateo County 2012).
La Honda Fire Brigade (also called Volunteer Company 57) is a part of the 911 system within the County Fire
System. La Honda Fire Brigade, which operates out of Station 57 located at 8945 La Honda Road (within two
miles from the project site), is a Basic Life Support Engine Company and responds to several types of non-law-
enforcement emergencies, including structure fires, wildland fires, medical aid, vehicle accidents, cliff rescues,
hazardous materials incidents, confined space and trench rescues, swift water rescues, as well as several types
of storm-related emergencies. La Honda Fire has 16 current members with an authorized strength of 20. The
company has two senior officers (a Chief and an Assistant Chief) and three supervising officers (a Captain and
two Lieutenants) (La Honda Fire 2012).
The District maintains a fire program to assist these agencies with fire response. If a fire occurs on or is
threatening District lands, District staff helps establish Incident Command if first on scene, evacuates or closes
the Preserves for visitor safety, performs initial attack when safe and effective to do so, provides logistical
assistance given staff knowledge of the property, monitors and attacks spot fires, and supplies additional water
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-64 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
for primary agency engines. The District operates a maintenance-style water truck for use in providing water for
fire suppression.
POLICE PROTECTION
District rangers are peace officers authorized to carry out duties in patrolling District preserves to promote
visitor safety and provide for the protection of the natural resources of the preserves. The District has a total of
25 badged rangers (who have attended a District approved Academy and wear a peace officer badge). In an
emergency, any or all of these personnel could be summoned to assist at an incident. The San Mateo Sheriff’s
Department is the primary jurisdictional law enforcement agency that provides law enforcement service to
unincorporated areas of San Mateo County, including the project site. District staff is responsible for enforcing
District regulations most importantly pertaining to vandalism, bicycle speed, bicycle helmets, dogs off leash,
dogs in closed area, and parking, whereas the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Department is primarily responsible
for criminal enforcement and all other code sections.
SCHOOLS
The project site is located within the La Honda Pescadero Unified School District. The nearest school is La Honda
Elementary School, located at the end of Sears Ranch Road, over 1.5 miles west of the project site boundary..
PARKS
Several large open space preserves are located in the vicinity of the project site and the Russian Ridge Open
Space Preserve, including the La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2
miles west of the site), Windy Hill Open Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2 miles north of
the site), Sam MacDonald and Pescadero Creek County Parks (located approximately 1 mile southwest of the
site), and Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2 miles east of the site),
and Wunderlich County Park (located just north of the site).
3.14.2 DISCUSSION
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project would decrease risk of wildland fire due to the re-introduction of
grazing on the property, which would reduce onsite fuels by controlling vegetation during the fire season, and
also due to the demolition of existing dilapidated structures. The proposed project would not increase fire risk
because public vehicle access, camping, open fires, camp stoves, and fireworks would be prohibited. See Section
3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, which includes mitigation measures to further reduce impacts related to
wildand fire. Implementation of the proposed project would not increase the need for fire protection service
such that new or expanded fire service facilities would be necessary. In addition, the proposed project is
currently owned by the District and would not affect response times or other performance objectives. The
impact would be less than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-65
Police protection?
Less-Than-Significant. Law enforcement service in the vicinity of the project site is currently provided by the San
Mateo County Sheriff’s Department (criminal) and District rangers (resource protection). Implementation of the
proposed Use and Management Plan would provide limited expansion of public access to areas that are not
currently accessed by the public. No structures would be developed on the project site. Most emergency
responses would be handled internally by District staff and would not tax other law enforcement agencies.
Implementation of the proposed project would not result in increased demand for police protection such that
new or expanded facilities are necessary to maintain current service levels. This impact is less than significant.
Schools?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development of new residences and therefore would not
result in a substantial effect on the permanent population in the area that would increase the demand for
educational services. Implementation of the proposed project would have no impact on schools.
Parks?
Less-Than-Significant. Implementation of the proposed project would provide additional publicly-accessible
open space and limited trails (the 0.05-mile existing POST circle driveway). The POST circle driveway is a dead-
end trail and does not provide connection to other parks and open space preserves in the area would therefore
not increase demand for other parks and open space facilities, such that new or expanded facilities would be
required. This impact is less than significant.
Other public facilities?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include development of new residences and therefore would not
result in a substantial effect on the permanent population in the area that would increase the demand for other
services such as libraries, community centers, etc. Implementation of the project would have no impact on these
other services.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-66 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.15 RECREATION
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XV. Recreation. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
3.15.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As mentioned in Section 3.14 “Public Services” above, there are several large open space preserves and parks
located in the vicinity of the project site and the Russian Ridge Open Space Preserve, including the La Honda
Creek Open Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2 miles west of the site), Windy Hill Open
Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2 miles north of the site), Sam MacDonald and
Pescadero Creek County Parks (located approximately 1 mile southwest of the site), and Skyline Ridge Open
Space Preserve (District Preserve located approximately 2 miles east of the site), and Wunderlich County Park
(located just north of the site).
3.15.2 DISCUSSION
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Less-Than-Significant. As mentioned above in Section 3.14 Public Services, the proposed project would provide
additional open space and trails (the 0.05-mile POST circle driveway) to the public. The proposed access to the
existing POST circle driveway would not provide connection to other parks and open space preserves in the area
would therefore not increase demand for other parks and open space facilities, such that new or expanded
facilities would be required. This impact is less than significant.
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Less-Than-Significant. See the discussion under “a” above. The proposed project would not increase demand for
other parks and open space facilities, such that new or expanded facilities would be required and would
therefore result in a less than significant impact.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-67
3.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVI. Transportation/Traffic. Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level of service
standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
safety of such facilities?
3.16.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is not accessible by any public roadway. Visitors to the project site would access the site by
hiking or riding horseback on Mindego Ridge Trail. Vehicle parking would be provided by the future staging area
on Alpine Road that was approved as part of the adjacent Mindego Gateway project.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-68 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.16.2 DISCUSSION
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and
relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project provides a trail extension and limited public access onto the
Mindego Ranch site. It is not anticipated that the proposed public access to the POST circle driveway would
attract substantial additional visitation. No additional District staff are necessary for the proposed project. The
cattle ranching operation would result in only a few vehicle trips per week (e.g., no more than 2 one-way trips
per day). Therefore, no substantial vehicle trip generation would result. The proposed project would not
substantially affect the performance of the circulation system and would therefore not conflict with any
applicable transportation plans, ordinances, or policies. The project would result in a less-than-significant
impact.
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
Less-Than-Significant. See discussion under “a” above. The proposed project would generate minimal vehicle
trips. Therefore the project would not conflict with a congestion management plan, including level of service
standards and other standards for roadway/highway congestion management. The impact is less than
significant.
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. Implementation of the proposed project does not involve development of any tall structures and
would not alter air traffic patterns. The proposed project would result in no impact.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
No Impact. No vehicle access would be provided to the project site. Therefore, no traffic hazards would result.
The proposed project would result in no impact.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less-Than-Significant. To further mitigate the proposed project’s impacts associated with wildland fire,
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2a (See Section 3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials) requires appropriate emergency
access features, including 12-foot-wide gates and 10-foot-radius turnarounds at trailheads. These measures
would ensure appropriate emergency vehicle access. The impact is less than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-69
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
Less-Than-Significant. As mentioned above under “a”, the proposed project includes limited trail extension and
is not expected to substantially affect the number of visitors that would utilize the existing trail network.
Therefore, demand for bicycle facilities and other alternative modes of transportation would not be
substantially affected by the proposed project. The impact is less than significant.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-70 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
3.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVII. Utilities and Service Systems. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider that serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand, in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
3.17.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The two existing onsite residential structures are unoccupied. No active utilities service is currently provided at
the project site. Stormwater run-off drains naturally. There is no municipal or other formal drainage system;
however, culverts and other drainage facilities convey stormwater flow across or through roadways.
The District does not provide regular trash collection services. District ordinance requires users to dispose of
refuse brought to the RROSP and prohibits public littering or dumping of any material onto the Preserve. Illegal
trash is removed from the Preserve by District staff and properly disposed of.
3.17.2 DISCUSSION
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board?
No Impact. No restrooms are included as part of the proposed project. No wastewater would be generated. The
proposed project would result in no impact related to wastewater treatment requirements.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-71
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities
or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
No Impact. See discussion under “a” above. The proposed project would result in no impact related to
construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities.
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less-Than-Significant. For the most part, drainage of stormwater runoff occurs naturally on the project site,
with the exception of features such as culverts that convey drainage through roadways. The proposed project
involves drainage improvements to prevent erosion and improve water quality, installing reverse-grade dips and
ditch relief culverts; rocking low-lying segments; replacing a failing culvert along Mindego Hill Trail; and
regrading, widening, and installing reverse-grade dips on three critical ranch access roads. Environmental
impacts associated with these improvements are evaluated in this IS. Impacts associated with installing these
drainage facilities are less than significant.
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
No Impact. No potable water would be available at the project site. Water for cattle troughs would be pumped
from onsite springs into proposed water tanks. No water service is required for implementation of the project.
Therefore, the proposed project would result in no impact related to water supply capacity.
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand, in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No Impact. See discussion under “a” above. The proposed project would result in no impact related to
wastewater treatment capacity.
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs?
Less-Than-Significant. A number of dilapidated structures and remnant ranching facilities are proposed for
demolition and removal. Demolition of these structures would generate solid waste. Material would be recycled
to the greatest extent possible and otherwise hauled to appropriate disposal facilities. Any hazardous material
would be abated first per state requirements (see Section 3.9 “Hazards and Hazardous Materials”) and would be
disposed of at appropriate hazardous waste disposal facilities. The volume of solid waste generated during
demolition would not be substantial.
As mentioned under the Environmental Setting, the District does not provide regular trash collection services.
Visitors are required to dispose of their own trash. The District prohibits public littering or dumping of any
material onto the Preserve. District staff removes any illegal trash, which is typically not substantial in volume,
and properly disposes of it. Because implementation of the proposed Master Plan involves very limited
generation of solid waste, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with solid waste
regulations and impacts to landfills will be less-than-significant.
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-72 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
Less-Than-Significant. As described under “f” above, the proposed project involves very limited solid waste
generation and would not conflict with federal, state, and local statutes or regulations related to solid waste.
The impact is less than significant.
Ascent Environmental Environmental Checklist
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3-73
3.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or
threatened species, or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable”
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects
that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083, 21083.5.
Reference: Government Code Sections 65088.4.
Public Resources Code Sections 21080, 21083.5, 21095; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357;
Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan
v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.
3.18.1 DISCUSSION
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an
endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less-Than-Significant. As described in the biological resources analysis of this IS (Section 3.4), implementation of
the proposed project, including mitigation measures included in this IS/MND, would result in less-than-
significant impacts related to biological resources. Natural Resource Management is one of the overarching
goals of the proposed project, including protecting and enhancing habitat and wildlife populations. The
Environmental Checklist Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
3-74 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
proposed project does not have the potential to substantially degrade fish or wildlife habitat, adversely affect
wildlife populations, or restrict the range of special-status species. Also, as indicated in the cultural resources
analysis of this IS (Section 3.5), implementation of the proposed project would not adversely affect existing
historic structures and mitigation measures would prevent substantial adverse effects to unknown
archaeological resources or human remains. These impacts are considered less than significant.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.)
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project includes very little soil disturbance and does not include
construction of new structures or substantial impervious surfaces. The proposed project is designed to protect
and enhance existing natural and cultural resources. As indicated throughout this IS/MND, implementation of
the proposed project would not result in any individually significant impact. In addition, the effects of the
proposed project would not combine with the effects of other past, present, or future projects in a cumulatively
considerable fashion. The cumulative impacts associated with the proposed project are less than significant.
c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less-Than-Significant. The proposed project does not include any new sources of pollution and would not
generally involve the use, handling, or transport of hazardous materials. Demolition of existing structures would
be carried out in compliance with existing OSHA and BAAQMD standards for handling of hazardous building
materials such as asbestos and lead. This impact is less than significant.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 4-1
4 REFERENCES
ARB. See California Air Resources Board.
Ascent Environmental. 2013 (July). Historical Resource Analysis for the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District Proposed Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan. Sacramento, CA.
Atwill, Robert. 1998. Rangeland cattle and the risk of waterborne Cryptosporidium parvum infection in humans.
Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the American Associate of Bovine Practitioners. September
1998, p 62-66.
Bankosh, Lisa. Personal Communication. 2013. (September) Lisa Bankosh provided information as part of the
review of the administrative document in September 2013.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2010. Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan. Adopted September 15, 2010.
San Francisco, CA.
Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2009. Draft CEQA Guidelines September 2009. Available:
http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/Files/Planning%20and%20Research/CEQA/Workshop%20Draft%20-
%20BAAQMD%20CEQA%20Guidelines%209-2009%20Superseded.ashx?la=en.
Best, Timothy C., CEG. 2012 (November). Road and Trail Erosion Inventory: Mindego Ranch Area.
Biosearch Associates and Coast Range Biological. 2011 (November). Biotic Assessment for Mindego Gateway
Study Area, San Mateo County, CA. Santa Cruz, CA.
Biosearch. 2012 (September). San Francisco Garter Snake Habitat Management Plan. Santa Cruz, CA.
California Air Resources Board. 2003. HARP User Guide. Sacramento, CA. Available:
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/harp/harpug.htm>.
California Air Resources Board. 2010 (April 22). Naturally Occurring Asbestos. Sacramento, CA. Available:
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/asbestos/asbestos.htm>. Accessed June 22, 1010.
California Air Resources Board. 2011 (February). Attainment Designations Maps. Available:
<http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm>.
California Department of Conservation. 2000. A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California—Areas
More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos. California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File
Report 2000-19. Available at: <http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/asbestos/geninfo.htm>.
California Department of Conservation. 2002. Guidelines for Geologic Investigations of Naturally Occurring
Asbestos in California. Special Publication 124. Available: <http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/minerals/
hazardous_minerals/asbestos/Asbestos_Guidelines_SP124.pdf>.
California Department of Conservation. 2010. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. California Important
Farmland Finder. http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html Accessed June 14, 2013.
References Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
4-2 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
California Geological Survey 2007. Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle. Available:
<http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/RGM/sfsj/sfsj.html#>. Accessed April 11, 2012.
City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG). 1996 (December). San Mateo County
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Plan. Redwood City, CA.
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2013. EnviroStor database. Available at:
<http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/>. Accessed July 17, 2013.
Erler & Kakinowski, Inc. 2007 (October). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Phase II Investigations
Report. Burlingame, CA.
EPA 2012. Ground-level Ozone, Health Effects. Available at <http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/
health.html> Accessed May 8, 2012.
Geocon Consultants, Inc. 2011. (November) Landfill Remediation Constraints Evaluation. November 9,
2011.
Hylkema, Mark G., MA, RPA. 2013 (February). Positive Archaeological Survey Report (PASR) and Finding of No
Adverse Effect to Archeological Resources. Sunnyvale, CA.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007. Climate Change 2007: They Physical Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Geneva, Switzerland. Available:
<http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm >.
IPCC. See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
La Honda Fire 2012. La Honda Fire Brigade Web Site. Available at < http://www.lahondafire.org/> Accessed
April 2, 2012.
LSA Associates. 2012 (February). Mindego Gateway Project Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Berkeley, CA.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD). 1993. Regulations for Use of Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Lands. Revised 2004. Los Altos, CA.
MROSD. 2002 (June). San Mateo Coastal Annexation Draft EIR. Los Altos, CA.
MROSD. 2003. Service Plan for the Coastside Protection Area. Los Altos, CA.
MROSD. 2008 (February). Mitigated Negative Declaration - POST Mindego Ranch Addition to Russian Ridge Open
Space Preserve, San Mateo County, CA. Los Altos, CA.
MROSD. 2009 (March). Herbicide Application and Invasive Species Control at Mindego Ranch. Los Altos, CA.
MROSD. 2011 (October). Resource Management Policies - Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District. Los Altos,
CA.
MROSD. 2012. MRODS Board Meeting R-12-37. Agenda Item 5. June 13, 2012.
Ascent Environmental References
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 4-3
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2001. A Guide to Health Risk Assessment.
Available: <http://www.oehha.org/pdf/HRSguide2001.pdf>.
Sage Associates. 2012 (October). Mindego Hill Ranch Grazing Management Plan.
San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2012 (September). Approval of Closure-in-Place.
September 28, 2012
San Mateo County. 1985. San Mateo County General Plan.
San Mateo County. 2012. San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes for September 25, 2012
approving Williamson Act Amendment. Redwood City, CA.
US Census Bureau. 2012. State & County quick Facts, San Mateo County. Available at:
<http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06081.html>. Accessed April 2, 2012.
Zhu, Y., W. C. Hinds, S. Kim, and S. Shen. 2002. Study of Ultrafine Particles Near a Major Highway with Heavy-
duty Diesel Traffic. Atmospheric Environment. 36:4323–4335.
References Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
4-4 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank.
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 5-1
5 LIST OF PREPARERS
LEAD AGENCY
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Gretchen Lausten ........................................................................................................................ Co-Project Manager
Lisa Bankosh ................................................................................................................................ Co-Project Manager
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT
Ascent Environmental, Inc.
Gary Jakobs, AICP .......................................................................................................................... Principal-in-Charge
Mike Parker, AICP ....................................................................................... Project Manager/Environmental Planner
Dimitri Antoniou ............................................................ Assistant Project Manager/Air Quality and Noise Specialist
Honey Walters ............................................................................................. Principal Air Quality and Noise Specialist
Linda Leeman ....................................................................................................................................... Senior Biologist
Amber Giffin ............................................................................................................................ Document Preparation
Gayiety Lane ............................................................................................................................ Document Preparation
List of Preparers Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
5-2 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
This page intentionally left blank.
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
R u s s i a nRidge
MindegoHill2143'
MindegoRanch
!!!
!!!
!!!!!!
!!!
Mindego Lake
Granny Flats Reservoir Big Spring
Knuedler Lake
Upper Pond
£¤84
£¤35
£¤280
Area ofDetail
M o n t eBello
L a H o n d aCreek
W i n d yHill
Path: G:\Projects\Russian_Ridge\MindegoUandMPlanCEQA\MindegoCEQAJan22BoardReport\Attachment2_MindegoRanchLocation.mxd
Created By: glaustsen
!!!Ga teExisting P ubl i c Tr ai l
Mid p enins ul a Reg ionalOpen Sp a ce D ist rictNovember 2012
A t t a c h m e n t 2: M i n de g o R a nc h L oc a t i on
Barn
Corral
Old True Residence
^_True Residence
Rodgers GulchMindego C
reek
Min
d
e
g
o Creek
Mid p e ni ns ula Re gi ona lOpen S p a ce Dis tri ct
January, 2014
Path: G:\Projects\Russian_Ridge\MindegoUandMPlanCEQA\MindegoCEQAJan22BoardReport\Attachment3_HabitatEnhancementProjects.mxd
Created By: glaustsen
0 0.50.25Miles
I
(MR O SD )
While the District strives to use the b est available d igital d at a, this d at a does not rep resent a legal survey and is merely a graphic illust ration of geogr aph ic features.
