Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2023 01 11

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes December 14, 2022 Page 4 of 8 Helen asked about the terms "out lots." Ember said these were public land dedications from the development. She said that the land is owned by the city, but some areas have limited HOA maintenance responsibilities. Ember said staff need legal review for this issue. The city has agreed to mowing a 10 foot buffer strip, but is trying to keep the actual open space (outlot E) un- mowed. Ember reassured the public that all the out lots would be part of the wildfire contract. She added that staff walked with the HOA landscapers to show them which land is owned by whom. Mr. Cathcart suggested that an HOA member should be included in that process too, since landscapers change more frequently. Ember said she would be happy to work with whomever the HOA would like to appoint as a point person. Ember added that some of the out lots they identified are considered Parks, not Open Space, which gives them more management flexibility. Ember will inform the Parks Superintendent about the out lots (B, C, D) for mowing consideration. Jessamine asked for a staff update to follow up on this issue at the next meeting. Discussion Item - Opportunities to Improve the Property Acquisition Ranking Process. Presented by Jessamine Fitzpatrick, OSAB Member - Jessamine presented a slide show to guide a discussion about the property acquisition ranking process that OSAB does every two years. The purpose of the process is to create a ranking document that can be useful to City Council. Her notes from the July meeting discussion included strengths and weaknesses of the current process. She shared some process improvement ideas that she had generated. 1) Each cycle, have an OSAB representative meet with Open Space Staff, the City Manager's Office, City Council, and possibly the County to get input from stakeholders to learn about their needs for the ranking document. 2) Before ranking the properties, determine specific acquisition strategies, so the discussion could be about a particular property with a specific strategy listed. For example, some properties might be evaluated for fee simple acquisition and others might be considered solely for a trail easement. 3) After the voting, there could be a discussion about proactive options to active acquisition. 4) OSAB members should receive a copy of whatever goes to City Council at the end. David commented that the ranking list should be pushed to council rather than waiting for council to ask for it. Ember was under the impression that council generally asks to see the OSAB ranking list during executive session. Helen and Ember talked about the information sheets staff developed for potential land parcels and how helpful they had been.