-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: 2nd St. stop signs - outstanding requests
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 06:34:06 -0700
From: Manoff. Mark <xxxxxxx@saccounty.net>
To: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>

Jay,
I forwarded this to Randy. His e- mail foustr@ saccounty.net


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 2nd St. stop signs - outstanding requests
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 15:08:51 -0700
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Mark Manoff <xxxxxxx@saccounty.net>

Mark,

Mr. Faust has not provided his email address to me, so I am asking you
to accept the following requests from me for information and to respond
to me.

1.  This is a follow up to the telephone call I received from Mr. Randy Faust on September 30, 2004 (my caller ID said "blocked call", so I do not know the number from which he called). I asked for and he agreed to provide, "next week", the following information:

• "The County adopted board policy at this time" as it applies to the use of speed control measures on rural roads, including speed control stop signs and speed bumps.
• Details on "the criteria that was met" to comply with the county adopted board policy as it applies to the Second Street speed control measure.
• Details on any work that was done to measure and validate the criteria that was met.

--  see http://obri.net/2nd/home.html#9

I did receive, without a cover letter, on October 9, 2004, an envelope from DOT that contained a November 25, 1986 recommendation from Douglas M. Fraleigh, Director, Department of Public Works, to the Board of Supervisors recommending five items, including expansion of the Neighborhood Speed Control Program to semi-rural streets. What I received shows no indication of Board adoption. It is unknown if this is the actual adopted policy. What I want is a valid Board resolution, the actual date adopted, any changes the Board may have made, and the votes as cast by the Board. Please provide a "real" copy of the approved Board policy.

--  see http://obri.net/2nd/861125.html

1.1 I also received, in that envelope On October 9, 2004, an "Engineering and traffic study" (8-24-04) plus a 24 hour traffic count (8-19-04). As there was no cover letter, there is no statement that these are the studies that justified the stop sign. I request confirmation that these are such studies, and that these are the only studies involved.

--  see http://obri.net/2nd/survey.html


2. As I requested at the CPAC meeting October 12:

"This is a request for a copy of the County policy that established the voting procedure, including the use of what is identified as a 'questionnaire' or 'survey', yet is actually a binding vote compelling a County action.  I want to see the policy that identifies how voters are chosen, how returned ballots are secured and tallied, and how the ballot language is written and approved. I want to see the policy that did not allow me to either write an opposing ballot statement or lacking that, prevented me from finding out who was empowered to vote to install the stop signs. I want to see the policy that prevented me from presenting my side of the issue to voters before they cast their ballot."

--  see http://obri.net/2nd/Oct12.html#request


Your prompt responses to my requests will be appreciated.

Thank you,

Jay O'Brien