R u s s i a n R i d g eOpen S p a c e P r e s e r v e
A t t a c h m e n t 3: Ha b i t a t E n h a c e m e n t P r o je c t s
MROSD Preserves
Other or Private Land
Mindego Ranch Property Tra il
Pr imar y Ro ad (Yea r-Ro und)
Pr imar y Ro ad (S easo na l)
ATV A ccess
MindegoLake
BigSpring
UpperPond
KnuedlerLake
Mindego Hill Trail
Proposed Cattle Exclusion Fence
Mindego Lake- Drain pond to eradicatenon-native predators
Big Spring- Remove sediment and vegetationto increase amount and durationof open water habitat- Install livestock exclusion fence
SFGS Conservation Management Unit(660ft Buffer Around Ponds)
Knuedler Lake- Remove sediment and vegetationto increase amount and durationof open water habitat- Install livestock exclusion fence
Upper Pond- Remove sediment and vegetationto increase amount and durationof open water habitat- Install livestock exclusion fence
This map was used by L. Bankosh for U&M Committee meeting, andboard report for (11/13/12)
M i n d e go Creek
Rodgers Gulch
Mindego Creek
Mid p e ni ns ula Re gi ona lOpen S p a ce Dis tri ct
January, 2014
0 0.650.325MilesI
(MR O SD )
While the District strives to use the best available digital dat a, this data does n ot represent a legal survey and is m erely a gr ap hic illustration of geographic features.
R u s s i a n R i d g eOpen S p a c e P r e s e r v e
Water Line (Proposed)
Trough (Proposed)Trough
Water Tank (Proposed)Water Tank
!<·<
!'!'
A t t a c h m e n t 4: G ra zi ng I n fra st ru c t u r e
MROSD Preserves
Other or Private Land
Mindego Ranch Property
Acc ess Ro ad
Ex isting F ence
Mindego Hill Trail
Cu esta L a H on da Gu il dWatershed Fence/C or ra l (Pr op o sed)
Sum mer Past ures
Wint er Past ures
MindegoLake
BigSpring
UpperPond
KnuedlerLake
!(
!!!
!!!!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
!!!
Mid p e ni ns ula Re gi ona lOpen S p a ce Dis tri ct
At t a c hm e n t 5 : P u b l i c A c c e s s
January, 2014
0 0.50.25MilesI
(MR O SD )
Pr o po sed Pub lic A ccess
While the District strives to use the best available digital dat a,this data does n ot represent a legal survey and is m erely agraphic illustration of geographic features. Mi nd ego Ranc h Pr op ert y
MR OS D Pres erves
Pr imar y Ro ad (Yea r-Ro und)
Pr imar y Ro ad (S easo na l)
ATV A ccess !R Co unc il C ir cle
!!!MR OS D G at e
Ot her P ubli c A genc y
Pr i vat e Pr o per ty
!!!
SF YouthAuthority
Council Circle Detail
Conservation Management Unit(660ft Buffer Around Ponds)
Mindego Hil l Trail
!!!MR OS D G at e (Pr op os ed)
Mindego Creek
KnuedlerLake
UpperPond
MindegoLake
BigSpring
Attachment 6
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 1
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM CONTENTS
This mitigation monitoring program (MMP) includes a brief discussion of the legal basis and purpose of the
program, a key to understanding the monitoring matrix, discussion and direction regarding noncompliance
complaints, and the mitigation monitoring matrix itself.
LEGAL BASIS AND PURPOSE OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM
Public Resources Code (PRC) 21081.6 requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or reporting
programs whenever certifying an environmental impact report or mitigated negative declaration. This
requirement facilitates implementation of all mitigation measures adopted through the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.
MONITORING MATRIX
The following page provides a table identifying the mitigations incorporated into the Mindego Ranch Use and
Management Plan (the project). These mitigations are reproduced from the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND) for the project. The columns within the tables have the following meanings:
Number: The number in this column refers to the Initial Study section where the
mitigation is discussed.
Mitigation: This column lists the specific mitigation identified within the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.
Timing: This column identifies at what point in time, review process, or phase the
mitigation will be completed. The mitigations are organized by order in which
they appear in the Mitigated Negative Declaration
Who will verify? This column references the District department that will ensure
implementation of the mitigation.
Verification: This column will be initialed and dated by the individual designated to confirm
implementation.
NONCOMPLIANCE COMPLAINTS
Any person or agency may file a complaint asserting noncompliance with the mitigation measures associated
with the project. The complaint shall be directed to the District’s General Manager in written form, providing
specific information on the asserted violation. The General Manager shall cause an investigation and determine
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
2 Mitigation Monitoring Plan
the validity of the complaint; if noncompliance with a mitigation measure has occurred, the General Manager
shall cause appropriate actions to remedy any violation. The complaint shall receive written confirmation
indicating the results of the investigation or the final action corresponding to the particular noncompliance
issue.
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 3
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation in
Section III Air
Quality
Mitigation Measure 3.3-1
The District shall require all its construction contractors to implement the
following basic construction mitigation measures. This measure incorporates
Mitigation Measure AIR-1 of the Coastal Protection Program EIR. (The
measures below provide updated consistency with BAAQMD regulations.)
Basic Construction Mitigation Measures
All exposed and un-compacted surfaces (e.g., staging areas, soil piles, and
graded areas,) shall either be watered two times per day or covered with
mulch, straw, or other dust control cover.
All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall
be covered.
All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be collected
and removed at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is
prohibited.
All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour
(mph).
All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as
soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading
unless seeding, dust control covers, or soil binders are used.
Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not
in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the
California airborne toxics control measures (ATCM) Title 13, Section 2485 of
California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.
All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in
accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be
checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper
condition prior to operation.
Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to
contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall
respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. BAAQMD’s phone
number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
During construction MROSD Operations (Resource
Specialist) with Planning PM
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
4 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation in
Section IV
Biological
Resources
Mitigation Measure 3.4-1
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize
impacts to San Francisco garter snake, California red-legged frog, and western
pond turtle. This measure incorporates Mitigation Measures BIO 1b, 1j, and 1l
of the Coastal Protection Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity
to protections for San Francisco garter snake, California red-legged frog and
western pond turtle for habitat enhancement actions.)
Because San Francisco garter snake is Fully Protected, no take can be
authorized under the Fish and Wildlife Code. Take is defined in Section 86 of
the Fish and Wildlife Code as "hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or
attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill." Habitat enhancement
activities must ensure that no snakes are taken during implementation.
Because San Francisco garter snake and California red-legged frog are
federally protected and habitat enhancement activities may affect them,
USFWS shall be consulted as required by the Endangered Species Act.
Because potential impacts to aquatic habitat may also require a Section 404
permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) (see Discussion
under “C” below and Mitigation Measure BIO 4), consultation with USFWS
would occur during the recovery permit process (under Section 10 of the
ESA).
The District shall implement all conservation measures included in the
Biological Opinion issued by USFWS as a result of the consultation to
minimize potential impacts to San Francisco garter snake and California red-
legged frog.
Conservation measures shall include:
o Speed Limits.
Prior to and during
construction activities
(including
maintenance-related
construction).
Use of vehicles on Mindego Ranch should be strictly
controlled by the District to avoid potential take of San Francisco
garter snake and California red-legged frog. Other than emergencies,
access should be limited to necessary patrols and authorized persons
that follow a 5-mph speed limit within 2,000 feet of Mindego Lake,
Knuedler Lake, Upper Pond or Big Spring.
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM in consultation
with USFWS and CDFW, as
necessary.
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 5
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
o Worker Education Seminar.
o
Prior to conducting any action that may
negatively affect listed species, all staff, contractors and persons
associated with the project must attended a worker-education
seminar delivered by a qualified District biologist or other qualified
biologist. The seminar will include written information regarding
identification, natural history, legal status, onsite observations, and
related information. Names and phone numbers of the biological
monitors and CDFW and USFWS contacts should be included in the
written information. The District should maintain a signature sheet to
document compliance, which will be made available upon request.
Pre-activity Surveys.
o
Prior to ground disturbing actions, pre-activity
surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to search for San
Francisco garter snake during periods when they are active, and to
minimize affecting potential San Francisco garter snake cover-sites
and hibernacula during all times of the year.
Biological Construction Monitoring.
A qualified biologist shall conduct
a pre-activity survey for San Francisco garter snake and California red-
legged frog and western pond turtle prior to implementing actions
that include ground disturbance or other activities that could
otherwise harm either species. The biological monitor shall oversee
compliance with this plan and all associated permits and should be
the point of contact for regulatory agencies, if needed. If protected
species are observed within the study area by anyone involved in the
project, work shall cease and the animal will be allowed to move out
of the area under its own motivation, and under the direct
observation of the biological monitor (if feasible). If a western pond
turtle nest is discovered, CDFW will be contacted for guidance to
protect such a unique resource. Relocation of any protected species
to the nearest appropriate habitat will not be conducted, unless
specifically authorized by the regulatory agencies.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
6 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation Measure 3.4-2
Prior to demolition of structures, surveys for roosting bats within the
structures will be conducted by a qualified biologist. Surveys will consist of a
daytime pedestrian survey looking for evidence of bat use (e.g., guano) and/or
an evening emergence survey to note the presence or absence of bats. The
type of survey will depend on the condition of the buildings. If no bat roosts
are found, then no further study is required. If evidence of bat use is observed,
the number and species of bats using the roost will be determined. Bat
detectors may be used to supplement survey efforts, but are not required.
If roosts of pallid bats are determined to be present and must be removed, the
bats will be excluded from the roosting site before the structure is removed. A
program addressing compensation, exclusion methods, and roost removal
procedures will be developed in consultation with DFG before
implementation. Exclusion methods may include use of one-way doors at roost
entrances (bats may leave but not reenter), or sealing roost entrances when
the site can be confirmed to contain no bats. Exclusion efforts may be
restricted during periods of sensitive activity (e.g., during hibernation or while
females in maternity colonies are nursing young). The loss of each roost (if any)
will be replaced in consultation with DFG and may include construction and
installation of bat boxes suitable to the bat species and colony size excluded
from the original roosting site. Roost replacement will be implemented before
bats are excluded from the original roost sites. MROSD has successfully
constructed bat boxes elsewhere that have subsequently been occupied by
bats. Once the replacement roosts are constructed and it is confirmed that
bats are not present in the original roost site, the structures may be removed
or sealed.
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize
impacts to San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and American badger. This
measure incorporates Mitigation Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1c, BIO-1d,
BIO-1f, and BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection Program EIR. (The measures below
provide specificity to protections for San Francisco dusky-footed woodrat and
American badger.)
Within 30 days prior to project construction, a qualified biologist shall
inspect the work area and adjacent areas within 50 feet for woodrat houses
and badger dens. If none are found, then no additional measures are
necessary.
Prior to demolition and
construction activities.
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM in consultation
with CDFW, as necessary.
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 7
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
If a woodrat house is identified within 50 feet of the work area, an exclusion
zone shall be erected around the existing woodrat houses using flagging or
a temporary fence that does not inhibit the natural movements of wildlife
(such as steel T-posts and a single strand of yellow rope or similar
materials). The work area shall be relocated as necessary to avoid impacting
woodrat houses, even if avoidance is by only a few feet. If woodrat houses
cannot be avoided by the trail, CDFW shall be contacted for approval to
relocate individuals by live-trapping and building a nearby artificial house as
a release site. Approval to relocate shall be acquired from CDFW.
If an occupied badger burrow is identified within 50 feet of the work area,
the trail shall be relocated as necessary to avoid impacting the animal or its
den. If an active natal den is discovered, work shall cease and a qualified
biologist or District staff shall monitor the site until the young have
dispersed.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-3
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize
impacts to special-status plants. This measure incorporates Mitigation
Measures BIO-1a, BIO-1b, BIO-1d, and BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection
Program EIR. (The measures below provide specificity to protections for
special-status plants.)
The District shall utilize qualified District staff or a contractor to conduct
protocol-level preconstruction special-status plant surveys for all potentially
occurring species within the project footprint that has not previously been
surveyed. Prior to ground-disturbance or vegetation management in
potentially suitable habitat, surveys shall be conducted during the
appropriate blooming period when they are most readily identifiable in
accordance with Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special
Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (DFG 2009). If no
special-status plants are found during focused surveys, the findings shall be
documented in a letter report, and no further mitigation shall be required.
If special-status plant populations are present in the project footprint, the
District shall determine if the population can be avoided by adjusting the
project design.
Preconstruction MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM in consultation
with USFWS and CDFW, as
necessary.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
8 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
If the impact to special-status plants cannot be avoided, the District shall
consult with CDFW and USFWS, as appropriate depending on species
status, to determine the appropriate measures to ensure no net loss of
occupied habitat or individuals. These measures may include preserving and
enhancing existing populations, creation of off-site populations on project
mitigation sites through seed collection or transplantation, and/or restoring
or creating suitable habitat in sufficient quantities to achieve the no-net-loss
standard.
Mitigation Measure 3.4-4
The District shall implement the following measures to avoid and minimize
impacts to wetlands and other waters of the United States. This measure
incorporates Mitigation Measure BIO-1j of the Coastal Protection Program EIR.
(The measures below provide specificity to protections for wetlands and
waters of the United States.)
Where wetlands or other waters of the United States could be affected by
draining ponds, dredging sediment and vegetation, installation of grazing
infrastructure, erosion and damage repair along roadways, or other
activities, a preliminary wetland delineation shall be submitted to USACE for
verification. The wetlands may also be subject to CDFW regulation under
Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. No grading, fill, or other ground
disturbing activities shall occur until all required permits, regulatory
approvals, and permit conditions for effects on wetland habitats are
secured.
If the wetlands are determined to be subject to USACE jurisdiction, projects
such as restoration activities or trail or road crossings may qualify for a
Nationwide Permit if certain criteria are met. For those wetlands that
cannot be avoided, the District shall commit to replace, restore, or enhance
on a “no net loss” basis (in accordance with USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW) the
acreage of all wetlands and other waters of the United States that would be
removed, lost, and/or degraded with project implementation. Wetland
habitat shall be restored, enhanced, and/or replaced at an acreage and
location and by methods agreeable to USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW, as
appropriate, depending on agency jurisdiction, and as determined during
the permitting processes.
Prior to construction
activities near or
within a wetland or
other waters of the
U.S.
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM in consultation
with USACE and CDFW, as
necessary.
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 9
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation in
Section V
Cultural
Resources
Mitigation Measure 3.5-1
The District shall implement Mitigation Measure CUL-2 from the Coastal
Protection Program EIR:
Protocol for Unexpected Discovery of Archaeological and Paleontological
Cultural Materials.
In the event that any cultural resources are exposed during construction, work
at the location of the find will halt immediately within 10 meters (30 feet) of
the find. If an archaeologist is not present at the time of the discovery, the
District will contact an archaeologist for identification and evaluation in
accordance with CEQA criteria.
A reasonable effort will be made by the District and archaeologist to avoid or
minimize harm to the discovery until significance is determined and an
appropriate treatment can be identified and implemented. Methods to protect
finds include fencing, covering remains with protective material and culturally
sterile soil or plywood. If vandalism is a threat, 24-hour security shall be
provided. During this evaluation period, construction operations outside of the
find location can continue preferably with an archaeologist monitoring any
subsurface excavations.
If the resource cannot be avoided, the archaeologist will develop an
appropriate Action Plan for treatment within 48 hours to minimize or mitigate
the adverse effects. The District will not proceed with construction activities
that could affect the discovery until the Action Plan has been reviewed and
approved. The treatment effort required to mitigate the inadvertent exposure
of significant cultural resources will be guided by a research design appropriate
to the discovery and potential research data inherent in the resource in
association with suitable archaeological field techniques and analytical
strategies. The recovery effort will be detailed in a professional report in
accordance with current archaeological standards. Any non-grave associated
artifacts will be curated with an appropriate repository.
Prior to and during
construction
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
10 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation Measure 3.5-2
The District shall implement Mitigation Measure CUL-3 from the Coastal
Protection Program EIR:
Native American Burial Plan (NABP)
1) In the event of an inadvertent discovery of human remains and cultural
items during project construction, the field crew supervisor shall take
immediate steps, if necessary, to secure and protect any remains and
cultural materials. This shall include but is not limited to such measures as
(a) temporary avoidance by construction until the remains and items can
be removed; (b) posting a security person; (c) placement of a security
fence around the area of concern; or, (d) some combination of these
measures. Any such measures employed will depend upon the nature and
particular circumstances of the discovery.
Prior to and during
construction
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM
2) The County Medical Examiner (Coroner) shall be notified by the field crew
supervisor or other designated District manager and informed of the find
and of any efforts made to identify the remains as Native American. If the
remains are identified as a prehistoric Native American by either a
professional archaeologist under contract to the District or the Medical
Examiner’s forensic archaeologist, the Medical Examiner is responsible for
contacting the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24
hours of notification of the find. The Medical Examiner may choose to
document and remove the remains at his/her discretion depending on the
circumstances of the discovery. The NAHC then designates and notifies a
Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD has 24 hours to consult and
provide recommendations for the treatment or disposition, with proper
dignity, of the human remains and grave goods [Note: Other culturally
affiliated Native Americans [Indians] may be consulted by the MLD during
the consultation and recommendation process to determine treatment of
the skeletal remains].
3) Each burial and associated cultural items shall be stored as a unit in a
secure facility, which shall be accessible to the MLD and other Native
American representative(s) or their designated alternates upon prior
arrangement.
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 11
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
4) The remains and associated cultural items shall be reburied in a secure
location as near as possible to the area of their discovery or at an off-site
location acceptable to the MLD that has minimal potential for future
disturbance. The reburial shall be done in a manner that shall discourage
or deter future disturbance. Reburial shall be conducted by persons
designated by the MLD, with the assistance, if requested, of the District’s
field crew. The location shall be fully documented, filed with the NAHC
and the California Historical Resources Information System, Northwest
Information Center, California State University, Sonoma and treated as
confidential information.
5) If the NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD fails to make a
recommendation, or the District or designate rejects the recommendation
of the MLD and mediation (as per Section 5097.94 subdivision (k)) fails,
reinterment of the human remains and associated cultural items
associated shall take place with appropriate dignity on the property in a
location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
6) For security reasons, no news releases, including but not limited to
photographs, videotapes, written articles, or other such means that
contains information about human remains or burial-related items of
Native American origin shall be released by any party during the
discovery, recovery and reburial unless approved by the MLD.
7) Any disputes that arise among the MLD and representatives of affected
Native American groups and/or between the District or designate and the
MLD concerning cultural affiliation or the ultimate disposition of Native
American human remains and associated funerary objects and
unassociated funerary objects shall be resolved according to the dispute
resolution procedures in Section 5097.94 of the State of California Public
Resources Code.
8) The Archaeological Data Recovery/Native American Burial Treatment
Report(s) shall be prepared by professional archaeologists. The report
shall include, but not be limited to, the following: project overview;
ethnographic section; previous archaeological research in the region and
on-site; circumstances of discovery; recovery procedures and techniques;
artifact analysis; faunal analysis; osteological analysis and interpretation;
and, conclusions. The MLD and other interested Native American
representative(s) shall be provided an opportunity to review the report
and submit comments within the same time period as accorded any other
reviewers.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Ascent Environmental
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
12 Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
9) Objects not associated with the human remains and recovered from
private land shall be transferred to the District. If curation of any objects is
required, curation will be at repository approved by the District.
Repositories can include the History Museums of San Jose collections, the
Tiburon Archaeological Research Group, San Francisco State University
and the Collections Facility, Department of Anthropology, Sonoma State
University, Rohnert Park.
Mitigation in
Section VIII
Hazards and
Hazardous
Materials
Mitigation Measure 3.8-1
The District shall designate the corral area as a “closed area” and install signs
to alert the public and District staff that the area is closed. After the corral area
remediation is completed according to RWQCB (and/or DTSC) standards, the
signage may be removed from the corral area. The District shall also enforce
the access restrictions and note the restrictions on District Preserve maps.
Prior to opening
land to public
access
MROSD Administration
and Operations depts.
