New Search
Page 1 of 4 <br /> RISDAL Lacey L <br /> From: RISDAL Lacey L <br /> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 9:13 AM <br /> To: SMITH Tammy D <br /> Subject: RE: funding for Creekside acquisition <br /> Tammy, <br /> Johnny and Carolyn both feel that the acquisition of this park needs to stay with the Bond fund. This acquisition <br /> was counted as one of the neighborhood acquisitions under the bond, and if we move it out, then we will be short <br /> a requirement. In addition, they both feel the single occurrence of the hand-written notes found are not enough <br /> evidence to prove that we followed the plan of purchasing this site. So, with this, I am content in leaving this site <br /> where it was originally funded from. Let me know if you have any questions, <br /> Lacey Risdal, x4841 <br /> Financial Analyst <br /> Public Works <br /> Maintenance and Parks & Open Spaces <br /> From: SMITH Tammy D <br /> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:29 PM <br /> To: RISDAL Lacey L <br /> Subject: FUV: funding for Creekside acquisition <br /> FYI <br /> Tammy Smith <br /> From: PETERSON Tish A <br /> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:07 PM <br /> To: SMITH Tammy D <br /> Subject: FW: funding for Creekside acquisition <br /> fyi <br /> From: CARLSON Becky A <br /> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:01 PM <br /> To: PETERSON Tish A <br /> Subject: RE: funding for Creekside acquisition <br /> <br /> Yep...this could be a big deal if we should have used SDCs and not bond proceeds (I wish I knew what the <br /> <br /> original message from Phillip to Robin said, below, and how this came to their attention). If we are, indeed, going <br /> <br /> to have ahalf-million in additional 1998 bond proceeds to program and spend, then that information needs to be <br /> <br /> out there ASAP. Johnny & Carolyn are the right people to start this conversation with. <br /> -becky <br /> From: PETERSON Tish A <br /> <br /> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 3:47 PM <br /> 7/27/2006 <br /> <br />