RED HILL COMMUNITY PARK JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

Board of Directors Meeting

November 10, 2004

DRAFT MINUTES

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chair Breen called the meeting to order at 7:40 pm on November 10, 2004 in the San Anselmo Town Council Chambers. Chair Breen announced that he would conduct the meeting with respect to all participants.

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Breen, Lopin, Walter, Wright Absent: Thornton

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Barry Spitz noted that One Glen Drive was misspelled. Louise Mathews noted related to the traffic study that Sunny Hills Drive is not at Level D traffic, that she asked the question regarding the well, and that she supported the White Hill site in coordination with the Red Hill and Sorich Park. Heather Mitchell clarified that she supported the White Hill site if it did not exclude Red Hill as an option.

M/S/C (Wright/Lopin) to approve the minutes of the October 5, 2004 meeting as amended.

4. TREASURER’S REPORT

Treasurer Janet Pendoley presented the balance sheet and profit and loss statement for the periods ending September 30 and October 31, 2004. She reported $36 in interest income earned during this period. Funds in the amount of $942 were expended for fundraising efforts and professional fees. As of October 31st, the JPA's assets totalled $51,131.

5. JPA TASK FORCE REPORT/ACTION

Ann Swett indicated that the task force was formed to create a viable plan for Red Hill Park. Members are Elaine Snyder, Dharma Clement, Andrea Vincent, Lew Tremaine, Ron Little, Board member Lopin and Ann Swett. The group met with Glen Drive residents who expressed their concerns about the use of the White Hill site. A second option was Sorich Park, but because of the open space constraints, was found it infeasible. Finally, the task force returned to the Red Hill site. Peter Arnold introduced the revised design plan, revised to include a baseball field by pivoting the soccer field and placing the baseball field where the tennis courts were located. Results included increasing the dog park size, terrace seating for the soccer field, a ramp to the Shaw Drive parking lot, and picnic tables around the parameter. Fences around the athletic fields include 20 ft, 8 ft and 12 ft heights, with 4 ft fences around the dog park. Mr. Arnold indicated that the revisions focused on gaining efficiency and addressing people's concerns. Board member Wright commented that parking on Shaw Drive involved cost, slope and traffic issues. Mr. Arnold responded that 25 additional parking spaces in the Sunny Hills lot helped to ameliorate the problem as well as the handicapped ramp. No grading changes to the lot are necessary. In response to an audience question, Peter responded that one of the two tennis courts has been lost. In response to the question of cost, there is some additional cost in field turf and fencing but offset substantially by the SABA grant and lot design savings. Peter Hamilton, 415 Sequoia Drive, stated that noise coming up the valley and traffic will be problems. Ann Murphy asked about the retaining wall. Peter responded that the walls were moved away from the hillside and reduced in size. April Orcutt, 510 Sequoia, stated that she was never advised of this plan, and the noise, lights and traffic will be extreme problems due to the amphitheater effect. Chair Breen confirmed that Sequoia was included in the noise study. Board member Wright commented that when Red Hill school was open, there were several hundred children in the area. A Fairfax resident applauded the JPA on the revised plan for addressing the issues raised in previous meetings. Richard Lucas, 506 Sequoia, commented on the unique "Greek Amphitheater" effect of the area. Board member Lopin confirmed with Mr. Arnold that the groundcover may offer some sound buffering. She indicated that the field use will be during afternoons and weekend time, rather than school recess times. John W. Wright, upper Sequoia, commented that over time the Sequoia area has been developed with houses and that progress was not welcomed by everyone. He believes the field will be a great addition. A Sequoia Ave resident expressed concerned about a PA system if the field is rented out in evenings as a commercial venue and the traffic problem will be worsened. Board member Walter noted that a traffic study was performed and is available at town hall. Louise Mathews stated that the baseball field would change the traffic pattern; Peter Arnold responded that the fields would not both be in use at the same time since they overlap. If lighting is included in the plan, there will be a total of 5 poles with substantially new lighting technology. Re easement from Sunny Hills, JPA has gotten verbal approval. An audience member who lives in Parkside Apartments commented on current high traffic level already. Jim Seymour commented that lights and noise are problems for the Sequoia area, particularly on weekday nights after 8 pm. Chair Breen confirmed that no PA system is planned. Ken Conroy noted several errors in the neighborhood notice such as tax money and PA system. Louise Mathews referred to Carter Coleman's comment at a Park and Rec Finance Committee meeting, and Mr. Coleman responded that it was only a comment not a plan. Sophia Spencer liked the park plan, retaining one tennis court. In response to question of use level, Director Ron Little said estimates were 3,500–4,500 people per year, including all types of uses. Paul Orbach commented that the tennis courts should be done in tandem to relieve the wait time. An audience member commented that the town desperately needs a soccer field but not a baseball field. Ken Conroy, SABA, stated that the baseball field would be used for kids 13 to 16 years old, an age group that has no other town field. Board member Wright clarified that the task force recommended that White Hill site be taken off the table.

Ann Swett presented the task force's recommendation. The dog park is recommended as proposed, to include a fenced walking track around the parameter for use when fields are not in organized use. Off leash dog use during organized practice/game times in the fenced dog area only; community walkers can also use the fenced walking track. The task force is volunteering to continue to meet to receive feedback and help to maintain a clean, safe park and harmony among user groups. There is a need for cooperation and responsibility between all groups. Board member Wright commented that the off leash use on the fenced track is a significant use change which RVSD would have to approve. Board member Lopin indicated the RVSD wants to consider it in light of the whole plan. Soccer field is regulation size. Fencing would prevent dog waste on the playing field. In response to a question regarding implementing plan revisions to meet the December design deadline, Board member Wright stated that the timeline might have to be delayed. Michael Goldman commented that this experience has issues similar to the Memorial Park development, but the greater community got together to build the park.

