My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2010-08-23
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
AgdaPkt 2010-08-23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/23/2013 12:55:23 PM
Creation date
8/19/2010 12:36:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Redevelopment Agency
Date
8/23/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
177
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
6.1 G <br /> Page 1 <br /> , ����T <br /> To f�e Honorable 11�ay�r and Gity �oi�nc:it <br /> Frorn the Cit Mana er <br /> August 23, 2010 <br /> �UBJECT <br /> Response to fhe San Mateo County Civif Grand Jury Report "The Effectiveness of Red <br /> Light Traffic Gamera Enforcement." <br /> RECOMMENDATiON <br /> Approve the Police Chief's Response to the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report <br /> "The Effectiveness of Red Light Traffic Camera Enfor�ement." <br /> BACKGROUND <br /> In August 2Q09, the San IV(ateo County Civil Grand Jury informed the Chief of Police <br /> that it was conducting an invesfiigation into a!( Pho�o Red Light Enforcement Programs <br /> in San Mateo County. This investigation wouid be the second inquiry into Pnoto Red <br /> Light Enfo.rcement hr�pr�rns invalving fih� �ity o� RPc�w�QC� �ity_ In March 2009 the Gi���l <br /> Grand Jury fiCed its first repor# wi�h the County Superior Court perfiaining to the traffic <br /> safety effectiveness of red light cameras in Redwood City. <br /> The latest report includes 18 "findings" and six "recommendations." The Court wrote <br /> that the City must submit comments regarding the report's findings and <br /> recommendations to the Cour� no lafier than Sep�ember 7, 2010, and that fhe response <br /> must be approved by City Council at one of its regular meetings. The response to the <br /> Grand Jury is submitted for your approval. <br /> �4LTERNATfVES <br /> N/A <br /> FiSCAL IMPAGT <br /> �, <br /> N/A �- � � <br /> : {�` ���.. <br /> ; /� �: <br /> ,.:w� �. <br /> �. � � <br /> ��`"(Jf/� J y^�, �' /' J��} p � ` �. <br /> �. ...+r"�'�w/l./��+"`F �✓a'v_' 1.w+'W"" , . "^"`��"".e Ii1.F(� p 1!"'..�. �T :�i .. ...aa+-cvnw.•vnTa��FiC+..-+.� <br /> ♦ E + <br /> .-R'.'YV'y.�.. �P"M`VU+.� "wy�� d.�(y„�e.�_ '�7 °.�` � ...Lr.w....,yti.. <br /> Chris Cesena �� �` ouis A. Cobarruviaz ! �'``� <br /> Police Captain Chief of Police <br /> ------.w,._.......,�._.,��.,,...._,. <br /> � <br /> � <br /> �:w. <br /> Peter fngram V� <br /> City Manag�r <br /> �1TTACHMENTS <br /> 1. San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report "the Effectiveness of R�d Lighf <br /> Traffic Camera Enforcement" <br /> 2. Police Chief's Response to the Superior Court <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.