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2a
The District shall implement the following applicable mitigation measures
incorporated directly from the Coastal Protection Program EIR:
The District shall select indigenous plant materials and/or seed mixes
utilized along trails for their low maintenance and drought and fire resistant
characteristics to minimize additional fuel available to wildland fires to the
extent feasible. (Coastal Protection Program EIR Mitigation HAZ-2a)
The District shall limit trail use to low-intensity hiking, bird watching,
bicycling, equestrian use, environmental education and other similar low
hazard uses, and prohibit smoking, camping, picnicking, fireworks and off-
road vehicle use. (Coastal Protection Program EIR Mitigation HAZ-2e)
Prior to opening
land to public use;
ongoing project
oversight thereafter
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM
Ascent Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Program
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan IS/MND 13
Impact Mitigation Measure(s) Timing Monitoring Responsibility –
District Department
Verification
(Date & Initials)
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2b
To further reduce the potential for wildland fire ignition beyond the Coastal
Protection Program EIR mitigation, the following additional mitigation measure
is required:
In order to reduce fire ignition risk, the District currently requires the
following measures for all maintenance and construction activities within
the Preserve:
o All equipment to be used during construction and maintenance
activities must have an approved spark arrestor.
o Grass and fuels around construction sites where construction vehicles
are allowed to be parked will be cut or reduced.
o Mechanical construction equipment that can cause an ignition will
not be used when the National Weather Service issues a Red Flag
Warning for the San Francisco Bay Area.
o Hired contractors will be required to:
- Provide water and/or fire extinguisher to suppress potential
fires caused by the work performed.
- Remind workers that smoking is prohibited at the work site and
on any District land per contract conditions and District
Ordinance.
- Maintain working ABC fire extinguishers on all vehicles in the
work area.
- Contact both Mountain View Dispatch at (650) 968-4411 and
CAL FIRE, Skylonda, at (650) 851-1860 for emergency response
in the event of a fire.
Prior to opening
land to public use;
ongoing project
oversight thereafter
MROSD Operations Dept.
(Resource Specialist) with
Planning PM
ATTACHMENT 7
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
Mindego Use and Management Plan Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 22, 2014
Pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15073, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)
were circulated for public review. The public comment period began on November 26, 2013 and
concluded on January 6, 2014. The IS/MND was distributed in compliance with CEQA and also posted
on the District’s website.
The purpose of this document is to respond to comments pertaining to the potential for significant effect
on the environment as a result of implementation of the Mindego Use and Management Plan. During the
public comment period, comments were received from two agencies. This document responds to those
comments, which are attached to this Response as Exhibit A. Corrections to the Draft IS/MND in
response to the comments received, or necessary to amplify or clarify material in the Draft IS/MND, are
included in the responses. Underlined
text represents language that has been added to the Draft IS/MND;
text with strikeout has been deleted from the Draft IS/MND.
Response to Commenter 1: Cuesta La Honda Guild
Dear Mr. Cain and Guild Board of Directors,
Thank you for your comments regarding the Mindego Use and Management Plan (U & M Plan)
Amendment. The Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND, SCH#
2013112067) analyzing potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the
U&M Plan Amendment was published on November 26, 2013 and the public comment period
ended on January 6, 2014. This memorandum has been prepared to respond to the Cuesta La
Honda Guild’s (Guild) comments, dated January 4, 2014, regarding the reintroduction of cattle
grazing to Mindego Ranch and potential impacts to downstream water quality.
The Guild’s concerns are focused on the potential for off-site transport of Cryptosporidium
oocytes (fecal pathogens) from Big Springs and Mindego Lake to Mindego Creek, where the
Guild maintains a drinking water diversion during the months of October through May. Water
quality measures included in the U&M Plan Amendment reduce the risk of pathogen transport
during the period of diversion to the point we believe there is no foreseeable risk of water supply
contamination, while still allowing cattle within the watershed during the summer months.
Grazing must occur within the pastures adjacent to Mindego Lake and Big Spring to maintain
suitable habitat for the federally-endangered San Francisco garter snake (San Francisco Garter
Snake Habitat Management Plan, pg. 28). Moreover, these key summer pastures are required to
support an economically viable grazing operation. Since no cattle will be present in the
watershed during the period of water diversion, the potential for fecal pathogens to enter the
Guild’s water supply is eliminated.
The Guild requests modifications to the proposed water quality measures, which are addressed
below. Furthermore, the District understands that the Guild must test source water for
Cryptosporidium oocytes on a monthly basis, even summer months when water is not being
ATTACHMENT 7
diverted, and that detection could trigger costly improvements to the water system. In response
to this new information, the District proposes an additional measure to prevent pathogen
transport in the dry season.
1) The first of the Guild’s comments concerns the system of natural barriers and fencing that
exclude livestock from the Mindego Creek watershed. The majority of the watershed
boundary is characterized by a steep, clifflike drop and dense, impenetrable scrub
vegetation. A livestock herd that grazes a property permanently year-round, such as the
small herd of female cows that are proposed to graze Mindego Ranch (as opposed to the
male stock animals of a seasonal operation), habitually graze areas that are easily accessed
from their holding field and water sources, and typically do not range outside of their
readily available pastureland. However, in areas of gentler terrain and less dense
vegetation, as in the western portion of the property boundary, additional fencing is
necessary to be absolutely certain that the herd is contained. For this reason, additional
fencing is proposed as part of the U&M Plan Amendment (see Exhibit 2-4 of the
IS/MND). The District believes that, with the additional fencing, the natural barrier system
will be completely effective in restricting cattle to the winter pastures.
However, the Guild further suggests that additional fencing be installed within summer
pastures to prevent cattle from accessing Big Spring and Mindego Lake at any time. As
discussed above, well-managed grazing in this area is required to maintain suitable habitat
conditions for sensitive aquatic species. However, in response to the Guild’s suggestion,
and recognizing that Cryptosporidium is primarily carried by young calves, calves will be
excluded entirely from Mindego Lake and Big Spring at all times via existing pasture
fencing (Figure 1). This is a new proposed additional measure in response to the Guild’s
concerns. Calves are born during the months of August through October. The following
modification will be made to pg 2-8 of the IS/MND (strikeout = text removed; underline =
text added) and incorporated into the Grazing Management Plan.
Calves will be excluded entirely from Mindego Lake and Big Spring at all times via
existing pasture fencing.
2) The second of the Guild’s comments requests that the District define “regular monitoring”
of the grazing operation and describe what actions would be taken to recover missing
cattle. In response to this request, the following modification is made to the second bullet
point on pg 2-8 of the IS/MND and incorporated in the Grazing Management Plan:
Monitoring shall occur weekly during the rainy season and at least 2 days per week
during the calving season. Should livestock be detected in summer pastures between
September 1 and May 31, or calves detected in ponds at any time, the District will notify
the Guild and immediately take actions necessary to secure the animals in a holding
pasture until the location of the breach can be identified and repaired.
3) The final Guild comment points out that the District does not currently have a plan to test
the herd for Cryptosporidium. This is correct. As described herein and within the
IS/MND, the District will implement measures to avoid the risk of pathogen
ATTACHMENT 7
contamination to Mindego Creek. First, no cattle will be present in the watershed during
the period of water diversion. Additionally, calves, the primary source of the pathogen,
will be excluded entirely from Mindego Lake and Big Spring. With the implementation of
these measures, the District does not believe monitoring the herd for Cryptosporidium is
necessary. As stated in the District’s correspondence to the Guild dated November 25,
2013, in the unlikely event that Cryptosporidium spores are detected through the Guild’s
required testing, and the source species is identified as cattle, the District will take
immediate action to restrict the herd to a secure holding field, conduct Cryptosporidium
testing, and remove infected cattle from the ranch.
The District strives to maintain and improve watershed health and water quality through its land
management programs, and is committed to the protection of rare and endangered species. With
adoption of the Coastside Protection Program in 2004, the District also committed to support
agriculture within the San Mateo County coastal region by preserving and fostering existing and
potential agricultural operations on all suitable lands. The Mindego property has a long history as
a cattle ranch, beginning in 1859 and continuing until the temporary suspension of grazing in
2008, and is zoned to allow for livestock grazing. Continuing this operation is a high priority in a
region where economic opportunities for ranchers are increasingly scarce. Furthermore, Mindego
Ranch is subject to a Williamson Act contract with San Mateo County that restricts the use of the
land to agricultural and open space uses, and requires the land to be in active agricultural/grazing
ATTACHMENT 7
use. Finally, as part of the Coastal Protection Program, the District entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding with the San Mateo County Farm Bureau that ensures that all District actions on
the Coastside which may impact agricultural operations are vetted by local farmers and ranchers.
Through this process, the Farm Bureau has urged the importance of maintaining Mindego Ranch
in active agricultural use.
We feel that the U&M Plan addresses the complex stewardship of Mindego Ranch, and, with
extensive input from our partners and stakeholders, has achieved the necessary balance among the
District’s many management goals while remaining protective of your watershed. We look
forward to continuing to work closely with the Guild as the U&M Plan is implemented.
Response to Commenter 2: San Mateo County Resource Conservation District
Dear Ms. Kellyx Nelson,
Thank you for your comments regarding the Mindego Use and Management Plan (U & M Plan)
Amendment. The Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND, SCH#
2013112067) analyzing potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the
U&M Plan Amendment was published on November 26, 2013 and the public comment period
ended on January 6, 2014. This memorandum has been prepared to respond to the San Mateo
County Resource Conservation District comments, dated January 2, 2014, expressing support for
the U&M Plan and offers partnership to the District on habitat enhancement and other actions as
appropriate.
The Resource Conservation District (RCD) and the District share a common goal of protecting
and restoring natural resources. The District greatly appreciates the opportunity to partner with the
RCD on implementation of the U&M Plan habitat enhancement actions. Specifically, the District
looks forward to exploring opportunities to partner with the RCD to expand our existing
knowledge and expertise on actions such as pond restoration and enhancement.
ATTACHMENT 7
EXHIBIT A COMMENT LETTERS
Cuesta La Honda Guild
Common Intercst Development
Professionally managed by ft6i*unug"
January 4,2OL4
Ms. Lisa Bankosh
Project Manager
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Subject: lnitialStudy/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Mindego Ranch Use and Management Plan
The Board of Directors of Cuesta La Honda Guild appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Use
and Management Plan for Mindego Ranch (the Plan). As we have expressed in previous correspondence
to Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (the District), the Guild's principal concern is the
protection of Mindego Creek, which is a vitalsource of drinking water to the community. The Guild
considers the re-introduction of cattle onto the property as a potential source of Cryptosparidium
contamination to Mindego Creek.
Cryptosporidium is a small single-celled protozoan parasite that lives in the intestinal tract of mammals.
lnfection occurs by fecal-oral transmission and causes gastrointestinal illness in humans. Severe
infections can be chronic in young children and in adults with compromised immune systems. lnfected
humans and animals shed thickly walled oocysts that can survive outside of the body for extended
periods of time. Cryptosporidium is particularly prevalent in waters contaminated with animal and
human waste.
Testing for the presence of Cryptosporidium is mandated for all water districts in California that utilize
surface waters under provisions of the Long term Surface Water Treatment Rule 2 (California
Department of Public Health). The Guild completed the required yearlong testing schedule in 2011with
no detection s of Cryptosporidium oocysts. The Guild will be required to conduct another round of
testing in 2015, and every 6 years, thereafter. Federal and State drinking water regulations require that
water systems that utilize surface waters as a source of drinking water have filtration and disinfection
methods that will remove and killat least 99% of the Cryptosporidium oocysts. The oocysts are resistant
to chlorination, the disinfection method used by the Guild's drinking water system. Therefore, detection
of any oocysts in the source water could trigger a requirement by the State for the Guild to implement
additional, expensive treatment methods, such as ultraviolet irradiation or ozone, to meet the
regulatory requirement.
Our reading of some of the literature suggests that information on linkages among infection rates in
cattle, hydrologic transport, and human health risk is not well established. For example, infection rates
in calves of range herds are variable, but it is not unusual for tO-2OYo of the tested calves to harbor the
Comprehensive Community Management Solutions Page I
7655 Redwood Blvd., #100, Novato, CA 94945 . P: 866-473-2573. F: 415-367-9045 . service@realmanage.com
Cuesta La Honda Guild
parasite (Atwill). The risk of contamination of surface water is not well documented, but at least one
study indicated that oocysts can be transported from feces during rainfall events (Tate et al. 2000). The
extent of transport to surface waters and risk to human health may be largely determined by site-
specific factors, including hillside slope.
The Guild's concerns can be appreciated when placed into the hydrological setting. The Guild possesses
appropriative water rights to Mindego Creek for direct use and storage. We are entitled to divert water
from October to the end of May from a point of diversion situated roughly 0.25 mile downstream of the
confluence of Big Springs Creek and Mindego Creek. Maps in the Plan illustrate the hydrological
connection between Big Springs Creek and Mindego Creek. Big Springs is a source of water to Big Springs
Creek which conveys its flow via a steep, incised channel to Mindego Creek. Furthermore, the position
of Mindego Lake relative to Big Springs Creek suggests that shallow groundwater discharge from
Mindego Lake might flow to Big Springs. Thus, the possibility exists for a continuous groundwater-
surface water connection between Mindego Lake and Mindego Creek. With this in mind, the Guild's
concerns are focused on the potential for off-site transport of Cryptosporidium oocytes to Mindego
Creek.
District staff met with the Board of Directors of Cuesta La Honda Guild, twice, to present the proposed
Use and Management Plan and to invite comments. ln response to the Guild's concerns, District
planners incorporated additional measures into the grazing plan to reduce the risk of contamination of
Mindego Creek by Cryptosporidium. The Guild commends the District for making these changes.
However, there are several aspects of the Plan that the Guild believes should be strengthened. The
protection of water quality of Mindego Creek is based in part on an adaptive management strategy,
which would react to issues and failures in the current grazing plan. We highlight several of these,
below, and suggest that the Plan should be more proactive to avoid potential problems.
r The Plan will use natural barriers (steep hillsides and vegetation) and fencing to exclude cattle
from the Mindego Creek watershed during the period the Guild withdraws water from Mindego
Creek. The Plan relies on natural barriers, exclusively, in the portion of the propertythat borders
Big Springs and Big Spring Creek (designated as the summer grazing area). The Plan states that
fencing will be installed should the natural barriers prove to be ineffective in excluding cattle
from the watershed. The Guild encourages the District to consider installing fencing in the lower
summer pasture area before cattle are re-introduced to the property.
o The Plan states that District staff or the grazing tenet will 'regularly' monitor for cattle entering
the Mindego Creek watershed. The Plan does not define 'regularly'. This should be explicitly
specified. Moreover, the plan does not describe what action the District would take to recover
missing cattle, and whether the Guild would be notified should cattle be discovered in the
Mindego watershed.
o There is no the plan to monitor for Cryptosporidium in the herd. Such monitoring coupled with
aggressive mitigation would seem to provide a greater measure of protection against the spread
of the pathogen and contamination of human drinking water supplies.
Comprehensive Community Management Solutions Page 2
7655 Redwood Blvd., #100, Novato I CA94945. P: 866-473-2573 . Ft 4L5-367-9045 . service@realmanage,com
Cuesta La Honda Guild
ln closing, the Cuesta La Honda Guild board of directors recognizes that the District is sensitive to the
Guild's concerns, and appreciates that the District has reached out to solicit comments on the proposed
Use and Management Plan for the Mindego Ranch property. Here, we have provided additional
comments on the proposed plan which we believe supports the District's best management practices to
mitigate the risk of contamination of Mindego Creek by Cryptosporidiurr. However, the Guild is not
aware that a formal risk analysis of the proposed grazing plan has been conducted, but only that the
perceived risk is slight. Although, the risk of contamination by Cryptosporidiuln appears to be small, it
would be largely, if not entirely, borne by the Guild and other downstream users. The consequences of
contamination in terms of human health and financial costs to the Guild would be severe. Therefore,
despite the proposed measures to mitigate the risk of contamination, the Guild still questions the
decision to re-introduce cattle to the Mindego Ranch property.
Sincerely,2
Daniel Cain, president of the board of directors, Cuesta La Honda Guild, lnc.
References
Atwill, R., Rangeland cattle and the risk of waterborne Cryptosporidium parvum infection in humans.
http://www.cabnr.unr.edu/resources/cattlemens/1998/03%20Atwill.html. accessed January 2014.
Tate, K. W., Atwill, E.R., George, M.R., McDougland, N.K., and Royce, E. 2000. Crytosporidium parvum
transport from cattle fecal deposits on California rangelands. J. Range Manage.53: 295-299
Comprehensive Community Management Solutions Page 3
7655 Redwood Blvd,, #100, Novato, CA94945 . Pt 866-473-2573 . F: 415-367-9045 . service@realmanage.com
January 2, 2014
Lisa Bankosh, Open Space Planner III
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
330 Distel Circle
Los Altos, CA 94022
RE: Comments on Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for Mindego Use and Management Plan
Dear Ms. Bankosh:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Mindego Use and Management Plan that has been prepared and distributed by the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD).
Resource conservation districts (RCDs) are authorized under the California Public Resource Code to address
local resource conservation needs “to secure the adoption of conservation practices including but not
limited to farm, range, open space, urban development, wildlife, recreation, watershed, water quality, and
woodland, best adapted to save the basic resources, soil, water, and air of the state from unreasonable and
economically preventable waste and destruction.” RCDs work with the consent of public and private
landowners for watershed restoration and enhancement.
Our RCD collaborates with landowners and managers, technical advisors, area jurisdictions, government
agencies, and others to protect, conserve and restore natural resources in coastal San Mateo County.
As a special district with expertise and responsibilities for resource conservation, we would like to offer our
partnership on the implementation of the Mindego Use and Management Plan for habitat enhancement
and other actions as appropriate. We offer specific programs for rural road and trail management,
restoration and enhancement of ponds, agricultural and residential water conservation, water quality
monitoring, salmonid restoration and recovery, implementation of the San Gregorio watershed plan, and
more. On staff at the RCD and at your service is a watershed coordinator for the San Gregorio watershed as
well as the Agricultural Ombudsman for the county.
We accomplish all of our resource protection work in partnership with others. We appreciate the
productive partnership we have had with MROSD over the years and look forward to expanding that
collaboration as MROSD implements its Mindego Use and Management Plan.
Sincerely,
Kellyx Nelson
Executive Director
ATTACHMENT 8
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
THE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, THE
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND RELATED FINDINGS,
IN CONNECTION WITH
THE PROPOSED RUSSIAN RIDGE USE AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE MINDEGO RANCH AREA
WHEREAS The Board of Directors of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
(“District”) has reviewed the proposed Russian Ridge Use and Management Plan Amendment
for the Mindego Ranch Area and all associated actions (“the Project”) and has reviewed the
Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) analyzing the environmental effects of the Project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the District Board of Directors that,
based upon the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program,
all comments received, and all substantial evidence in light of the whole record presented, the
Board of Directors find that:
1. Notice of the availability of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and all
hearings on the MND were given as required by law and the actions were conducted
pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines.
2. All interested parties desiring to comment on the MND were given the opportunity to
submit oral and written comments on the adequacy of the MND prior to this action by the
Board of Directors. Two comments were received.
3. Prior to approving the Project that is the subject of the MND, the Board has considered
the MND, along with all comments received during the public review process. In
response to comments received, staff has made modifications to the MND.
4. The Board finds that modifications to the MND in response to comments received during
the public review process clarify, amplify and make insignificant modifications to the
MND, which does not require recirculation in accordance with Section 15073.5 of the
CEQA Guidelines.
5. The Board finds that, on the basis of the whole record before it, including the Initial
Study and MND, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a
significant effect on the environment in that, although the proposed Project could have
significant effects on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case
since Mitigation Measures have been made a part of the Project to avoid such effects.
6. The Board adopts the MND and determines that the MND reflects the District’s
independent judgment and analysis.
