Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space Acceptance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conejo open-space board approves readiness to accept 245-acre parcel from Seventh-day Adventists
Summary
The Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency voted unanimously to find acceptable a 245-acre parcel (lot 15, APN 667-0-051-565) offered by the Southern California Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and to make the SEQUA exemption finding; the action is procedural and does not complete the deed transfer.
Get email alerts on the Open Space Acceptance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency on May 20 adopted a resolution finding that a 245-acre tract northwest of the terminus of Academy Drive meets the agency's conditions for acceptance and is eligible for transfer to the agency.
Administrator Brian Stark told the board the property (lot 15 of tract 49, identified as assessor's parcel number 667-0-051-565) was dedicated for permanent open-space protection under Specific Plan 13 and Amendment No. 2 approved in 2011. Staff reported the five-year restoration and monitoring period tied to earlier required restoration work has concluded and that a Phase I environmental site assessment and title review identified no objectionable issues. Stark also noted a typo in the board packet that listed acreage as 7.14 acres and said the correct acreage is 245 acres.
Why it matters: the parcel adjoins existing open space lands (including Conejo Canyons and Wildwood areas), would broaden habitat connections and trail opportunities, and would add a substantial area to the agency's conservation holdings if and when the deed transfer is completed.
Public comment and objections: Velino Salazar, immediate past president of the Southern California Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, spoke in favor of the transfer but said his organization had requested a short continuance through its attorney to allow additional conversation about an interior —donut hole— parcel the church regards separately. Salazar said the church did not oppose the agency's acceptance of the 245-acre parcel and expressed gratitude to staff for assistance in completing long-running restoration responsibilities.
Legal and procedural details: staff urged the board to treat tonight's action as a procedural certificate of acceptance that does not itself convey title. Stark said any grant deed and escrow steps are executed by the property owner; the board's resolution attaches a certificate of acceptance so the agency is prepared to accept the deed when parties agree. Staff also recommended the board make CEQA-related findings; the resolution cites California Code of Regulations, title 14, sections 15061(b)(3) and 15325 for exemptions.
Board discussion touched on enforcement and management issues (illegal motorcycle access along Academy Drive), timelines for trail development (staff estimated one to several years for a new trail connection), and zoning questions tied to an interior parcel that the board said is under City of Thousand Oaks jurisdiction. Directors asked about due diligence; staff confirmed completion of title review and a Phase I environmental report.
Vote and next steps: Director Nichols moved and Director Hofer seconded the motion to approve Resolution 2026-03 with the corrected acreage; the board approved it by roll call, 5-0. Stark said the agency will open escrow and coordinate apportionment of property taxes and other transfer mechanics once the owners execute the grant deed; the board's action makes the agency administratively ready but does not yet place the parcel in agency inventory.
Authorities, citations and technical notes: staff referenced Specific Plan 13 (1995, amended 2011) and the CEQA exemptions in California Code of Regulations, title 14, sections 15061(b)(3) and 15325. The property's APN and tract/lot identifiers were provided in the staff presentation and the board packet.
What remains unresolved: the —donut hole— interior parcel (roughly 70—80 acres of differing land-use designation) remains a separate land-use question for the City of Thousand Oaks and was not decided by tonight's action. The board also noted ongoing operational concerns (motorized trespass) that staff will continue to address.

