HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-29-2007 Charter PacketLINO LAKES CHARTER COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Thursday, November 29, 2007
1. Call to Order and Roll Call 6:30 PM
2. Pledge of Allegiance 6:32 PM
3. Approval of Agenda 6:33 PM
4. Open Mike 6:34 PM
5. Approval of minutes, November 15, 2007 6:35 PM
6. Old Business
A. Review draft amendment from Attorney
B. Submitting amendment to Council discussion
7. New Business
Adjourn
6:40 PM
8:30 PM
A. Set Agenda, January 2008 9:20 PM
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
r1 44
DATE
TIME STARTED
TIME ENDED
MEMBERS PRESENT
MEMBERS EXCUSED
MEMBERS UNEXCUSED
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT
DRAFT
CITY OF LINO LAKES
CHARTER COMMISSION
: November 15, 2007
. 6:35 P.M.
: 10:22 P.M.
: Dahl, Trehus, Duffy, Bor, Richard Williams,
Rosemary Williams, Storberg, Zastrow, Stockman
Maher, and Carlson
: Aldentaler, Vacha, Bening, Handrick,
: Montain
: None
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Chair Duffy called the special meeting of the Lino Lakes Charter Commission to order at 6:35
p.m. on November 15, 2007.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chair Duffy suggested one change to the agenda after item #4 (open mike) to include a brief
discussion of Commissioner Trehus's recent email and requested the Commissioners take a vote
regarding the proposed referendum provision in light of Commissioner Trehus's email.
Commissioner Carlson stated he respectfully disagreed with Chair Duffy. He stated there was
significant discussion by the Charter Commission at its November 1st meeting regarding the
taxpayer referendum and there were only two nays following the vote on the motion, resulting in
the motion being carried.
Commissioner Storberg concurred.
MOTION by Chair Duffy to amend the agenda to include a discussion regarding the taxpayer
referendum provision of the proposed Charter amendment.
Further Discussion
Commissioner Trehus suggested this item could be included under agenda item #6, Old Business
(review revised draft amendment).
Chair Duffy withdrew her motion.
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 2
DRAFT
45 MOTION by Commissioner Trehus, seconded by Commissioner Zastrow, to approve the agenda
46 as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
47
48 OPEN MIKE
49
50 Chair Duffy introduced Steve Minar and stated Mr. Minar will be joining the Charter
51 Commission in 2008.
52
53 The Commissioners welcomed Mr. Minar to the Charter Commission.
54
55 APPROVAL OF MINUTES — NOVEMBER 1, 2007
56
57 Commissioner Storberg requested line 236 be amended to clarify the reference to the
58 Commissioner making the statement, to read: "Commissioner Storberg concurred, and stated Ms.
59 Marty is the attorney and we are paying her...".
60
61 Commissioner Trehus requested line 35 be amended to read "example, requiring that a certain
62 percentage of residents in a particular neighborhood are `against' ... ".
63
64 Commissioner Trehus requested line 36 be amended to read "doesn't sound right, and suggested
65 it should require that a certain percentage of residents in a...".
66
67 MOTION by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Stockman Maher, to approve the
68 November 1, 2007, Charter Commission meeting minutes, as amended. Motion carried
69 unanimously.
70
71 PAUL MONTAIN MEMBER STATUS
72
73 Commissioner Dahl noted she did not put this item on the agenda for this evening and stated it
74 will be on the next regular meeting agenda.
75
76 OLD BUSINESS — REVIEW REVISED DRAFT AMENDMENT
77
78 Chair Duffy asked if the Commissioners had any comments regarding Commissioner Trehus's
79 recent email.
80
81 Commissioner Storberg asked if the question regarding the taxpayer referendum provision should
82 be left to the voters to decide.
83
84 Chair Duffy stated she felt this runs the risk of confusing the voters.
85
86 Commissioner Trehus stated he felt leaving the Charter the way it currently reads is always going
87 to be an option for the voters. He stated the City Council has the option of going with the Task
88 Force's draft amendment or with the Charter Commission's draft amendment.
2
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 3
DRAFT
89 Commissioner Stockman Maher requested discussion regarding the reasons for amending the
90 current Charter.
91
92 Commissioner Storberg stated her belief that the primary impetus to amending the Charter
93 appears to be so that the roads get fixed.
94
95 Commissioner Bor asked if the referendum were passed, would the Commission still be
96 interested in amending the Charter. She stated she views it as an effort to clean up some of the
97 language in the current Charter.
98
99 Commissioner Carlson stated he felt there was consensus at the Commission's last meeting
100 regarding this matter.