7. The Board adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and will
require it to be implemented as part of the Project.
ATTACHMENT 8
8. The location and custodian of the documents or other material, which constitute the
record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are located at the offices of the
General Manager of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 330 Distel Circle,
Los Altos,
California 94022.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
R-14-15
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 11
AGENDA ITEM
Appointment of District Representatives to the Governing Board of the Midpeninsula Regional
Open Space District Financing Authority for Calendar Year 2014
BOARD PRESIDENT’S RECOMMENDATION
Approve appointment of Directors Cecily Harris, Nonette Hanko, Pete Siemens, and Curt Riffle
to serve on the Governing Board of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Financing
Authority (“Authority”) for Calendar Year 2014.
DISCUSSION
The Governing Board of the Authority consists of five members. In accordance with the Joint
Powers Agreement and its bylaws, the District’s Board President shall automatically be the
Chairperson of the Authority. Three of the other four members are appointed by the Board
President, to be selected from among the District’s Board of Directors. The fifth member is the
member of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors whose district encompasses the greatest
territory of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, and who is appointed to the Board
of the Financing Authority by the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. Supervisor Joseph
Simitian was appointed to the Authority Board by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors
on January 14, 2014, and will remain as the fifth member through the remainder of his term
which expires at the end of 2016.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Board Committee Review of this item is not required.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts associated with the recommended action.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notice was provided as required by the Brown Act. No additional notice is required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA).
R-14-15 Page 2
NEXT STEP
Once the Board has approved the appointments, the District staff will prepare a new roster of
Financing Authority Board Members for internal posting.
Responsible Department Manager:
Steve Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
Contact person:
Cecily Harris, Board President
R-14-16
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
AGENDA ITEM 10
AGENDA ITEM
Appointment of Board of Directors Standing Committee Members for Calendar Year 2014
BOARD PRESIDENT’S RECOMMENDATION
Approve the President’s appointments to the Board Standing Committees as well as approve the
appointments of Board representatives to other bodies, and determine the compensation status
for attendance at Board Committee meetings.
SUMMARY
Every year, the newly elected Board President appoints members to each of the Board’s
Committees.
DISCUSSION
The Board Policy on Committees (1.04) states that the Board President appoints Board members to
annual Standing Committees and to represent the District on outside bodies, with the consent of the
Board. The five (5) Board Standing Committees are:
1. Action Plan and Budget Committee (ABC)
2. Legislative, Funding and Public Affairs Committee (LFPAC)
3. Planning and Natural Resources (PNR)
4. Real Property Committee
5. Board Appointee Evaluation (BAE)
Following the Board Policy on Committees, Director Riffle (Board Treasurer) will be assigned as
one of the three members of ABC. At the January 8, 2014 Board meeting, the Board President
appointed Directors Pete Siemens, Curt Riffle and Yoriko Kishimoto to ABC.
Board Policy 6.03 (Compensation of Directors & Payment of Expenses) of the Board Policy Manual
states that all Standing Committees are compensable and compensability for attendance of Ad Hoc
Committee meetings is determined on an annual basis by the Board. It is recommended that Board
members be compensated for attendance at all Board Committee meetings, including any newly
formed Ad Hoc Committees. It is further recommended that Board member attendance at the two
outside bodies, the Bay Ridge Trail Council and California Joint Powers Insurance Authority
(CalJPIA), remain non-compensable.
R-14-16 Page 2
In accordance with California Public Resources Code Section 5536 and Board Policy 6.03, each
District Board member may receive compensation in an amount not to exceed one hundred dollars
($100) per day for each attendance at a Board meeting and no Board member may receive more than
five hundred dollars ($500) compensation in any one calendar month. Accordingly, with seven
Board members the maximum the entire Board could receive pursuant to state law is $42,000 per
year. The District’s current budget for Board meeting compensation has been and remains $25,000
per fiscal year. If it is determined that additional funds are required, a budget adjustment will be
requested during the FY2014-15 midyear budget review.
The proposed committee assignments for 2014 are as follows:
Action Plan and Budget:
• Pete Siemens
• Curt Riffle
• Yoriko Kishimoto
Planning and Natural Resources:
• Jed Cyr
• Yoriko Kishimoto
• Curt Riffle
Legislative, Funding and Public Affairs:
• Nonette Hanko
• Jed Cyr
• Larry Hassett
Real Property:
• Nonette Hanko
• Larry Hassett
• Cecily Harris
Board Appointee Evaluation:
• Jed Cyr
• Cecily Harris
• Pete Siemens
The Board Committee schedule is as follows:
• First Tuesdays of the month: LFPAC
• Second Tuesdays of the month: Real Property Committee
• Third Tuesdays of the month: Planning and Natural Resources
• Fourth and Fifth Tuesdays of the month: “Free” meeting dates available for Committee meetings.
Due to the nature of the Action Plan and Budget Committee and the Board Appointee Evaluation
Committee, these two committees will meet on an as-needed basis.
R-14-16 Page 3
FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no new or incremental fiscal impact associated with this action. Board
compensation for committee work is included in the annual budget and remains unchanged from
the previous year.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Public Notice was provided pursuant to the requirements of the Brown Act. No further notice is
required.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
This proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and no environmental review is required.
NEXT STEPS
If approved, staff will prepare a new roster of Board Committee assignments for posting
internally and on the District website.
Responsible Department Manager:
Steve Abbors, General Manager
Prepared by:
Jennifer Woodworth, District Clerk
Contact person:
Cecily Harris, Board President
R-14-01
Meeting 14-03
January 22, 2014
FINANCING AUTHORITY MEETING AGENDA ITEM 1
AGENDA ITEM
Acceptance of the Controller’s Annual Financial Report of the Midpeninsula Regional Open
Space District Financing Authority
CONTROLLER’S RECOMMENDATION
Accept the Annual Financial Report of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Financing Authority (Financing Authority).
DISCUSSION
In May 1996, the District and Santa Clara County established the Financing Authority with the
purpose of providing financing assistance to the District to fund the acquisition of land to
preserve and use as open space and to finance public capital improvements. Accordingly, the
District and the Financing Authority are accounted as one blended unit for financial statement
purposes. On July 18, 2013, the District’s independent auditors, Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co.,
issued its report on the District’s financial statements for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013
(Attachment 1).
Through March 2013, the District has sold six series of Financing Authority notes, with a total
par value of $199.6 million. A summary of the six financings is shown in Table 1 below.
Excluding the 2007 Notes, which raised no new money and only refinanced existing Financing
Authority notes, the District has issued $140.5 million (net) of Financing Authority notes,
funding $77 million of new land acquisitions and repaying $60 million of prior public and
private debt, which had been issued at higher interest rates and for shorter maturities.
Table 1: District Financings
Issuance Par Amount TIC* Purpose
1996 Notes $29.9 M 6.25% $11M Land + pay-off 1988 Notes
1999-1 Notes $29.7 M 5.26% $21M Land + pay-off 1992 Notes
1999-2 Notes $28.4 M 5.93% $15M Land + pay-off 1990 Notes
2004 Notes $31.9 M 4.99% $10M Land + pay-off 1993 COPs
2007 Notes $59.2 M 4.57% Pay-off 1996 & 1999-2 Notes
2011 Bonds $20.5 M 5.60% Purchase $20M of Land
* TIC = Total Interest Cost, including all costs of issuance
R-14-01 Page 2
Three Financing Authority note issues remained outstanding on March 31, 2013, with a total
outstanding balance of $102.86 million. This represented 74% of the District’s total outstanding
debt balance. The average total interest cost of these outstanding Financing Authority notes was
4.95%. A summary of the activity on the Financing Authority notes in fiscal 2013 is shown
below. During the 2013 fiscal year, $2.02 million of principal was repaid, $5.04 million of
interest was paid, and $111,468 of accretion was accrued. Accretion arises from the portion of
notes sold as capital appreciation bonds (CABs). CABs are like zero-coupon bonds; they do not
pay interest, instead they accrete each year to reflect the growing principal value to be paid at
maturity. The purpose of CABs is to lengthen the average life of the debt. The 2004 Notes
include $1.3 million of CABs.
Table 2:
FY2012-13 Financing Authority Activity
($ millions)
Balance
March 2012
Principal
Paid/Refunded
Accretion
Balance
March 2013
Interest Paid
FY2012-13
2004 Notes $31.45 $0.49 $0.11 $31.07 $1.39
2007 Notes $52.82 $1.53 $0.00 $51.29 $2.57
2011 Bonds $20.50 $0.00 $0.00 $20.50 $1.08
$104.77 $2.02 $0.11 $102.86 $5.04
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no unbudgeted fiscal impacts associated with the recommended action.
BOARD COMMITTEE REVIEW
Board Committee review is not required for this agenda item.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice was provided pursuant to the Brown Act. No additional notice is necessary.
CEQA COMPLIANCE
No compliance is required as this action is not a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act.
NEXT STEPS
None.
Attachment
1. District’s Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended March 31, 2013.
Prepared by:
Michael Foster, Controller
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL
OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
• L
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2
Statement of Position 8
Statement of Activities 9
Balance Sheet - Governmental Funds 10
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Statement of Net Assets II
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances -Governmental Funds 12
Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Change in Fund Balances -Total
Governmental Funds with the Statement of Activities 13
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 15
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances -Budget and Actual 37
1
1
1
1
1
Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co., LLP
Certified Public Accountants
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT
Board of Directors
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District
Los Altos, California
VALUE THE DIFFERENC
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities and each major fund of the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District as of and fo r the year ended March 31, 2013 which collectively
comprise the District's basic financial statements as listed in the Table of Contents.
Management's Responsibility fo r the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fa ir presentation of these fi nancial statements in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design,
implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fa ir presentation of fi nancial
statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditor's Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our
audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements
are fr ee fr om material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the
risks of material misstatement of the fi nancial statements, whether due to fr aud or error. In making those risk
assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity's preparation and fa ir presentation of the
financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not fo r the
purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. Accordingly, we express no
such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the
reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
presentation of the fi nancial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit
opinion.
Opinion
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fa irly in all material respects, the respective
financial position of the governmental activities and each major fu nd of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space
District as of March 31, 2013, and the respective changes in the financial position thereof fo r the year then ended
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America.
260 Sheridan Avenue. Suite 440 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Tel: 650.462.0400 Fax: 650.462.0500 www.vtdcpa.com
FRESNO • L AGUNA HillS • PALO ALTO · PLEASANTON • RANCHO CUCAMONGA • RIVERSIDE • SACRAMENTO
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management discussion
and analysis and the budgetary comparison information as listed in the table of contents be presented to
supp lement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements,
is required by the Government Auditing Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial
reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context.
We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with
auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquires of
management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with
management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements and other knowledge we obtained during
our audit of the basic fi nancial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the
information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or
provide any assurance.
Palo Alto, California
July18,2013
2
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
This section of the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District's (the District) basic financial statements
presents a narrative overview and analysis of the District's financial activities for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2013. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with our
basic financial statements.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
Property tax revenue exceeded expectations in fiscal 2013 due to higher than projected growth in assessed
valuations and income from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies. Reported tax revenue increased by
$1.5 million, or 5.3%. The assessed valuation of secured property within the District, as of July 1,2012,
increased by approximately 4.6%. District tax revenue growth never exactly matches the rate of increase in
assessed valuation because the District's hybrid fiscal year spans two tax years. During fiscal 2013, the
District received $0.9 million from trust funds related to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies within
the District. Approximately 30% of this redevelopment-related income represented one-time payments.
The District received 66% of its tax revenue from Santa Clara County and 34% from San Mateo County.
Property tax revenue increased by 5.4% in fiscal 2012 due to the resumption of supplemental (SBS13) tax
allocations by Santa Clara County and a change in the method of computing the year-end tax accrual.
The District added land and associated structures with appraised values totaling $13.5 million in fiscal 2013.
The three largest land acquisitions each involved partner support, either in the form of bargain sales or
grants. The largest property, the 952 acre Toto Ranch, on the San Mateo coast, was acquired for $3.5
million, approximately half of its appraised value, in a bargain purchase from the Peninsula Open Space
Trust (POST). The District received a $375,000 grant from the Living Landscape Resource Fund to
partially fund a $1.4 million addition to the El Corte de Madera Creek preserve. The Sempervirens Fund
sold the District a $1.0 million addition to this same preserve for half its appraised value. Net of grants and
gifts, the District used $5.S million of cash for land purchases in fiscal 2013, down from $9.1 million in
fiscal 2012. The District added $24.0 million and $10.0 million of land and associated structures in fiscal
2012 and 2011, respectively.
District expenditures were again within the armual budget. Recorded expenses include one significant non
recurring charge. The District made a decision to pay-off its $2.5 million CalPERS side fund liability in
March 2013. This pre-payment is expected to save the District over $2 million of retirement expense over
the next IS years. Excluding land acquisition transactions, debt service and the non-recurring CalPERS
payment, total District spending, $19.6 million, was $3.9 million, or 16.6%, below budget and up 14.1 %
over fiscal 2012. The largest factor in the budget variance was the re-scheduling of the next phase of the
multi-year Mt. Umunhum project into fiscal 2014. In fiscal 2013, salaries and benefits, excluding the
CalPERS side fund pay-off, increased by 5.9%, services and supplies expenses grew by 54.7% and non-land
capital spending and land acquisition expenses rose by 7.0%. The large percentage spending increase for
services and supplies was principally due to accruing $0.6 million of additional insurance expense to fully
cover the District's projected retrospective liability to the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority
(CJPIA).
3
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
The assets of the District exceeded liabilities at the close of the 2013 fiscal year by $299.3 million (net
assets). Of this amount, $259.6 million is invested in capital assets, net of related debt, $1.6 million is
restricted by the terms of existing District debt, $1.1 million is restricted to pay for future retirement medical
expenses, and the remaining $36.9 million is unrestricted. About 24% of the unrestricted balance is
projected to be used for capital expenditures in fiscal 2014 as the approved budget for fiscal 2014 forecasts
land purchases and other capital expenditures totaling $12.7 million, or $8.9 million net of associated grant
and gift income. Another $1.9 million of the unrestricted balance is an endowment to provide stewardship to
the Hawthorns property, acquired is fiscal 2011.The District's total net assets increased by $9.6 million in
fiscal 2013, as general and program revenues exceeded program expenditures. Program expenditures were
within budget. The District's total long-term debt obligations declined by $1.6 million, to $139.0 million.
OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This discussion and analysis is intended to serve as an introduction to the District's basic financial
statements. The District's basic financial statements consist of three components: (I) government-wide
financial statements; (2) fund financial statements and (3) notes to the basic financial statements. This
report also contains other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements
themselves.
Statements of Position (formerly Statement of Net Assets)
Presented below are condensed statements of position for the past two years:
Years ended: March 31, 2013 March 31, 2012 Increase (Decrease}
Assets
Current Assets $ 44,722,294 $ 48,018,249 $ (3,295,955)
Retiree Health Trust 1,097,306 1,334,306 (23 7,000)
Capital assets 398,589,610 385,932,042 12,657,568
Total assets 444 ,409 ,210 435,284.597 9,124,613
Liabilities
Accounts payable and
Other current liabilities 8,207,851 7,256,368 951,483
Long-term debt 13 6,913,221 138,328,785 (I,415,564}
Total liabilities 145,121.072 145,585,153 ( 464,08!}
Net Position
Invested in capital assets,
net of related debt 259,637,822 245,393,422 14,244,400
Restricted 2,730,928 1,567,913 1,163,015
Unrestricted 36,919,388 42,738,109 (5,818,721}
Total net position $ 222,288,138 $ 282,622,444 $ 9,588,694
4
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
Analysis of Net Assets
The District's assets at the close of this fiscal year are $299.3 million more than its liabilities. This is the
result of the District's inventory of capital assets. The net investment in capital assets, $259.6 million,
consists primarily of the District's over 60,000 acres of land in 26 open space preserves protected for
public enjoyment. The investment in capital assets is offset by long-term debt obligations on promissory
notes and lease revenue bonds. The net assets subject to external restrictions are composed of $1.6
million for debt service and $1.1 million for future retirement medical expenses. Unrestricted net assets
are used to finance additional capital projects. The District's budget for fiscal year 2014 includes $8.9
million for land acquisition and other capital projects, net of related grant and gift income.
Changes in Net Position
Presented below is an analysis of the District's revenues and expenses over the past two years:
Revenues
Program revenue
Charges for services
Grants and contributions
Land donations
General revenue
General property tax
Investment income
Other
Total Revenues
Expenses
Change in net assets
Increase % Increase
March 31, 2013 March 31, 20 12 (Decrease) ( Decrease)
$ 1,380,887 $ 1,319,580 $ 61,307 4.6
913,338 1,452,738 (539,400) (37.1 )
3,890,155 13,927,600 (10,037,445) (72.7)
30,269,803 28,737,153 1,532,650 5.3
287,642 374,544 (86,902) (23.2)
298,068 393,542 (95,474) (24.3)
37,039,943 46,205,157 (9,165,214) �
27,451,249 22,601,256 4,849,993 21.5
$ 9,588,694 $ 23,603,901 $ 04.015,207) �
Analysis of Change in Net Position
For the year ended March 31,2013, the District's net position increased by $9.6 million. The net
position increase was unusually large in fiscal 2012 because the District received its largest ever land
donation, $13.9 million, in that year.
Progranl revenues include rental income, grants, gifts of land, cash donations and park management fees
from Santa Clara County. Grant income is tied to specific preserve development projects and land
acquisitions. In fiscal 2013, the District received $538,338 of preserve development-related grant
income and a $375,000 acquisition grant. The District received $3.9 million of land donations, mostly
from POST and Sempervirens Fund. Rental income increased by 5.5%, due to acquisition ofland
containing additional rental assets.
5
MID PENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
Tax revenue increased by $1.5 million, or 5.3%, in fiscal 2013. A majority of the increase, $0.9 million,
was income from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies within the District. Approximately 30% of
this redevelopment-related income is non-recurring. Investment income declined due to smaller cash
balances and lower interest rates.
Fiscal 2013 expenses include two extraordinary items: $2.5 million to pay-off the District's CalPERS
side fund liability and $0.6 million to fully cover the District's projected retrospective insurance liability
to CJPIA. Excluding these two items, total expenses increased by $1. 7 million, or 7.6%, from the prior
year.
GENERAL FUND
The General Fund balance sheet includes all District accounts except for capital assets, retirement assets
and debt. At March 31, 2013, the General Fund had a fund balance of $37.5 million, down $4.3 million
from the prior year-end. This decrease was the result of using cash reserves to purchase land. Except
for the $1.9 million Hawthorns endowment fund, all of this fund balance is unreserved and designated
for future capital projects, including $8.9 million budgeted for capital expenditures in fiscal year 2014,
net of associated grant and gift funding.
DEBT SERVICE FUND
The only asset in the Debt Service Fund, $1.6 million, is a reserve fund required by the terms of the
District's 2004 Revenue Bonds. The funds are held by the bond trustee and will be used to make the
final debt service payment on this issue in 2033. The District receives the interest earned on this reserve
fund, and this is shown on the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance-
Governmental Funds. Total debt service in fiscal year 2013 was $8.9 million, consisting of $2.8 million
of principal and $6.0 million of interest.
CAPITAL ASSETS
As of March 31, 2013, the District's investment in capital assets is $398.4 million, net of accumulated
depreciation. The District added $10.9 million of land in fiscal year 2013, representing 92% of the total
increase in capital assets, and has conunitted $4.4 million of its fund balance for various uncompleted
capital projects included in construction in progress. Additional information on the District's capital
assets can be found in Note 4 in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements.
