Laserfiche WebLink
14 <br /> City Manager noted that Congressman McCloskey had discussed the statement at <br /> length during Homeowners ' meeting , and in the discussion , indicated that prior to <br /> his election to Congress , he had thoroughly delved into Ordinance No . 1128 to <br /> determine legal sufficiency , therefore , is fully aware of the relationship of <br /> Leslie and the City . City Manager affirmed there is no partnership under technical <br /> definition and that neither party is liable for actions of the other . Referring <br /> to another point in the letter concerning the " understanding " that DMJM and Dames <br /> & Moore were consultants for the developer , he emphasized they are consultants <br /> approved by the City Council , retained by the City , and that there is a provision <br /> in DMJM ' s agreement which precludes their doing any work for Leslie without <br /> express approval by the City , which has never been requested nor granted . <br /> Reimbursement to DMJM is from District bonds and not by the developer . <br /> Mr . Johnson stated the builders have not stopped <br /> in Unit I , and advised cancellations referred to <br /> are in the Dolphin subdivision which was never <br /> started . He responded to further questions by <br /> advising that no new projects being considered <br /> at present which Leslie has agreed to participate in <br /> financing ; Belmont Drain Improvement funds are <br /> now on deposit ; other District projects in which Leslie has <br /> agreed to participate are proceeding . To a question re - <br /> garding funding of projects pending sale of 1E" bonds , he <br /> replied there are none other than Bridge . <br /> Mr . Niklaus , Congressman McCloskey ' s representative , was <br /> invited to comment , and he stated he was present as an observer , <br /> but had been asked to reiterate the Congressman ' s request for <br /> :tirect reply to his letter of October 27th . He emphasized <br /> they would like direction from Council this week, if possible , <br /> and also noted the Congressman ' s willingness to meet with <br /> Council , <br /> Councilman Arnett moved to respond to Congressman McCloskey ' s offer to make him- <br /> self available for Council meeting of the 24th , and requested this be made a <br /> specific Agenda item , seconded by Councilman Henderson and carried . ( MINUTE ORDER <br /> #69 -216 ) <br /> Councilman Keckley moved to invite Senator Dolwig and Assemblyman Britschgi to <br /> participate in the Council meeting of November 24th , seconded by Councilman <br /> Weymouth and carried . ( MINUTE ORDER #69 -217 ) <br /> Councilman Arnett explained his purpose in responding independently to the Con - <br /> gressman ' s October 27th letter , and emphasized he did not attempt to answer for the <br /> Council as a whole . <br /> Councilman Petersen detailed the events of the meeting of the Homeowners ' Association <br /> referred to in the Congressman ' s letter , and fact that Congressman had asked for <br /> response from citizens of Redwood Shores , and suggestion made that in order to <br /> continue the project in lieu of a projected 18 -month wait while survey is made , <br /> perhaps Subdivisions 1 and 3 could continue , He stated it was agreed nothing could <br /> be gained by insisting on a hearing until a reply had been received on this <br /> suggestion , and urged time be allowed for this purpose . <br /> R '�� <br />