My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2009-10-26
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2009
>
AgdaPkt 2009-10-26
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2009 2:31:21 PM
Creation date
10/22/2009 1:53:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
10/26/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
193
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Page 1 of 1 <br />8A <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />A TTY -Julie Rosas <br /> <br />From: ATTY-Stan Yamamoto <br /> <br />Sent: Monday I October 05, 2009 2:26 PM <br /> <br />To: MGR-Malcolm Smith <br /> <br />Cc: ATTY-Julie Rosas <br /> <br />Subject: staff report on public outreach plan for hi speed rail <br /> <br />Malcolm: the recommendation is to Ilaccept" the report but the body of the report says all cities being <br />asked to "approve" a comparable plan. Your report isn't asking for a resolution. If council accepts the <br />plan, irs less formal then signing on as having approved it. As I'm not really conversation on what's going <br />on here, I don't know if this is a legally significant distinction. But, if the council "approves" of the plan, <br />they will be hard pressed to complain about it later. <br />Let me know which direction you need to go. <br /> <br />10/5/2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.