6
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
LONG-TERM DEBT
As of March 31, 2013, the District's long-term debt includes $2.5 million of subordinated notes issued
to sellers in District land purchase transactions, $100.7 million of Authority revenue bonds sold to the
public in 2004, 2007 and 2011, $18.1 million of District refunding promissory notes sold to the public in
2005 and 2012, and $17.7 million of accreted interest, unamortized premium and unamortized loss on
refunding. The 2004 and 2007 Authority bonds and 2005 Refunding notes were originally rated AAA
by Moody's and Standard & Poor's based on municipal bond insurance policies purchased from Ambac
Assurance Corporation and MBIA. Due to substantial losses from mortgage-related risk exposures,
these insurance companies no longer carry investment grade credit ratings. The District's current stand
alone credit rating on promissory notes is AA+ from Fitch and AA from Standard & Poor's. Additional
information on the District's long-term obligations can be found in Note 6 in the Notes to the Basic
Financial Statements.
BUDGETARY PERFORMANCE
The Budgetary Comparison Schedule-General Fund shows how the District financial results compared
to the original budget adopted in March 2012 and the final budget adjusted in December 2012.
Due principally to delays in completing capital projects containing grant and gift funding, total District
revenue, exclusive of land donations, was under budget by $2.5 million, or 7%. Most of these grants
and gifts have been re-budgeted for receipt in fiscal 2014. Tax revenue was 4.8% above budget, most
due to the unexpected level of income from the dissolution of redevelopment agencies within the
District.
Total expenditures were $3.6 million, or 11.3%, below budget, leaving an excess of revenue over
expenditures, exclusive of land donations, of $4.6 million, or $0.5 million more than budgeted.
Excluding land acquisition transactions, debt service, and the non-recurring CalPERS pay-off, total
District spending, $19.6 million, was $3.9 million, or 16.6%, below the final budget. The largest factor
in the spending variance was the re-scheduling of the next phases of the multi-year Mt. Umunhurn
capital project into fiscal 2014. Salaries and benefits, excluding the non-recurring CalPERS pay-off,
were $0.5 million, or 4.4%, below budget, services and supplies cost $0.3 million, or 5.7%, less than
budget, non-land capital spending was $2.8 million, or 48.8%, under budget, and land acquisition
support expenses were $0.3 million, or 39.5% under budget. This overall operating budget performance,
83% of budget, was at the low end of the range of recent years (82% to 94% of budget).
7
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
MARCH 31, 2013
ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET
The Board of Directors adopted the District's budget for fiscal year 2014 on March 13,2013. This
budget assumes approximately 5% growth in property tax revenue. The budget projects spending $12.7
million for land and other capital projects, or $8.9 million net of associated grant and gift income.
Operating expenditures and debt service are budgeted at $17.5 million and $8.9 million, respectively. If
all revenues and expenditures occur as budgeted, the District's cash position would decrease by $5.0
million in fiscal year 2014. Since the adoption of the budget, the District learned that property tax
revenue in fiscal 2014 is likely to exceed the budget projections by some $1.5 million, due to higher
growth in assessed valuation of secured and unsecured property in both counties and additional
redevelopment property tax trust funds.
The District is currently pursuing potential land acquisitions and other capital projects which would use
up all undesignated reserves within three years.
ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION
This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the District's finances for all those
with an interest in the District's finances. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this
report or requests for additional financial information should be addressed to the District Clerk, 330
Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA 94022.
8
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
MARCH 31, 2013
Cash and investments (Note 2)
Receivables
Taxes
Interest
Deposit
Rent
Prepaid expense
ASSETS
Restricted cash and investments (Note 2)
Note receivable (Note 3)
Deferred charges
Net OPEB Asset (Note 9)
Capital assets (Note 4)
Nondepreciable
Land
Construction in progress
Depreciable, net of accumulated depreciation
Structures and improvements
Infrastructure
Equipment
Vehicles
Total assets
Accounts payable
Accrued liabilities
Deposits payable
Deferred revenue
Interest payable
Compensated absences (Note 5)
Due in one year
Due in more than one year
Long-term debt (Note 6)
Due within one year
Due in more than one year
Total liabilities
LIABILITIES
NET POSITION (Note 11)
Invested in capital assets, net of related debt
Restricted for debt service
Restricted for OPEB
Unrestricted
Total net position
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
9
$ 32,53 5,5 13
8,027,198
42,580
1,046,895
612
28,997
1,633,622
195,653
1,211,224
1,097,306
379,410,829
4,396,366
7,397,095
5,146,364
775,677
1,463,279
444,409,210
811,242
1,304,72 1
81,730
1,971,040
524,6 12
221,424
1,254,515
3,293,082
135,658,706
145,121 ,072
259,6 37,822
1,633,622
1,097,306
36,919,388
$ 299,288,138
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
Program expenses:
General government:
Salaries
Benefits
CALPERS side fund redemption
Directors
Services and supplies
Depreciation
Interest
Total program expenses
Program revenues:
Charges for services
Capital grants and operating contributions
Land donation
Total program revenues
Net program expenses
General revenues:
Property tax increment
Investment income
Miscellaneous
Total general revenues
Changes in net assets
Net position -beginning of the year
Net position -end of the year
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
10
$ 8,309,803
3,961,927
2,51 0,958
31,500
4,360,703
839,870
7,436,488
27,451,249
1,380,937
913,338
3,890,155
6,184,430
21,266,819
30,269,803
287,642
298,068
30,855,513
9,588,694
289,699,444
$ 299,288,138
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS BALANCE SHEET
MARCH 31, 2013
Debt
General Service
Fund Fund
ASSETS
Cash and investments (Note 2) $ 32,535,513 $
Receivables
Taxes 8,027,198
Interest 42,580
Deposit 1,046,895
Rent 612
Prepaid expense 28,997
Restricted cash and investments (Note 2) 1,633,622
Note receivable (Note 3) 195,653
Total Assets $41,877,448 $ 1,633,622
LIAB�ITIES
Accounts payable $ 811,242 $
Accrued liabilities 1,304,721
Deposits payable 81,730
Deferred revenue (Note 3) 2,166,693
Total liabilities 4,364,386
FUND BALANCES
Restricted
Debt service 1,633,622
Unassigned 37,513,062
Total fund balance 37,513,062 1,633,622
TOTAL LIAB�ITIES AND FUND BALANCE $ 41,877,448 $ 1,633,622
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
11
Total
Governmental
Funds
$ 32,535,513
8,027,198
42,580
1,046,895
612
28,997
1,633,622
195,653
$ 43,511,070
$ 811,242
1,304,721
81,730
2,166,693
4,364,386
1,633,622
37,513,062
39,146,684
$ 43,511,070
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
RECONCILIATION OF THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS -BALANCE SHEET
WITH THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
MARCH 31, 2013
Total fund balances reported on the governmental funds balance sheet
Amounts reported for Governmental Activities in the Statement of Net Position are
different from those reported in the Governmental funds above because of the
following:
CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets used in Governmental Activities are not current assets or financial
resources and therefore are not reported in the Governmental funds.
NOTES RECEIVABLE
Notes receivables are not available to pay for current period expenditures and,
therefore, are deferred on the modified accrual basis in the balance sheet of the
Governmental funds
DEFERRED CHARGES
Bond issuance costs are expended in the Governmental funds when paid, however,
they are capitalized and amortized over the life of the corresponding bonds for
purposes of the Statement of Net Position
LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
The liabilities below are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not
reported in the Governmental funds:
Long-tenn debt
Accrued interest payable
Compensated absences
NET OPEB ASSET
Net OPEB Asset is not available to pay for current period expenditures and, therefore,
is not recognized in the Governmental funds but deferred on the Statement of Net
Position
NET POSITION OF GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
12
$
$
39,146,684
398,589,610
195,653
1,211,224
(138,951,788)
(524,612)
(1,475,939)
1,097,306
299,288,138
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
Debt
General Service
Fund
REVENUES
Property tax $ 30,269,803 $
Grant income 913,338
Investment income 221,933
Property management (Note 7) 1,380,937
Other income 145,800
Total Revenues 32,931,811
EXPENDITURES
Current
Salaries 8,309,803
Benefits 6,014,461
Directors 31,500
Services and supplies 4,356,948
Capital outlay
New land purchases 6,194,600
Land acquisition support costs 517,312
Structures and improvements 2,206,010
Equipment 540,204
Vehicles 152,912
Debt service
Principal
Interest and fiscal charges
Total Expenditures 28,323,750
EXCESS (DEFICIENCy) OF
REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES 4,608,061
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES):
Transfers in
Transfers out (8,876,542)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (8,876,542)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (4,268,481)
Fund Balance at beginning of year 41,781,543
Fund Balance at end of year $ 37,513,062 $
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
13
Fund
65,709
65,709
2,842,752
6,033,790
8,876,542
(8,810,833)
8,876,542
8,876,542
65,709
1,567,913
1,633,622
Total
$ 30,269,803
913,338
287,642
1,380,937
145,800
32,997,520
8,309,803
6,014,461
31,500
4,356,948
6,194,600
517,312
2,206,010
540,204
152,912
2,842,752
6,033,790
37,200,292
(4,202,772)
8,876,542
(8,876,542)
(4,202,772)
43,349,456
$ 39,146,684
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS WITH THE
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
The schedule below reconciles the net changes in fund balances reported on the Governmental Funds Statement
of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, which measures only changes in current assets and
current liabilities on the modified accrual basis, with the change in net position of Governmental Activities
reported in the Statement of Activities, which is prepared on the full accrual basis.
Net change in fund balances -total Governmental funds
Amounts reported fo r governmental activities in the Statement of Activities are differ ent
because of the fo llowing:
CAPITAL ASSET TRANSACTIONS
Governmental fu nds report capital outlays as expenditures. However, in the Statement of
Activities the cost of those assets is capitalized and allocated over their estimated useful
lives and reported as depreciation expense.
The capital outlay expenditures are therefore added back to fu nd balance
Depreciation expense is deducted fr om the fund balance
Loss on disposal of capital assets is expensed on the statement of activities, but does not
impact the Governmental fu nds.
Donation of land is not reported in Governmental fu nds. However, the fa ir value of the
land is recognized as revenue in the statement of activities.
Payment of principal on general obligation bonds is an expenditure in the governmental
funds, but it reduces long-term liabilities in the statement of net position and does not
affect the statement of activities.
NOTES RECEIVABLE
Repayment of notes receivable is reported as revenue in Governmental funds, and thus,
has the effect of increasing fund balance because current financial resources have been
received. However, the loan payments reduce the receivables in the statement of net assets
and do not generate revenue in the statement of activities.
LONG-TERM DEBT PROCEEDS AND PAYMENTS
Repayment of bond principal is an expenditure in the Governmental fu nds, but in the
Statement of Net Assets the repayment reduces long-term liabilities.
Accreted Interest on capital appreciation bonds
Repayment of debt principal on current interest promissory notes
Change in accrued interest payable
Amortization of bond premium
Amortization of loss on refunding
Amortization of deferred amounts
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
14
$ (4,202,772)
9,611,038
(839,871 )
(3,754)
3,890,155
2,015,000
(11,305)
(1,080,299)
827,752
85,036
163,573
(339,194)
(68,241)
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -TOTAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS WITH THE
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
ACCRUAL OF NON-CURRENT ITEMS
The amounts below included in the Statement of Activities do not provide or (require) the
use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as revenue or expenditures
in Governmental funds (net change):
Compensated absences
Net OPEB Asset
CHANGE IN NET POSITION OF GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
15
$
(221,424)
(237,000)
9,588,694
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
NOTE 1-SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (the District) was formed in 1972 to acquire and preserve public
open space land in northern and western portions of Santa Clara County. In June 1976, the southern and eastern
portions of San Mateo County were annexed to the District. The District annexed a small portion of the northern
tip of Santa Cruz County in 1992. In September 2004, the District completed the Coastside Protection Program,
which extended the District boundaries to the Pacific Ocean in San Mateo County, from the southern borders of
Pacifica to the San Mateo/Santa Cruz County line.
Reporting Entity
As required by generally accepted accounting principles, these basic financial statements present the
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and its component unit. The component unit discussed in the
following paragraph is included in the District's reporting entity because of the significance of their operational or
financial relationships with the District.
Blended Component Unit. The District and the County of Santa Clara entered into a joint exercise of
powers agreement dated May I, 1996, creating the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Financing
Authority (the Authority), pursuant to the California Government Code. The District is financially
accountable for the Authority, as it appoints a voting majority of the governing board; is able to impose its
will in the Authority; and the Authority provides specific financial benefits to, and imposes specific financial
burdens on, the District. The Authority was formed for the sole purpose of providing financing assistance to
the District to fund the acquisition of land to preserve and use as open space. As such, the Authority is an
integral part of the District, and accordingly, all of the Authority's activity is blended within the
accompanying debt service fund.
Basis of Presentation
The District's Basic Financial Statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. The Government Accounting Standards Board is the acknowledged
standard setting body for establishing accounting and fmancial reporting standards followed by governmental
entities in the United States of America.
These Statements require that the financial statements described below be presented.
Government-wide Statements. The Statement of Net Position (formerly the Statement of Net Assets) and
the Statement of Activities display information about the primary government (the District) and its component
unit. These statements include the financial activities of the overall District government. Eliminations have
been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities. Governmental activities generally are
financed through taxes, intergovernmental revenues, and other nonexchange transactions.
The Statement of Activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each
function of the District's governmental activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated
with a program or function and, therefore, are clearly identifiable to a particular function. Program revenues
include (a) charges paid by the recipients of goods or services offered by the programs, (b) grants and
contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational needs of a particular program and (c) fees, grants
16
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
and contributions that are restricted to financing the acquisition or construction of capital assets. Revenues
that are not classified as program revenues, including all taxes, are presented as general revenues.
Fund Financial Statements. The fund financial statements provide information about the District's fu nds,
including blended component units. The emphasis of fu nd financial statements is on major individual
governmental fu nds, each of which is displayed in a separate column.
Major Funds
Major funds are defined as fu nds that have either assets, liabilities, revenues or expenditures/expenses equal to ten
percent of their fund-type total and five percent of the grand total. The General Fund is always a major fund. The
District may also select other fu nds it believes should be presented as major funds.
The District reported all of its fu nds as major governmental funds in the accompanying financial statements:
General Fund. The General Fund is the general operating fund of the District. It is used to account for all
financial resources. The major revenue sources for this Fund are property taxes, grant revenues and interest
income. Expenditures are made for public safety and other operating expenditures.
Debt Service Fund. The Debt Service Fund is used to account for accumulation of resources fo r, and the
payment of long-term debt principal, interest and related costs. Resources are provided by General Fund
transfers and interest income on unspent funds.
Basis of Accounting
The government-wide fmancial statements are reported using the economic resources measurement focus and the
full accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recorded when earned and expenses are recorded at the time
liabilities are incurred, regardless of when the related cash flows take place.
Governmental funds are reported using the current financial resources measurement fo cus and the modified
accrual basis of accounting. Under this method, revenues are recognized when measurable and available. The
District considers all revenues reported in the governmental fu nds to be available if the revenues are collected
within sixty days after year--end. Expenditures are recorded when the related fund liability is incurred, except for
principal and interest on long-term debt, claims and judgments, and compensated absences, which are recognized
as expenditures to the extent they have matured. Governmental capital asset acquisitions are reported as
expenditures in governmental funds. Proceeds of governmental long-term debt and acquisitions under capital
leases are reported as other financing sources.
Non-exchange transactions, in which the District gives or receives value without directly receiving or giving
equal value in exchange, include taxes, grants, entitlements, and donations. On the accrual basis, revenue from
taxes is recognized in the fiscal year fo r which the taxes are levied or assessed. Revenue from grants,
entitlements, and donations is recognized in the fiscal year in which all eligibility requirements have been
satisfied.
The District may fund programs with a combination of cost-reimbursement grants and general revenues. Thus,
both restricted and unrestricted net assets may be available to finance program expenditures. The District's policy
is to first apply restricted grant resources to such programs, fo llowed by general revenues, if necessary.
17
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Budgets and Budgetary Accounting
The District's Board of Directors adopts an annual operating budget for the District as a whole, which includes
both its General and Debt Service Funds on or before March 3 I, for the ensuing fiscal year. The Board of
Directors may amend the budget by resolution during the fiscal year. The legal level of control, the level at which
expenditures may not legally exceed the budget, is at the category level.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of basic financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect certain reported
amounts and disclosures. Accordingly, actual results could differ from those estimates.
Compensated Absences
The total amount of liability for compensated absences is reflected in the basic financial statements. See Note 5
for additional information regarding compensated absences.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the statement of cash flows the District defines cash and cash equivalents to include all cash and
temporary investments with original maturities of three months or less from the date of acquisition.
Property Taxes
Property taxes are levied by Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties and a portion is distributed to the District. The
District recognizes property taxes as revenue in the fiscal year of levy.
Debt Discount and Issuance Costs
Debt discount, premiums, and issuance costs are capitalized as an offset to long-term debt and amortized using the
straight line method over the life of the related debt. Issuance costs for the District's tax-exempt commercial
paper short-term borrowings are expensed as incurred.
Subseq uent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events for recognition and disclosure through July 18, 2013, which is the
date the financial statements were available to be issued.
NOTE 2 -CASH AND INVESTMENTS
Policies
The District and its fiscal agents invest in individual investments and in investment pools. Individual investments
are evidenced by specific identifiable pieces of paper called securities instruments, or by an electronic entry
registering the owner in the records of the institution issuing the security, called the book entry system. In order
to maximize security, the District employs the Trust Department of a bank as the custodian of all District
managed investments, regardless of their form.
18
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
California Law requires banks and savings and loan institutions to pledge government securities with a market
value of 110% of the District 's cash on deposit for first trust deed mortgage notes with a value of 150% ofthe
District's cash on deposit as collateral fo r these deposits. Under California Law this collateral is held in an
investment pool by an independent financial institution in the District's name and places the District ahead of
general creditors of the institution pledging the collateral.
The District's investments are carried at fa ir value, as required by generally accepted accounting principles. The
District adjusts the carrying value of its investments to reflect their fa ir value at each fiscal year end, and it
includes the effects of these adjustments in income fo r that fiscal year. In the District's case, fair value equals fair
market value, since all District 's investments are readily marketable.
Classification
Cash and investments as of March 31, 2013, are classified in the financial statements as shown below, based on
whether or not their use is restricted.
Cash and cash equivalents, available for District operation
Restricted cash and investments
Total Cash and Investments
The Districfs cash and investments consist of the fo llowing at March 31, 2013:
Cash in bank
Deposits
Investments
Total Cash and Investments
19
$
$
$
$
32,535,5 13
1,633,622
34,169,135
13,422
2,084,646
32,071,067
34,169,135
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the District's Investment Policy
The District 's Investment Policy and the California Government Code allow the District to invest in the
fo llowing, provided the credit ratings of the issuers are acceptable to the District and approved percentages and
maturities are not exceeded. The table below also identifies certain provisions of the California Government
Code or the District's Investment Policy where it is more restrictive:
Maximum Minimum Maximum Maxi mum
Remaining Credit Percentage Investment
Authorized Investment Type Maturity Quality of Portfolio In One Issuer
US Treasury Obligations 5 years N/A No Limit No Limit
US Agency Securities 5 years N/A No Limit No Limit
California Local Agency Investment Fund Upon Demand N/A $40 million per
account
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 5 years N/A 30% No Limit
Bankers Acceptances 180 days N/A 40% 30%
Commercial Paper 270 days A 25% 10%
Repurchase Agreements I year N/A No Limit No Limit
Reverse Repurchase Agreements 92 days N/A 20% No Limit
Medium Term Notes 5 years A 30% No Limit
Money Market and Mutual Funds N/A Highest Category 20% 10%
Investments Authorized by Debt Agreements
The District must maintain required amounts of cash and investments with trustees or fi scal agents under the
terms of certain debt issues. These fu nds are used if the District fa ils to meet its obligations under these debt
issues.