Board member Wright indicated that after the JPA acts on this recommendation, each of its 3 public agency members would have to approve in a public meeting the design plan change and timing changes. Cost estimates have not been analyzed yet.

M/S/C unanimously (Walter/Wright) that the board adopt the design in principal, subject to minor adjustments for cost contingencies, and recommend to RVSD that it entertain the utilization of the facility as it was recommended by the task force.

M/SC unanimously (Walter/Wright) that the task force form a nucleus of a larger group of interested parties organized for the purpose of receiving ongoing feedback and of helping to maintain the condition of the facility.

6. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT

Discussion Items: Alternative/creative funding methods.

Board member Wright introduced Joe Ufrat, an investment banker with a non-profit finance specialty, to discuss possible ways of funding the park plan. If a flow of user fees that are committed to over time, those fees can be converted to bond payments. Not a general tax obligation bond, but rather a revenue bond, borrowing money with repayment by user fees. As a public agency, JPA can issue the tax-free bond at a very low rate and use the committed user fees to pay off the bond. As professional banker for non-profit health care finance, hospitals use revenue bonds to finance needs. A non-profit entity that owns the property, and which has the revenue stream for repayment, can leverage existing funds available today with revenue that is forthcoming to capitalize the project. This would not increase residents’ taxes. Board member Wright indicated that the details would have to be analyzed, including the level of fee revenue anticipated, how those funds were planned to be used, and who as private citizens might provide collateral as a creditworthy entity. Board member Lopin stated that it is a stop gap measure to get the last dollars needed. A committee will consider this idea further and report at the next meeting. Louise Mathews requested that the Finance Officer be included in the meetings. She questioned the JPA’ authority on this issue .

Action Item: Inclusion of field lights in the plan.

U.S. Soccer Foundation has a discounted soccer package that includes turf, Musco lighting, goals and other incidentals. Application deadline is December 1, 2004 and all the components must be included and supported by the community. JPA would also be eligible for $25,000 to $100,000 in grant funds. The Foundation has sponsored other parks that include baseball fields. The package does not prescribe usage but prescribe the Musco “cut off” lighting, which focus the light directly onto the field and not the surrounding area. Director Little indicated that the Foundation needs evidence of support from the community that lights would be installed. Breen clarified that the JPA can choose to withdraw from the grant process at any time, if any issue arose that made it advisable. Lopin commented that the RVSD approved lights with the caveat that the JPA would gather input from the community.

M/S/C (Lopin/Walter) that the Board issue a letter supporting the installation of the lights as part of the plan. Ayes: Lopin, Walter, Wright, Breen.

Ken Conroy spoke in favor of the lights. April Orcutt spoke against including the lights in the plan. Jim Phillips indicated he is in favor of the lights. An audience member spoke against the park plan. Nancy Ocata questioned the level of revenue, the need for additional security, and security costs resulting from the attraction of outsiders into the community. Man from audience questioned generating enough revenue for the bond, and the possibility that park will become revenue generator instead of community park. John Wright commented that lights do not necessarily increase security risk and that noise rather than lighting be worked on as the larger problem. Chair Breen suggested that the task force and Sequoia residents work together on the lighting issue and that the JPA agrees to withdraw the application if the issue cannot be resolved within 3 months. Liz Huntington asked how to determine what the erroneous facts in the flyer were. George Allonious asked about legality of notices in the mailboxes. Jim Seymour indicated that putting 3 yr olds to bed at 8:30 pm is difficult with park noise. Richard Lucas mentioned light pollution. Ann Murphy spoke in favor of the lights and the value of lighting over time, i.e. putting infrastructure in place during construction is cost efficient. Regarding vandalism, lack of in town baseball and soccer would offer activity to kids as they approach older ages. George Allonious mentioned that lights only needed during winter months. Joan Weinheimer, Sais Street, commented on the noise problem as significant and trafficin the area is already terrible. Board member Walter spoke about the San Rafael experience where lighting improved the activity and lessened vandalism. His interest in lighting is for safety and severely limiting the usage, so that this effort not center on servicing the revenue bond. Board member Wright concurred. Lopin asked length of baseball game (2 hrs; soccer at 1.5 hrs.) and suggested that lights can be limited. Chair Breen indicated his support contingent on the task force and Sequoia residents reaching agreement.

6. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT REPORT

See item 5 above.

7. FUNDRAISING COMMITTEE REPORT

Anne Murphy reported that the fundraising committee needs to know the status of the grant applications before taking the next steps. Louise Mathews requested a fundraising report listing the donations and pledges received.

8. OPEN TIME FOR PUBLIC EXPRESSION

In response to an audience question, it was stated that the JPA plan will go to the Planning Commission for approval and is subject to CEQA rules.

9. JPA REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, QUESTIONS, COMMENTS

Board member Wright requested that Director Little report at the December meeting on the budget for the revised plan and the timing of the funds necessary to move forward with the park development. Peter Arnold commented on the possibility of a phase-in of the plan. Board member Lopin announced that flyers cannot be given out on school property.

10. ADJOURNMENT

Chair Breen adjourned the meeting at 10:00 pm.

Respectfully Submitted,

Janet Pendoley

Treasurer, Red Hill Community Park JPA

Finance and Administrative Services Director, Town of San Anselmo