My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0019.000 2000-2002
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
2000-2002
>
COM 0019.000 2000-2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2008 11:50:32 AM
Creation date
5/10/2008 2:15:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
2000-2002
Communication
0019
Point
000
Author
Dixie Kaetsu, Finance Director, Director of Finance Stephen Yamashiro, Mayor
Communications - Referred To
FC
Comments
Council: Res. 9-01 adopted - 01/10/01 FC-5: Recommends adoption of Res. 9-01-12/19/00 (FC 34)
Communications - File Code
FND/TRF
Document Relationships
AGE COUNCIL 01/10/2001 2000-2002
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2000-2002\Council
AGE FC 12/19/2000 2000-2002
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2000-2002\Finance Committee (FC)
REP FC 005 12/19/2000 2000-2002
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Reports\2000-2002\Finance Committee (FC)
REP FC 005 12/19/2000 2000-2002
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Reports\2000-2002\Finance Committee (FC)
RES 009 Draft 01 2000-2002
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Resolutions\2000-2002
RES 009 Draft 01 2000-2002
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Resolutions\2000-2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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).
View images
View plain text
b) that further a vote of all residents, not just members of the Hui <br /> will be solicited prior to making any final decisions. <br /> c) That if a grant is applied for, and approved, this will in no way <br /> weigh towards the final decision on the area. <br /> HOWEVER PRIOR TO EDEN SUBMITTING R GRRNT PROPOSRL 1 feel that <br /> certain points should be addressed to determine if the grant proposal <br /> will euen conform to the master plan, be the best idea for the <br /> community in regards to costs, preservation, and implementing the <br /> master plan, or euen complying with County regulations. <br /> IN RERDING the master plan I have a few major points of <br /> contention which should be addressed PRIOR to applying for any type <br /> of grant. <br /> 1) In reviewing the archeological review letter dated Jun 9, 1985 <br /> from Mr. Paul Rosendhal. He clearly states that PRIOR to any <br /> decisions with regards to the area, a full and further study is <br /> completely necessary to determine what is within this site area with <br /> regards to archeological remains, their significance, how they can be <br /> protected, etc. He clearly states that in his opinion, this area could <br /> have important prehistoric or early historic remains within same and <br /> that as an initial step, the entire area should be studied, cataloged, <br /> and discussed. In lieu of this, and your committees knowledge of <br /> artifacts discovered in the general area, I know you will agree that <br /> this must be addressed. To propose a park, paved walkways, etc. and <br /> submit a grant proposal, PRIOR to further study (merely to secure a <br /> grant) seems not to heed the findings contained within the master <br /> plan. <br /> Any grant proposal made prior to conforming to Mr. Rosenthals <br /> conclusions SHOULD FULLY inform the Grantor: <br /> * that the area has not been fully studied, mapped or cataloged. <br /> * that the master plan clearly states that any decisions for the area <br /> should be fully conditioned on, and based on those findings of further <br /> studies. <br /> * that after any necessary studies are done that the membership and <br /> <br /> residents, and concerned parties will make the ultimate decision for <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.