20
MlDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fa ir value of an
investment. Normally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the sensitivity of its fa ir value
changes to changes in market interest rates. The District generally manages its interest rate risk by holding
investments to maturity .
Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the District's investments (including investments held by
bond trustees) to market interest rate fluctuations is provided by the fo llowing table that shows the distribution of
the District's investments by maturity or earliest call date:
12 Months More than
Investment Type or less 12 Months Total
Held by District
California Local Agency Investment Fund $ 7,803,382 $ $ 7,803,382
Santa Clara County Pool 22,634,063 22,634,063
Held by Trustees
US Federal Agency Securities 1,631,647 1,631,647
Money Market Mutual Funds 1,975 1,975
Total Investments $ 30,439,420 $ 1,631,647 $ 32,071,067
The District is a participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAlF) that is regulated by California
Government Code Section 16429 under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of Cal ifornia. The District
reports its investment in LAlF at the fa ir value amount provided by LAlF, which is the same as the value of the
pool share. The balance is available for withdrawal on demand, and is based on the accounting records
maintained by LAlF, which are recorded on an amortized cost basis. Included in LAlF's investment portfolio are
collateralized mortgage obligations, mortgage-backed securities, other asset-backed securities, loans to certain
state funds, and floating rate securities issued by fe deral agencies, government-sponsored enterprises, United
States Treasury Notes and Bills, and corporations. At March 31, 2013, these investments had an average maturity
date ofless than one year.
The fa ir value of the District's investment in the pool is reported at amounts based on the District's pro-rata share
of the fa ir value provided by the County Treasurer for the entire portfolio (in relation to the amortized cost of the
portfolio). The balance available for withdrawal is based on the accounting records maintained by the County
Treasurer, which is recorded on the amortized costs basis. Santa Clara County Pool fu nds were available for
withdrawal on demand and had an average maturity date of less than one year.
21
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Credit Risk
Credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not ful fill its obligation to the holder of the investment.
This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization.
Presented below is the actual rating as of March 31,2013, for each investment type as provided by Moody's
investment rating system.
Investment Type
Held by Trustees
US Federal Agency Securities
Money Market Mutual Funds
California Local Agency Investment Fund
Santa Clara County Pool
Total Investments
Concentration Risk
Not Rated
$
7,803,382
22,634,063
$ 30,437,445
Aaa
$1,631,647
1,975
$ 1,633,622
Total
$ 1,631,647
1,975
7,803,382
22,634,063
$ 32,071,067
The District was not exposed to concentration of credit risk because it had no investments in any one issuer that
exceeded 5% of its total investment portfolio.
Restricted Cash and Investments
The District has the fo llowing restrictions on cash and investments:
Restricted for Debt Service. The District has moneys held by Bank of New York as trustee, pledged to the
payment or security of its outstanding bond issues. All transactions associated with debt serve are
administered by the Bank. The cash and investment amounts were $1,633,622 as of March 31, 2013 .
NOTE 3 -NOTES RECEIVABLE
On December 17, 1997, the District sold the title to and possession of a SO-year fee determinable estate 10-acre
parcel near the Skyline Ridge Open Space Preserve. The District financed the purchase in the amount of
$288,800 over 25 years at a rate of 10% per annum. Monthly principal and interest payments of $2,634 are due
on the 1st of each month and late ifnot paid by the 10th , with the final payment scheduled December 1, 2022. The
outstanding balance at March 31, 2013 was $195,653. On November 10, 2011, the District received the gift of
the 79 acre Hawthorns property, in Portola Valley, California, and an endowment of $2,018,445 to manage the
property in perpetuity. The outstanding balance of the endowment liabil ity was $1,971,040 as of March 31, 2013.
22
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
NOTE 4 -CAPITAL ASSETS
Capital assets are recorded at the time of purchase and are capitalized at cost.
The District capitalizes as part of the asset cost, any significant interest incurred during the construction phase of
the asset.
Deprec iation is provided using the straight-line method for assets other than land. Estimated useful lives are as
fo llows:
Structures and improvements
Infrastructure
Equipment
Vehicles
10 to 30 years
30 to 40 years
5 to 20 years
10 to 20 years
Changes in capital assets accounts are summarized below:
Capital assets not being depreciated
Land
Construction in progress
Total capital assets not being depreciated
Capital assets being depreciated
Structure and improvements
Infrastructure
Equipment
Vehicles
Total capital assets being depreciated
Less accumulated depreciation for
Structure and improvements
Infrastructure
Equipment
Vehicles
Total accumulated depreciation
Net caplial assets being depreciated
Total capital assets, net
Balance at
March 31,2012
$ 368,468,116
4,778,954
373,247,070
14, I 02,668
4,403,183
1,302,609
2,691,791
22,500,25 1
6 ,9 1 6,8 59
1,064,055
645,676
1,188,689
9,81 5,279
12,684,972
$ 385,932,042
Additions &
Transfers
$ 10,942,7 13
1,75 1 ,944
12,694,657
573,007
2,01 0,865
213,859
143,337
2,94 1,068
361,721
203,629
91,248
183,273
839,871
2,101 ,197
$ 14,795,854
Retirements & Balance at
Transfers March 31, 2013
$ $ 379,41 0,829
(2,134,532) 4,396,366
(2,13 4,532) 383,807,195
14,675,675
6,41 4,048
(7,250) 1,509,2 18
(40,891) 2,794,237
(48,14 1) 25,393,178
7,278,580
1,267,684
(3,383) 733,541
(4 1 ,004) 1,330,958
(44,387) 10,610,763
(3,754) 14,782,4 15
$ (2,138,286) $ 398,589,610
Construction in progress represents construction of structures, equipment and improvements and infrastructure not
yet placed in service at March 31, 2013.
23
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
At March 31, 2013, the District had made commitments of approximately $6,676,940 for construction work, legal
and consulting fe es, and purchases of supplies and equipment.
NOTE 5 -ACCURED COMPENSATED ABSENCES
In accordance with the District's memorandum of understanding with various employee groups, emp loyees
accrue fifteen days of vacation during the first nine years of service, twenty days between service years 10 and
fo urteen, twenty-one days between service years fifteen and nineteen, twenty-three days between service years
twenty and tw enty-four, and twenty-five days after twenty-five years of service. An employee may accumulate
vacation time earned to a maximum of two times the amount ofhislher annual vacation accrual.
Full-time employees accrue twelve days of sick leave annually fr om the date of employment. An employee may
accumulate sick leave time earned on an unlimited basis. Upon resignation, separation fr om service, or retirement
fr om District employment, workers in good standing with ten or more years of District employment shall receive
a cash payment of the equivalent cash value of accrued sick leave as fo llows:
Years of Empl oym ent
10-15
16-20
21 or more
Percentage of equivalent
cash value of accrued
sick leave
20%
25%
30%
An employee hired before August 9, 2006, who retires fr om the District shall receive a cash payment of the
percentage of equivalent cash value or accrued sick leave based on years of employment as described above, and
apply the remainder of the equivalent cash value toward his/her cost of retiree medical plan premiums andlor
other qualified medical expenses. Upon retirement, the amount qualified and designated for retiree medical costs
shall be deposited in the Retiree Health Savings (RRS) plan, set up by the District. The cost for maintaining the
retiree's RRS account and the annual fee for the reimbursement process of qualified medical expenses will be
paid for by the retiree.
An employee hired on or after August 9, 2006, who retires tram the District may elect to receive only a cash
payment of the percentage of equivalent cash value of accrued sick leave based on years of employment as
described above.
In all cases the equivalent cash value of accrued sick leave will be based on current rate of pay as ofthe date of
separation fr om District employment.
The District accrues for all salary-related items in the government-wide statements for which they are liable to
make a payment directly and incrementally associated with payments made for compensated absences on
termination. Accrued compensated absences were $1,475,939 as of March 31,2013.
24
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
The change in compensated absences was as fo llows:
Beginning Balance, at April 1, 2012
Net change
Ending balance, at March 31, 2013
Current Portion
NOTE 6 -LONG-TERM DEBT
Summarized below are the current year's activities for long -term debt:
Original
Issue Beginning
Amount Balance Additions
Current Interest Promissory Notes
Hunt Living Trust Promissory Note
5.00-5.50%, due 4/212023 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 $
Daloia Land Contract Promissory Note
6.25%, due 10/10120 17 240,000 117,846
2005 Refunding Promissory Notes
3.25-5.00%, due 41112015 4,630,000 3,165,000
Bergman Note 850,000 850,000
2012 Promissory Refunding Note 15,790,000 15,790,000
Unamortized Premium 2,146,066
Total promissory notes 23,01 0,000 23,568,9 12
Current Interest Revenue Bonds
2004 Revenue Bonds
2.00-5.40%, due 9/112034 30,560,000 29,385,000
2007 Series A Rev Refunding Bonds
4.00-5.00%, due 9/112027 52,415,000 52,4 15,000
2007 Series B-T Taxable Revenue
Refunding Bonds, 5.15%, due 9/1n012 6,785,000 405,000
20 Il Lease Revenue Bond 20,500,000 20,500,000
Unamortized Premium NA 369,290
, Unamortized loss on refunding NA (3,640,802)
Total revenue bonds 105,535,000 99,433,488
Capital Appreciation Bonds and Notes
2004 Lease Revenue Bonds Accretion 1,340,010 2,061,515 111,468
2012 Promissory Refunding Notes 15,474,707 968,830
Total Accret ion 15,228,031 17,536,222 1,080,298
Total debt $ 143,773,031 $ 140,538,622 $ 1,080,298
2S
Governmental
Activities
$ 1,254,5 15
221 ,424
$ 1,475,939
$ 221 ,424
Amount
Ending due within
Retirements Balance one year
$ $ 1,500,000 $
17,753 100,093 18,888
810,000 2,355,000 1,145,000
850,000
15,790,000 540,000
67,391 2,078,675
895,144 22,673,768 1,703,888
490,000 28,895,000 620,000
1,120,000 51,295,000 630,000
405,000
20,500,000
96,182 273,108
339,194 (3,301 ,608) 339,194
2,450,376 97,661,500 1,589,194
2,172,983
16,443,537
18,616,520
$ 3,345,520 $ 138,951 ,788 $ 3,293,082
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Promissory Notes
Hunt Living Trust Promissory Note. On April I, 2003, the District entered into a $1,500,000 promissory
note with the Hunt Living Trust as part of a lease and management agreement. The note is due in fu ll on
April I, 2023 and bears interest at 5.5% semi-annually through April I, 20 13 and 5.0% per annum until the
maturity, or prior redemption, of the note. At March 31, 2013, the outstan ding balance on the note was
$1 ,500,000.
Daloia Land Purchase Contract Promissory Note. During fiscal year ending 2003 the District entered into
a land purchase contract promissory note in the amount of $240,000. The promissory note bears interest at a
fixed rate of 6.25% and matures October 10,2017. At March 31, 2013, the outstanding balance of the Daloia
Land Contract note was $100,093.
2005 Refunding Promissory Note. On June 30, 2005, the District issued $4,630,000 of 2005 Refunding
Promissory Notes for the purpose of refunding all of its outstanding 1995 Promissory Notes. The 2005 notes
bear interest rates from 3.25% to 5.00%. Principal and interest rates are due semi-annually on March I and
September I. At March 31,2013, the outstan ding balance was $2,355,000.
2010 Bergmau Note. On Nov 30, 20 I 0, the District issued a promissory note with Principal of $850,000 and
interest of 4% to finance the purchase of land. Interest and principal are due on a quarterly basis beginning
February 28'h, 20 11 and mature on November 30, 20 15. At March 31, 2013, the outstanding balance was
$850,000.
2012 Refunding Promissory Notes. On January 19. 20 12, the District advance refunded $34,652,643 in
1999 lease revenue bonds by issuing $3 1 ,264,707 in promissory notes. The 2012 notes bear interest rates
ranging fr om 2.00% to 6.04%. The notes are a blend of current interest and capital appreciation notes
maturing through 2042. The net proceeds of$33,295,663 (after payment of $278,683 in underwriting fe es,
insurance, and other issuance costs and a premium of $2,309,638) were used to purchase U.S government
securities. Those securities were deposited in an irrevocable trust with an escrow agent to prov ide fo r all
future debt service payments on the 1999 Series bonds. As a result, the 1999 Series bonds are considered to
be defeased and the liability fo r those bonds has been removed from the long-term debt in the financial
statements. At March 31, 20 13,the outstan ding balance of the notes, including accreted interest of $832,793,
was $32,233,537.
Revenue Bonds
2004 Revenue Bonds. On January 20, 2004, the Authority on behalf of the District, issued $3 1,900,0 I 0 of
2004 Revenue Bonds for the purpose of acquiring land to preserve and use as open space, repay a portion of a
1995 Promissory Note, purchase a reserve fu nd surety policy, and pay bond issue costs. The bonds consist of
Current Interest and Capital Appreciation Bonds. The Current Interest Bonds bear interest at 2.0% to 5.4%
and are due semi-annually on March I and September I. The Capital Appreciation Bonds accrete interest at
5.2% to %.4% and compound semi-annually on March 1 and September I. Principal payments on the Current
Interest Bonds are due annually September I. Principal payments on the Capital Appreciation Bonds are
payable at maturity beginning March, 2020. At March 3 I, 2013, the outstanding balance of these bonds was
$31 ,067,983.
26
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
2007 Series A Revenue Refunding Bonds and Series B-T Taxable Revenue Refuuding Bonds. On
December 15,2006 the District issued six series of promissory notes (2007 District Notes) for the purpose of
refunding its 1996 Project Lease, 1996 Promissory Notes, 1999 Project Lease, and 1999 Promissory Notes.
On December IS, 2006 the Authority, on behalf of the District, issued $52,4 1 5,000 0[2007 Series A Revenue
Refunding Bonds and $6,785,000 of 2007 Series B-T Taxable Revenue Refunding Bonds for the purpose of
defeasing the aggregate purchase price of the 2007 District Notes. The Series A bonds bear interest from
4.0% to 5.0% and Series B-T bonds bear interest at 5.15%. Interest for both series A and B-T are due semi
annually on March I and September I. Principal payments for the Series A bonds begin September, 2012 and
are due annually, thereafter. Principal payments for the Series B-T bonds are due annually on September I.
At March 31, 2013 the outstanding balance of 2007 Series A Bonds is $5 1 ,295,000 and there is no remaining
2007 Series B-T Bonds.
2011 Revenue Bonds. On May 19, 20 II, the Authority, on behalf of the District, issued $20,500,000 of 20 II
Revenue Bonds for the purpose of acquiring land to preserve and use as open space and pay bond issue and
related costs. The Bonds are not general obligations. Each year, the District will appropriate revenues-mainly
limited properly tax collections that Santa Clara County and San Mateo County allocate to the District -to
pay its obligations under a Lease Agreement for use and occupancy of District land in addition to other
District debt and lease obligations unrelated to this fi nancing. The Current Interest Bonds bear interest at
2.0% to 6.0% and are due semi-annually on March I and September I. Principal payments on the Current
lnterest Bonds are due annually September 1. At March 31,2013, the outstanding balance of these bonds was
$20,500,000.
27
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Debt Service Requirements
Annual debt service requirements are shown below for all long-term debt:
Promissory Notes
Remaining
Year Ending March 31 Principal Accretion Interest Total
2014 $ 1,703,888 $ $ 905,308 $ 2,609,196
2015 1,650,096 831,875 2,48 1,971
2016 1,226,382 782,314 2,008,696
2017 387,750 744,646 1,132,396
2018 398,012 3,489,516 3,887,528
20 1 9-2023 2,125,000 2,743,700 4,868,700
2024-2028 5,140,000 795,825 5,935,825
2029-2033 11,737,859 9,930,000 21,667,859
2034-2037 2,806,707 8,605,000 11,411,707
2038-2042 8,894,106 45,335,000 54,229,106
Total payments due 36,069,800 $ 63,870,000 $ 10,293,184 $ 110,232,984
Plus: unamortized premiums 2,078,675
Plus: accreted interest 968,830
Total carrying amount $ 39,117,305
Revenue Bonds
Remaining
Year Ending March 31 Principal Accretion Interest Total
2014 $ 1,295,000 $ $ 4,974,518 $ 6,269,518
20 15 1,495,000 4,916,630 6,411,630
2016 3,260,000 4,810,530 8,070,530
2017 3,960,000 4,647,855 8,607,855
2018 4,245,000 4,456,905 8,70 1,905
20 19-2023 23,793,6 12 312,691 19,724,660 43,830,963
2024-2028 30,086,399 1,394,326 14,53 1 ,003 46,011 ,728
2029-2033 15,170,000 7,149,846 22,319,846
2034-2037 11,965,000 3,140,688 IS, I 05,688
2038-2042 6,760,000 812,713 7572713
Total payment due 102,030,01 1 $ 1,707,017 $ 69,165,348 $ 172,902,376
Plus: unamortized premiums 273,108
Plus: accreted interest 832,973
Minus: unamortized loss on
refundings (3,3 01,609)
Total carrying amount $ 99,834,483
28
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Debt Repayment
All debt is payable from limited ad valorem property taxes levied on all taxable property within the District.
NOTE 7 -RENTAL INCOME
The District leases (rents) certain land and structures to others under operating leases with terms generally on a
month-to-month basis. Rental income of $1 ,08 1,958 was received during the year ended March 31, 2013.
NOTE 8-RETrnEMENT PLAN
Pension Plan
All permanent District employees are eligible to participate in the pension plan offered by California Public
Employees Retirement System (CALPERS) an agent multiple employer defined benefit pension plan with acts as
a common investment and administrative agent for its participating member employers. CALPERS prov ides
retirement and disability benefits, annual cost of living adjustments and death benefits to plan members, who must
be public employees and beneficiaries. The District's employees participate in the Miscellaneous (non safety)
Employee Plan. Benefit provisions under the Plan are established by State statute and District resolution.
Benefits are based on years of credited service, equal to one year of full time employment. Funding contributions
for the Plan are determ ined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CALPERS; the District must
contribute these amounts. The Plans' provisions and benefits in effect at March 31, 2013, are summarized as
follows:
Benefit vesting schedule
Benefit payments
Retirement age
Monthly benefits, as a % of annual salary
Required employee contribution rates
Required employer contribution rates
Miscellaneous
5 years service
Monthly for life
50
2.0-2.5%
7.941%
16.29 1%
CALPERS determines contribution requirements using a modification of the Entry Age Normal Method. Under
this method, the District's total normal benefit cost for each employee from date of hire to date of retirement is
expressed as a level percentage of the related total payroll cost. Normal benefit cost under this method is the level
amount the District must pay annually to fund an employee's projected retirement benefit. This level percentage
of payroll method is used to amortize any unfunded actuarial liabilities. The actuarial assumptions used to
compute contribution requirements are also used to compute the actuarial accrued liability. The District does not
have a net pension obligation since it pays these actuarially required contributions bi-weekly.
CALPERS uses the market related value method of valuing the Plan's assets. An investment rate of return of
7.75% is assumed, including inflation at 3.0%. Annual salary increases are assumed to vary by duration of
service. Changes in liability due to plan amendments, changes in actuarial assumptions, or changes in actuarial
methods are amortized as a level percentage of payroll on a closed basis over twenty years. Investment gains and
losses are accumulated as they are realized and ten percent of the net balance is amortized annually.
29
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
As required by new State law, effective July 1,2005, the District's Miscellaneous Plan was terminated, and the
employees in the plan were required by CALPERS to join new State-wide pools. One of the conditions of entry
to these pools was that the District true-up any unfunded liabilities in the fo rmer Plans, either by paying cash or
by increasing its fu ture contribution rates through a Side Fund offered by CALPERS. The District satisfied its
Miscellaneous Plan's unfunded liability of $2,510,958 by agreeing to contribute that amount to the Side Fund
through an addition to its normal contribution rates over the next 21 years. In 20\3, the District made a one-time
payment of$2,51 0,958 to eliminate the liabi lity. The required contributions representing annual pension cost, for
the year ended March 31 were as fo llows:
Annual Percentage of Net
Fiscal Year Pension Cost APC Pension
Ending (APC) Contributed Obligation
3/31/2013 $ 4,298,9 13 100% $
313 1120 12 1,572,759 100%
3/3 1120 11 1,415,161 100%
The latest available actuarial values of the above State-wide pools (which differs from market value) and funding
progress were set fo rth as fo llows. The information presented below relates to the State-wide pools as a whole, of
which the District is one ofthe participating employers:
Actuarial Unfunded
Unfunded Annual (Overfunded)
Valuation Accrued Value of (Overfunded) Funded Covered Liability as %
Date Liability Assets Liability Ratio Payroll of Payro ll
2010 1,972,9 10,64 1 1,603,482,152 369,428,489 81.27% 352,637,380 104.76%
Audited annual financial statements are available from CALPERS at PO Box 942709, Sacramento, CA 94229-
2709.
NOTE 9 -OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
During fiscal year 2009, the District implemented the provisions of Govemmental Accounting Standards Board
Statement No. 45, Accounting and Financial Reporting by Employers for Postemployment Benefits Other Than
Pensions. This Statement establishes uniform financial reporting standards for employers providing
postemployment benefits other than pensions (OPEB). The provisions of this statement are applied prospectively
and do affect prior years financial statements. Required disclosures are presented below.
The District joined the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT), an agent multiple-employer plan
administered by CALPERS, consisting of an aggregation of single-employer plans. District Board authorized a
deposit of$I,900,000 with CERBT on June 5, 2008, to begin fu nding its OPEB liability.
By Board resolution and through agreements with its labor unit, the District provides certain health care benefits
for retired employees (spouse and dependents are not included) under third-party insurance plans. A summary of
eligibi lity and retiree contribution requirements are shown below by bargaining unit:
30
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Eligibility
Benefit
Surviving Spouse
Continuation
Dental, V ision and
Life
-Service or disability retirement fr om the District
-Age 50 and 5 years of service
-Continue participation in Public Employees
Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA)
District pays retiree prem iums up to:
$350 per month effective 111/2009
-Same benefit continues to surviving spouse
None
As of March 31, 20 13, approx imately 99 active employees and 17 retirees were eligible to receive retirement
health care benefits.
Funding Policy and Actuarial Assumptions
The annual required contribution (ARC) was determined as part of a March 31,2010, actuarial valuation using the
entry age normal actuari al cost method. This is a proj ected benefit cost method, which takes into account those
benefits that are expected to be earned in the fu ture as well as those already accrued. The actuarial assumptions
included (a) 7.25% investment rate of return, (b) 3.25% proj ected annual salary increase, and (c) 0% health
inflation increases. The actuarial methods and assumptions used include techniques that smooth the effects of
short-term volatil ity in actuarial accrued liabilities and the actuarial value of assets. Actuarial calculations reflect
a long-term perspective and actuari al valuations involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and
assumptions about the probability of events far into the fu ture. Actuarially determined amounts are subject to
revision at least biannually as results are compared to past expectations and new estimates are made about the
fut ure. The District's OPEB unfunded actuari al accrued liabil ity is being amortized as a level percentage of
projected payro ll using a 30 year open amortization period.
In accordance with the District 's budget, the ARC is to be fun ded throughout the year as a percentage of payro ll.
Concurrent with implementing Statement No. 45, the District Board passed a resolution to parti cipate in the
California Employers Retirees Benefit Trust (CERBT), an irrevocable trust established to fund OPEB . CERBT is
administrated by CaIPERS, and is managed by an appointed board not under the control of the District Board.
This Trust is not considered a component unit by the District and has been excluded from these financial
statements . Separately issued financial statements for CERBT may be obtained from CALPERS at PO Box
942709, Sacramento, CA 94229-2709.
31
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Funding Progress and Funded Status
General ly accepted accounting principles permits contributions to be treated as OPEB assets and deducted from
the Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) when such contributions are placed in an irrevocable trust or equivalent
arrangement. During the fiscal year 2009, the District made contribution in excess of the ARC and amortized its
net OPEB obligation as presented below:
Annual required contribution
Interest on net OPEB asset
Adj ustment to annual required contribution
Annual OPEB cost
Net OPEB Asset at March 31, 2012
Net OPEB Asset at March 31, 2013
$
$
197,000
(97,000)
137,000
237,000
1,334,306
1,097,306
The Plan's annual required contributions and actual contributions for fiscal years ended March 31, 201 1 to 2013
are set forth below:
Percentage
Annual Actual of Annual Net OPEB
Fiscal Year OPEB Cost Contribution OPEB Cost Asset
3/3 112013 $ 237,000 $ 0% $ 1,097,306
3/3112012 179,255 0% 1,334,306
3/3 1120 11 153,000 0% 1,513,561
The Schedule of Funding Progress presents multi-year trend information about whether the actuarial value of plan
assets is increasing or decreas ing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liability for benefits. Trend data from
the actuarial studies is presented below:
Overfunded
Overfunded (Underfunded)
Entry Age (Underfunded) Actuarial
Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial Actuarial Liability as
Valuation Value of Accrued Accrued Funded Covered Percentage of
Date Assets Liability Liability Ratio Payroll Covered Payro ll
6/30/20 II $ 2,058,000 $ 1,844,000 $ 214,000 111.61 % $ 7,331,000 2.9%
3/3 1120 10 1,894,000 1,500,000 394,000 126.27% 5,772,000 6.8%
3/3 1/2008 1,078,000 (1,078,000) 0.00% 5,590,000 -1 9.3%
32
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
NOTE 10 -RISK MANAGEMENT
Coverage
The District is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets;
injuries to employees; and natural disasters. Prior to July 1,2002, the District managed and financed these risks
by purchasing commercial iusurance. On July I, 2002, the District joined the California Joint Powers Insurance
Authority (CAL JPIA). CAL JPIA is composed of 119 California public entities and is organized under a joint
powers agreement pursuant to California Government Code Section 6500 et seq. The purpose of CAL JPIA is to
arrange and administer programs for the pooling of self-insurance losses, to purchase excess insurance or
reinsurance, and to arrange for group-purchased insurance for property and other coverages. CAL JPIA' s pool
began covering claims of its members in 1978. Each member government has an elected official as its
representative on the Board of Directors . The Board operates through a 9-member Executive Committee.
During the past three fiscal years, none of the programs of protection have had settlements or judgments that
exceeded pooled or insured coverage. There have been no significant reductions in pooled or insured liability
coverage from coverage in the prior year.
Self-Insurance Programs of the CAL JPIA
General and Automobile Liability. Each government member pays a primary deposit to cover estimated
losses for a fiscal year (claims year). General liability (GL) coverage includes bodily injury, personal injury,
or property damage to a third party resulting from a member activity. The GL program also prov ides
automobile liability coverage. Six months after the close of a fiscal year, outstanding claims are valued. A
retrospective deposit computation is then made for each open claims year. Costs are spread to members as
fo llows: the first $30,000 to $750,000 are pooled based on member's share of costs under $30,000; costs in
excess of $750,000 are shared by the members based upon each individual member's payro ll. Costs of
covered claims above $5,000,000 are currently paid by reinsurance. The protection for each member is
$50,000,000 per occurrence, up to $50,000,000.
Worker's Compensation. The District also participates in the Worker 's Compensation program
administered by CAL JPIA. Pool deposits and retrospective adjustments are valued in a manner similar to the
General Liability pool. The District is charged for the first $50,000 of each claim. Costs from $50,000 to
$100,000 per claim are pooled based on the member's losses under its retention level. Costs between
$100,000 and $2,000,000 per claim are pooled based on payroll. Costs fr om $2,000,000 to $5,000,000 are
paid by excess insurance purchased by CAL JPIA. The excess insurance provides coverage to statutory
limits.
Purchased Insurance
Environmental Insurance. The District participates in the Pollution and Remediation Legal Liability
Program, which is available through CAL JPIA. The policy provides coverage for both first and third party
damages, including sudden and gradual pollution at or fr om property, streets, sanitary sewer trunk lines and
storm drain outfalls owned by the District. Coverage is on a claims-made basis. There is a $50,000
deductible. CAL JPIA has a limit of $50,000,000 for the 3-year period from July I, 2008 through July I,
20 11. Each member of CAL JPIA has a $10,000,000 aggregate limit during the 3-year policy term.
33
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Property Insurauce. The District participates in the All-Risk property program of CAL JPIA which includes
all-risk coverage fo r real and personal property (such as buildings, office furn iture, equipment, vehicles, etc).
This insurance is underwritten by several insurance companies. Property is current ly insured according to a
schedule of covered property submitted by the District to CAL JPIA. The All-Risk deductible is $5,000 per
occurrence; $1,000 for non-emergency vehicles. Prem iums for the coverage are paid annually and are not
subj ect to retroactive adjustments.
Boiler & Machinery Insurance. The District participates in the optional coverage for boiler and machinery,
which is purchased separately under the property program. Coverage is for physical damage for sudden and
accidental breakdown of boilers and machinery, and electrical injury. There is a $5,000 per accident or
occurrence deductible; properties on property schedule are covered.
Crime Insurance. The District participates in the crime program of CAL JPIA in the amount of $I,OOO,OOO
per claim, with a $2,500 per occurrence deductible. Insurance provides coverage for employee dishonesty,
fa ilure to faithfully perform duties, fo rgery, counterfeiting, theft, robbery, burglary, and computer frau d.
Premiums are paid annually and are not subj ect to retro active adjustments.
Special Event Tenant User Liability Insurance. The District participates in the special events program of
CAL JPIA which provides liability insurance when District promises are used fo r special events. The
insurance premium is paid by the tenant user to the District according to a schedule. The District then pays
the insurance arran ged through CAL JPIA. There is no deductible and the District is added as additional
insured. Liability limits are purchased in $1 million per occurrence increments.
Vendors/contractors program. General liability coverage is provided to vendors/contractors who
otherwise could not contract with the District as they could not meet the minimum insurance requirement: $1
million per occurrence, $1 million in aggregate.
NOTE 11 -NET POSITION
Net Position is the excess of all the District's assets over all its liabilities, regard less of fu nd. Net Position is
divided into three captions under GASB Statement 34. These capti ons apply only to Net Position, which is
determined only at the Government-wide level, and are described below:
Invested in Capital Assets, net of related debt describes the portion of Net Position which is represented by
the current net book value of the District's capital assets, less the outstanding balance of any debt issued to
finance these assets.
Restricted describes the portion of Net Position which is restricted as to use by the terms and conditions of
agreements with outside parties, governmental regulations, laws, or other restrictions with the District cannot
unilaterally alter.
Unrestricted describes the portion of Net Position which is not restricted to use.
34
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
MARCH 31, 2013
Contingent Liabilities
The District has entered into numerous agreements, has properties that will require environmental remediation,
and is named in certain claims and litigations. In the opinion of management, after consultation with counsel, the
liability, if any, resulting there fr om will not have a material effect on the District's financial position.
35
REQUIRED SUPPL EMENTARY INFOR MATION
36
MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT
GENERAL FUND
SCHEDULE OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES
IN FUND BALANCE -BUDGETARY BASIS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED MARCH 31,2013
Budgeted Amounts Variance
Favorable
Original Final Actual (Unfavorable)
REVENUES
Property taxes $ 28,495,000 $ 28,875,000 30,269,803 $ 1,394,803
Grant income 4,794,000 4,794,000 913,338 (3,880,662)
Investment in come 300,000 300,000 221,933 (78,067)
Property management -rents 1,109,000 1,109,000 1,380,937 271,937
Other income 388,000 388,000 145,800 (242,200)
Land Donation 615,000 615,000 3,890,155 3,275,155
Total Revenues 35,701 ,000 36,081,000 36,821,966 740,966
EXPENDITURES
Current
Salaries 9,002,479 8,806,300 8,309,803 496,497
Benefits (I) 3,850, I 07 3,530,634 6,014,461 (2,483,827)
Directors 25,000 29,000 31,500 (2,500)
Services and supplies 4,278,923 4,622,065 4,356,948 265,117
Capital Outlay
New land purchases 9,000,000 8,434,000 6,194,600 2,239,400
Land acquisition support costs 705,000 861,000 517,312 343,688
Structures and improvements 4,804,080 4,623,080 2,206,010 2,4 17,070
Equipment 641,275 866,275 540,204 326,071
Vehicles 170,000 177,000 152,912 24,088
Total Expenditures 32,476,864 31,949,354 28,323,750 3,625,604
EXCESS (DEFICIENCy) OF REVENUES
OVER EXPENDITURES 3,224,136 4,131,646 8,498,216 4,366,570
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)
Transfers (out) (8,876,542) (8,876,542) (8,876,542)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (8,876,542) (8,876,542) (8,876,542)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ (5,652,406) $ (4,744,896) (378,326) $ 4,366,570
Fund balance at beginning of year 41,781,543
Sub-total $ 41,403,217
Land donation (3,890,155)
Fund balance end of year $ 37,513,062
(I) The unfavorab le variance noted is due to the CALPERS side fu nd repayment referred to in Note 8 to the financial statements
37
TO: General Manager
FROM: Gordon Baillie
Monthly Field Activity Summary Report
Between 11/1/2013 And 11/30/2013
DISTRICT VIOLATIONS
Bicycle
Bicycle after hours
Closed area - bicycle
Helmet possession required
Helmet required
Trail use speed limit
Closed Area
Enter temporary/regular closed area
Dog
Dog in prohibited area
Leash required - Dog
Other
After hours
Damaging / removing plants
Smoking - undesignated area
Vehicles prohibited
DISTRICT TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
CITE WARNING JCR KNOWN TOTALS
VIOLATIONS
6 4
1 1
1 0
7 10
2 14
7 7
10 2
11 4
7 8
0 3
1 0
1 1
0 0 10
0 0 2
0 0 1
0 0 17
0 0 16
0 0 14
0 0 12
0 0 15
0 0 15
0 0 3
0 0 1
0 0 2
54 54 0 0 108
NON DISTRICT VIOLATIONS
Dog
Pets/dogs on 6 foot leash or radio collar/voice
NON DISTRICT TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
CITE WARNING JCR KNOWN TOTALS
VIOLATIONS
0 1 0
0
1
0 1 0 0 1
GRAND TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
54 55 0 0 109
ENFORCEMENT
Citations & JCRs Issued
Parking Citations Issued
ALL Written Warnings Issued
Police Assistance
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Law Enforcement
TOTALS
'195
54
74
61
ACCIDENTS / INCIDENTS
Fire Incident
Medical - Bicycle Accident
Medical - Hiking / Running Accident
Medical - Other First Aid
Vehicle Accident
MUTUAL AID
Law Enforcement
Medical - Hiking / Running Accident
Medical - Motorcycle Accident
6
49
49
14
2
3
4
3
2
6
1
1
2
*JCR Juvenile Contact Report
Thursday, Deceneber 19, 2013
Page 1 of 5
IR 13F399
PARKING VIOLATIONS CITE WARNING TOTALS
* MISSING VIOLATION * 2 0 2
Event ID# 35523 1 0 1
Event ID# 35518 1 0 1
PARKING VIOLATIONS
DISTRICT
CITE WARNING TOTALS
58 3 61
Prohibited Areas (Signed) 1 0 1
Prohibited Areas (Red curb) 1 0 1
Prohibited Areas (On fire trail) 2 0 2
Prohibited Areas (Nondesignated area) 5 2 7
Prohibited Areas (Blocking traffic) 4 0 4
Prohibited Areas (Blocking gate) 1 1 2
Prohibited Areas (After hours) 44 0 44
PARKING VIOLATIONS CITE WARNING TOTALS
NON DISTRICT 15 3 18
Disabled Parking - Designated Space 4 1 5
No parking after hours 1 0 1
No parking 7 2 9
Parking — State Highway 3 0 3
TOTAL # of PARKING VIOLATIONS 75 6 81
Vehicle Accident 2
DATE OCCURRENCES OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Nov 02 A bicyclist fell and was injured. Two District rangers, Santa Clara County Fire Department and Rural
AR 13F39s Metro paramedics responded. The bicyclist likely had a broken collarbone. He was transported to the
hospital by ambulance.
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Kennedy Trail
Rangers: 2
Nov 03 A District ranger in the Russian Ridge parking lot heard what sounded like a vehicle collision. He
MA 13S327 proceeded to the area and observed two cars pulling off to the side of west Alpine Road. The ranger
contacted both parties and found that there were no injuries. CHP was requested but was unable to
respond due to the extended response time. The ranger facilitated insurance and identification
exchange between the two involved parties.
Preserve Off District Lands - Skyline Location Highway 35 and intersection of west Alpine Rd.
Rangers: 2
Police: 1
Nov 04 Damage to a District gate was reported to a ranger. The ranger responded and determined that the gate
had probably been damaged when it was hit by a truck. CHP responded and took a report.
A large concrete pumper truck was found working at a nearby residence. The truck had paint scrapes
and the colors matched those left on the gate from the collision. However, the driver denied hitting the
gate.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio Location Mora Trail, Gate RS10
Rangers: 1
Police: 1
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Page 2 of 5
Nov 05 A District supervisor reported seeing an article in the local newspaper of an auto burglary at the Portola
IR 13S355 Road parking lot of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve. A District ranger contacted the San Mateo County
Sheriffs office and obtained the victim's contact information. The burglary occurred while she was
hiking. When she returned to her car, she found it had been broken into and a bag containing a
computer and her wallet were missing. She placed the value of the stolen items at $3,361.
Preserve Windy Hill Location Portola Road parking lot
Rangers: 1
Nov 05 A District ranger working in the preserve heard a dog barking and looking up saw a large dog charging
IR 13S330 toward him. The dog was not leashed. The ranger asked an approaching hiker if the dog belonged to
her, and asked her to restrain the dog. She complied stating that the dog belonged to relatives living
nearby, and she was just walking it. She also stated she was not familiar with the area and did not know
the regulations. She was cited for dog off leash.
Preserve Coal Creek Location Coal Road
Rangers: 1
Nov 05 A visitor reported the remains of a campfire to a District ranger. Two rangers responded and located the
IR 13F400 extinguished campfire on the trail. A Santa Clara County Fire investigator responded and took a report.
The rangers confirmed that the fire was out and dispersed the ashes.
Preserve St. Joseph's Hill Location Manzanita Trail
Rangers: 2
Nov 08 A neighbor driving a vehicle on Langley Hill Road hit another neighbor who was walking on the road.
MA 135331 The patient was transported by ambulance to the hospital. The ranger was initially asked to set up the
landing zone on Langley Hill Road but the helicopter was not required. A fire department battalion chief
asked the District ranger to stay with the driver of the vehicle until CHP arrived.
Preserve Off District Lands - Skyline Location Langley Hill Road
Rangers: 2
Police: 4
Nov 09 A vehicle was found in the parking lot displaying an altered disabled placard. The 2012 punch hole had
IR 13F405 been altered and filled in, and the 2013 hole punched out. The serial number of the placard was
checked against DMV records, and the placard was found to have expired approximately one year ago.
A parking citation was issued and a warning notice written regarding the altered placard.
A copy of the incident report was also mailed to the DMV fraud department.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio County Park Location Restroom Parking Lot
Rangers: 1
Nov 09 A neighbor's car caught on fire as he stopped at a District gate. CALFIRE responded and extinguished
IR 13F4o3 the fire. A ranger responded after the fire was extinguished. The neighbor removed the car. There was
no damage to District property.
Preserve Sierra Azul
Location Mt. Umunhum Road
Rangers: 1
Police: 1
Nov 09 A bicyclist fell injuring his hip and ribs. Santa Clara County Fire, Rural Metro Medics, and five District
AR 13F404 rangers responded. Rangers drove the Medics to the bicyclist. After examination the bicyclist was
transported by rangers to the trailhead where a relative drove him to the hospital.
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Kennedy Trail
Rangers: 5
Nov 10 District rangers responded to a motor vehicle accident where a motorcyclist that had attempted to pass a
MA 135337 vehicle making a turn on Highway 35. He suffered broken ribs and fractured right femur. San Mateo
County Fire Department and provided additional patient care.
Preserve Off District Lands - Skyline Location Windy Hill Vista Point
Rangers: 4
Nov 12 A District ranger observed a vehicle parked after hours in the parking lot and issued an after hours
IR 13S342 citation. The ranger then saw three visitors coming down the trail toward the parking lot, one carrying a
small dog. The ranger made contact with the men and issued a verbal warning about being in the
preserve after hours and asked the man with the dog if he had seen the regulation sign stating that dogs
were prohibited.
The man stated that the dog was a service dog and when asked what service the dog provided, he
replied that the ranger could not ask that question. Since that is a permissible question, he was asked
again what service and said the dog calmed him down. When asked to identify himself he gave a false
name. After being warned of the consequences he gave his real name, was cited for dog off leash and
released.
Preserve Russian Ridge Location Parking lot
Rangers: 3
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Page 3 of 5
Rangers: 2
IR 13S357
Nov 12 District rangers found a vehicle parked in a turnout next to the preserve. Suspecting a possible visitor in
IR 135341 a closed area, the rangers proceeded on a well traveled illegal trail into the preserve. The trail crossed a
creek and up a hill on the other side into a willow thicket. The rangers found a rusty shovel and further
along a collection of materials and containers.
Suspecting a possible marijuana cultivation site they backed out of the area. No suspects were see in
the area. The site was later investigated with the assistance of California Fish and Game Department
and it was determined that it had probably been an active grow site last season.
Preserve Tunitas Creek Location
Nov 12 An elderly runner fell in the parking lot injuring his hands, arm, shoulder, and head. A District ranger,
AR 13F409 Santa Clara County Fire, and Rural Metro Medics responded. The runner was taken to the hospital by
ambulance.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio County Park Location Restroom Parking Lot
Rangers: 1
Nov 13 District rangers discovered recent vehicle use on an old road cut. They also found motorcycle tracks,
IR 13S343 vegetation that had been cut to maintain trail access, evidence of removal of fire wood, tree stumps and
rounds, and black irrigation tubing with water flowing suggesting a possible marijuana garden. Staff later
went out to the site with Santa Clara Sherriff and they found a cultivation site that had been active the
last season.
Preserve Saratoga Gap Location Old road cut
Rangers: 2
Nov 16 A Deer Hollow Farm Mountain View volunteer had a hip injury after being knocked over by a cow. The
AR 13F414 District's farm maintenance worker requested that District rangers and the Santa Clara County Fire
Department respond. Three District rangers, Santa Clara County Fire Department, and Rural Metro
Paramedics responded. The volunteer was taken by ambulance to the hospital.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio Location Deer Hollow Farm
Rangers: 3
Nov 16 A District ranger took a report from a man who had parked his car at the Redwood Trailhead on Highway Rangers: 2
MA 13S349 35. The car was burglarized by breaking the passenger side window and a portable speaker was
stolen. The owner was transported back to his vehicle and advised to file a report with the sheriffs
department.
Preserve Off District Lands - Skyline Location
Nov 16 A District ranger copied radio traffic from the District's volunteer program leader of an injury to a District
AR 13S346 volunteer. The ranger responded, and provided medical care. San Mateo County Fire responded and
provided additional care. The volunteer was transported to a local hospital.
Preserve El Corte de Madera Creek Location Gallaway property off Native Sons Road
Rangers: 3
Nov 20 A woman was hiking down the trail when her leg started bleeding. She stated that she had had surgery
AR 13F419 on her leg vein five months earlier. Apparently the hike caused the healing wound to open and start
bleeding. She also stated she was feeling lightheaded. District rangers along with Santa Clara County
Fire assisted with medical aid administering oxygen and treating the wound. At her request she was
transported to her vehicle by a District ranger so she could drive home. She said she would have a
family member take her to the hospital.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio Location Rogue Valley Trail
Rangers: 3
Nov 22 A District ranger on patrol in the preserve copied radio traffic of a bicycle accident. The ranger arrived
AR 13S354 on -scene and took accident information. The victim was traveling too fast for conditions, lost control of
her bike, hitting a small ditch and was thrown over the handlebars, landing on her head and right arm.
Woodside Fire was already on scene and provided patient care. The victim was transported by ground
to a local hospital.
Preserve Windy Hill Location Spring Ridge Trail
Rangers: 1
Nov 24 A District ranger observed a visitor riding a motorized bicycle, which are prohibited, in the preserve. He Rangers: 1
was cited for motorized vehicle prohibited and released.
Preserve El Corte de Madera Creek Location Sierra Morena Trail
Nov 24 District rangers responded to a reported vehicle accident where a vehicle crossed the double line, hitting
AR 13S359 an on -coming motorcycle head on. The motorcyclist went over the side of Highway 9 into the Saratoga
Gap Open Space Preserve, landing 100 feet down a steep bank. District rangers assisted Santa Clara
County Fire in recovering the injured motorcyclist who suffered injuries to the neck and legs and was
flown to a local hospital. Rangers provided traffic control during the accident investigation.
Preserve Saratoga Gap Location Hwy. 9, approx. 1 mile north of Hwy. 35
Rangers: 2
Police: 5
Thursday, Dece,nber 19, 2013
Page 4 of 5
Nov 24 A man returned from a hike and reported feeling unwell, light headed, and dizzy. Dispatch contacted
AR 13F422 District rangers who responded along with Santa Clara County Fire.
The man said he was a diabetic and his walking companion/caretaker said the patient had started
wobbling during their walk. The patient was evaluated by rangers and medics and appeared alert and
oriented. A ranger gave him a ride to his vehicle and he left with his caretaker.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio County Park Location Bench near the tennis courts
Rangers: 2
Nov 25 A District ranger discovered that unknown persons had driven into a gate, pulled the locking post out of
IR 13F424 the ground, and had driven into the preserve. A ranger checked the area and did not find any additional
damage. Two rangers replaced the gate's locking post and secured the gate.
Preserve Bear Creek Redwoods Location Gate BC17
Rangers: 2
Nov 26 District rangers in the Skyline Field Office observed a vehicle drive past the office and disappear into the
IR 13S360 preserve. They tracked the vehicle and located it on the Butano View Trail, well inside the preserve and
past several signs stating authorized vehicles only. The occupants stated they wanted to take some
pictures. The driver was cited for motor vehicles prohibited and escorted out of the preserve.
Preserve Skyline Ridge Location Butano View Trail
Rangers: 2
Nov 28 A hiker became i l l with severe abdominal pain. A District trail patrol volunteer met the hiker and
AR 13F428 requested an emergency response. Two District rangers, Santa Clara County Fire Department, and
Rural Metro Medics responded. The hiker was taken to the hospital by ground ambulance.
Preserve Fremont Older Location Seven Springs Loop Trail
Rangers: 2
DATE
VANDALISM DETAIL
Nov 06 Sign broken off.
VL
Preserve Sierra Azul - Rancho de Guadalupe Location SA29 Engine shaft
Nov 23 Grafitti on Fire Danger signs.
VL
Preserve Sierra Azul Location SA07 Guardrail
Thursday, December 19, 20/3 _ _. . _ . . . . . . Page 5 of 5
TO: General Manager
FROM: Gordon Baillie
Monthly Field Activity Summary Report
Between 12/1/2013 And 12/31/2013
DISTRICT VIOLATIONS
Bicycle
Bicycle after hours
Closed area - bicycle
Helmet required
Trail use speed limit
Closed Area
Enter sensitive/hazardous closed area
Enter temporary/regular closed area
Dog
Dog in prohibited area
Leash required - Dog
Other
After hours
Vehicles prohibited
Weapons
Possession of/discharging paint ball gun, BB
Possession of/discharging weapon
DISTRICT TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
CITE WARNING JCR KNOWN TOTALS
VIOLATIONS
2
6
3
1
0
2
4
7
0
0
0
0
3 0 0
14 0 0
7 4 0
19 5 0
7 4 0
0 1 0
1 0 0
0 1 0
0
0
0
0
2
8
7
8
0 3
0 14
0 11
0 24
0 11
0 1
0
0
1
63 28 0 0 91
NON DISTRICT VIOLATIONS
Bicycle
Minor bicycling without helmet
Dog
Pets/dogs on 6 foot leash or radio collar/voice
NON DISTRICT TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
CITE WARNING JCR KNOWN TOTALS
VIOLATIONS
0
0
0 1 0
0
0
1
1
0 2 0 0 2
GRAND TOTAL # of VIOLATIONS
63 30 0 0 93
ENFORCEMENT
Citations & JCRs Issued
Parking Citations Issued
ALL Written Warnings Issued
Police Assistance
LAW ENFORCEMENT
Law Enforcement
ACCIDENTS / INCIDENTS
Lost Person Search
Medical - Bicycle Accident
Medical - Other First Aid
Vehicle Accident
MUTUAL AID
Law Enforcement
TOTALS
154
63
59
29
3
43
43
5
1
1
1
2
1
1
*JCR Juvenile Contact Report
Tuesday, January 27, 2014 -�- Page l of
g r 4
PARKING VIOLATIONS CITE WARNING TOTALS
DISTRICT 56 0 56
Prohibited Areas (Signed) 5 0 5
Prohibited Areas (Nondesignated area) 4 0 4
Prohibited Areas (Blocking traffic) 1 0 1
Prohibited Areas (Blocking gate) 2 0 2
Prohibited Areas (After hours) 44 0 44
PARKING VIOLATIONS CITE WARNING TOTALS
NON DISTRICT 3 0 3
No Parking Zone 1 0 1
Parking — State Highway 2 0 2
TOTAL # of PARKING VIOLATIONS 59 0 59
DATE OCCURRENCES OF SPECIAL INTEREST
Dec 01 A suspected marijuana grow site was discovered on the property. District rangers met with the reporting
IR 13S268 party. Camping gear as well as food and refuse were found in the area. The reporting party did not see
anyone in the area. The matter was turned over to California Fish & Wildlife for further investigation.
Preserve Purisima Creek Redwoods Location October Farm property
Rangers: 1
Dec 01 While on patrol, a District ranger saw a vehicle parked along the road at a suspicious location. The
IR 13S367 ranger stopped to investigate and observed a person climbing through a gap in the fence and away from
a rifle laying on the ground. That person admitting to shooting the rifle off for over an hour before being
contacted by the ranger. He was cited for firearms prohibited.
Preserve Los Trancos Location Inside the preserve along Page Mill Rd.
Rangers: 1
Dec 04 Mountain View received a call through San Mateo Sheriffs Office of a auto burglary at Windy Hill. The
IR 13S369 victim was contacted by a District ranger the following clay and information related to the incident
gathered. The victim was hiking for approximately 1 hour 15 minutes and upon returnin to the parking
lot found a window broken. A substantial amount of cash, a computer, wallet, and credit cards inside a
backpack were stolen. A report was filed with the San Mateo County Sheriff.
Preserve Windy Hill Location Portola Road parking lot
Rangers: 2
Dec 06 While on patrol, a District ranger discovered a dead deer dumped approximately fifty belw a roadway.
IR 13F436 The deer had yellow rope through its back legs. There was also a pig hide and two dead ducks at the
site.
The ranger walked further down the bank and found two gun safes that appeared forced open. The
ranger notified California Department of Fish & Wildlife and returned with them to the site to assist with
further investigation.
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Reynolds Road
Rangers: 2
Police: 1
Dec 06 A District ranger copied radio traffic of an auto burglary at the preserve parking lot.
IR 13S370
Four people had pulled into the parking lot, and had put their belongings into the trunk so they would be
out of sight. They had gone for a five minute walk, since one of the party was not feeling well. Upon
returning to their car they found the driver's side window and the trunk open. When they had pulled into
the parking lot they had seen another vehicle pull in after them, but no one had exited the vehicle, which
they thought was suspicious.
A number of expensive items were stolen as well as wallets, credit cards and cash. San Mateo County
Sheriff responded and filed a report.
Preserve Purisima Creek Redwoods Location Parking lot
Rangers: 1
Police: 1
Tuesday, January 21, 2014 Page 2 of 4
Dec 07 A District ranger parked in the Monte Bello parking lot on Page Mill Road was approached by two hikers
IR 13S375 who said they had found a dog on the trail inside Los Trancos. While the ranger leashed this dog, a
second dog crossed Page Mill Road into the same parking lot. The dogs have been loose on numerous
occasions and were known to the ranger who took the dogs to the owners' residence and secured them.
The following day the ranger met with the owners and explained again about the regulations regarding
dogs. The owners were cited for the dogs being in a prohibited area.
Preserve Los Trancos Location Monte Bello parking lot
Rangers: 2
Dec 10 While on patrol, a District ranger observed a bicyclist not wearing a helmet. The ranger stopped the
IR 13S377 bicyclist, and the person was found to have an outstanding warrant for the same violation. He stated
that he had received a citation "about 10 years" ago and had not taken care of it. He was advised to
contact the court regarding the outstanding warrant, and was issued a citation for the new violation.
Preserve Windy Hill Location Spring Ridge Trail
Rangers: 1
Dec 12 One bicyclist was stopped and cited for a closed area bicycle violation. The bicyclist was warned for
camping and campfire violations.
IR 13F439
Preserve Rancho San Antonio Location Chamise Trail
Rangers: 2
Dec 14 Two subjects were stopped and cited for closed area violations.
IR 13F440
Preserve Bear Creek Redwoods Location BCR Pond
Rangers: 2
Dec 16 A Santa Clara County Ranger stopped two subjects who had open containers of alcohol in their
MA 13F442 vehicle. One subject was on parole and the other subject had a restraining order for the first subject.
The Santa Clara County Ranger requested a Santa Clara County Sheriffs response. A District Ranger
responded for officer safety until the Sheriff Deputy arrived.
Preserve Off District Lands - Foothills Location Mt. Eden Road, at a Steven's Creek Co gate
Rangers: 1
Police: 1
Dec 18 A District ranger on patrol saw that the shed inside the Skyline Ridge Tree Farm was open. The Tree
IR 135385 Farm was not open for business at the time. Upon investigating the ranger saw that the door & door
jamb has been hit by a vehicle. The inside of the shed had been sprayed with a fire extinguisher. The
ranger notified the operator of the Tree Farm who responded to the scene. Nothing had been taken
from inside the shed, but the locks on the door were also damaged. A San Mateo County Sheriff was
requested and a report was taken.
Preserve Skyline Ridge Location Tree Farm
Rangers: 1
Dec 21 A District Ranger responded to a report of a subject who had entered a closed area. The Ranger
IR 13F444 located ten additional subjects in the closed area. Nine of the subjects were warned for closed area
violations and the leader was cited.
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Mt. Umunhum Road
Rangers: 1
Dec 25 A visitor reported that a radio control helicopter had damaged his parked car. A District Ranger
AR 13F451 responded and saw a scratch on the hood of the car. The ranger told the people involved that they
should exchange information, and suggested they contact their insurance companies. A child was flying
the remote controlled helicopter at the time of the crash.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio County Park Location Airplane Parking Lot
Rangers: 1
Dec 26 One bicyclist fell injuring his head and face. A District Ranger, Santa Clara County Park Rangers,
AR 13F450 Santa Clara County Fire Department, and Stanford Lifeflight responded. The bicyclist was transported
by helicopter to the hospital.
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Approximately .1 mile above Limekiln Trail junction
Rangers: 1
Dec 28 A hiker became ill and complained of being weak. Rangers, Santa Clara County Fire Department and
AR 13F452 Rural Metro Paramedics responded and determined the person had low blood pressure. The person
was transported to the hospital by ambulance.
Preserve Rancho San Antonio Location Deer Hollow Farm
Rangers: 2
Dec 31 Three subjects were stopped and cited for hazardous closed area violations.
IR 13F457
Preserve Sierra Azul Location Former Almaden Air Force Base (Mt. Umunhum)
Rangers: 2
Tuesday, January 21, 2014
Page 3 of 4
DATE
VANDALISM DETAIL
Dec 02 Grafitti found on 12/2/13 "MERCED Young MONey 209" sanded off on 12/23/13.
VL
Preserve Skyline Ridge Location Gate SR12
Dec 15 "No Dogs" & "No Bikes" torn off.
VL
Preserve Long Ridge Location Hwy. 9 /Achistaca
Tuesday, January 21, 2014 Page 4 of 4
Director Yoriko Kishimoto Questions
January 22, 2014 MROSD Board Meeting
Item 3: Investment Policy
Why didn’t this go to ABC? Reserve level policy is important financial policy.
The annual renewal of investment authority is required to go to the Board every January and has
never been brought before ABC. After discussions with the GM, the Controller proposed a
prudent revision to our reserve policy which has the effect of increasing our reserves from $5M
to $11.5M in adherence to the proposed formula. This policy revision is before the full Board
tonight. If the Board wishes, it can send the item back to ABC and have it reconsidered as soon
as possible afterwards. However, the Controller will not have any investment authority in the
meantime.
Item 4: 1959 Survivor Benefits
* I never understood how these work. Is the cost to the district the payment of the health
benefits on top of the $4.80 per month? The district would pay directly?
The employer cost at the Indexed level as of the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2013 is $4.80 per
member per month. The employee cost is $2.60 per month. The annual cost will be recalculated
each year as the member counts will change. The District will pay this to CalPERS.
* What percentage (roughly) of public agencies provide this and what policy choices do we
have as board? (full payment of medical vs. partial, payment for children, domestic
partner, etc.)
The answer regarding the percentage of the public agencies providing this benefit requires
substantial additional research. There is no policy choice at this point. The next opportunity for
the Board to make a policy choice on this matter will be in the 2015 labor negotiations.
* What kind of “pool” are we part of in terms of risk management?
The District is in the PA Indexed Level Pool with an accrued liability of $16,250,802; a Market
Value of Assets of $18,606,508 and funded ratio based on the Market Value of Assets of 114.5%
per the CalPERS Finance & Administration Ctte Actuarial Valuation Report for the 1959
Survivor Benefit Program as of June 30 2012.
* I’ve heard of 5-6 different levels - what level is different than proposed on that we’re in?
There are six different benefit levels, however, the only one available to the District is
the Indexed Level:
Benefit Level One Survivor Two Survivors Three or more Survivors
Indexed** $634 $1,268 $1,902
This is another one which should have gone to ABC?
No. This was the subject of negotiations and was discussed with the full Board in closed session.
Item 5: Santa Clara Roads Exchange
* Sorry if I asked this earlier, but was the district invited to comment on the environmental
review for this bridge project (in 2008?)? County roads did an MND? Santa Clara County
adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 6, 2004. As a responsible agency, the
District considered the MND and determined at its March 26, 2008 meeting that no substantial
changes in the project or in the circumstances under which it was undertaken had occurred.
Item 9: Mindego
* What size water tanks being proposed?
The grazing plan recommends two 5,000 gallon water tanks to be installed at Mindego.