101
102 Commissioner Bor stated this issue appears to be perceived in the community as a divisional
103 issue for the people who live on the road in question. She felt if it were not this road, and we
104 were talking about some other road in the City and a different process had occurred with
105 consensus among the residents, there would likely be a different outcome. She stated she did not
106 believe there was disagreement among residents that the roads need to be fixed; it's primarily a
107 question of how the repairs get funded. She stated she is in favor of tweaking the language in the
108 amendment and presenting it to the City Council for its consideration. She indicated it is
109 important to have a good faith dialogue with the City Council regarding the proposed
10 amendment.
111
112 Commissioner Dahl expressed her appreciation to Commissioner Trehus for his contemplative
113 email. She stated one of the questions that she has been considering is "what do we want to
114 accomplish with this amendment?" She stated in the Pavement Management Report, West
115 Shadow Lake Drive was not listed as #1 in terms of needing repair. She thought it was #19 and
116 then rose to the top as being the worst road in the City. She asked if consideration should be
117 given to revising the referendum provision to state if residents do not want a referendum, they are
118 required to petition against it.
119
120 Commissioner Bor stated the feasibility study provision is intended to give residents input on
121 proposed public improvements.
122
123 Commissioner Carlson stated the referendum issue and Charter amendment have been discussed
124 at length since the beginning of the year.
125
126 Commissioner Trehus stated he felt if there are provisions in the proposed Charter amendment
127 that a majority of the Commissioners don't agree on, it should not get passed on to the City
128 Council for its consideration.
129
130 Commissioner Carlson stated the November 1st Commission meeting had its largest attendance
��31 to date; at that meeting, the Commission reached a consensus on the issue and it was understood
.32 that the Commission's comments would be presented to Ms. Marty. He stated the Commission
3
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 4
DRAFT
133 is under a tight deadline and if people have changed their minds on the issue, it may be prudent
134 to take a vote.
135
136 Chair Duffy stated she spoke with Commissioner Vacha earlier in the week and he indicated that
137 he felt the Commission should continue to move forward with the proposed Charter amendment.
138
139 The Commission welcomed Karen Marty to the meeting. Ms. Marty stated she revised Section 8
140 after receiving the Commission's comments from its November 1St meeting. She indicated the
141 revisions should make the Charter amendments easier to understand and presented the
142 Commission with a revised draft of Section 8.
143
144 Ms. Marty stated the Commission previously requested input regarding the "local character"
145 language. She stated the revised draft puts the local character language back in, and asked if the
146 Commission wants to include language that describes who benefits from a public improvement.
147
148 Commissioner Storberg stated the current Charter states there is no way the City can fix roads
149 without going to a referendum. She added she would like to see the language address fixing
150 existing roads and not putting in new roads.
151
152 Ms. Marty stated that concept is not currently incorporated in this draft. She stated the concept of
153 maintenance versus new roads can be split out.
154
155 Commissioner Storberg stated she felt the language needs to be a little clearer.
156
157 Commissioner Trehus stated if the City is going to use taxpayer dollars it has to go to a
158 referendum.
159
160 Ms. Marty asked the Commission how it wants to address maintenance versus reconstruction.
161 She suggested the amendment could state that maintenance of roads is not something for which
162 the City can assess.
163
164 Commissioner Zastrow stated the City is supposed to fix the roads without assessing and there is
165 currently a five year plan to do that without assessing. He stated if a particular road is going to
166 be reconstructed, the City can assess.
167
168 Commissioner Stockman Maher stated she felt it was important to specify that maintenance of
169 roads comes out of the general fund without assessing. She stated it also may be helpful to define
170 the term "maintenance."
171
172 Commissioner Bor concurred.
173
174 Commissioner Trehus stated that currently, every item of maintenance short of reconstruction is
175 considered "maintenance" and the City does not assess for that.
176
4
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 5
DRAFT
177 Commissioner Bor asked how the current Charter reads with respect to maintenance.
178
179 Commissioner Trehus stated the current policy is not to assess for anything short of
180 reconstruction or utility improvements and it does not go to a referendum.
181
182 Commissioner Bor asked if the Commission wants the Charter to differentiate between
183 maintenance, to outline how maintenance is funded, and whether it should trigger a referendum.
184
185 It was the consensus of the Commission to include maintenance in the proposed Charter
186 amendment.
187
188 Commissioner Bor stated she would like the amendment to state that roads are maintained
189 through the general fund. She stated if it is determined that a particular road needs to be
190 reconstructed, the City would be required to go through the process outlined in the Charter
191 amendment.
192
193 Chair Duffy asked the Commissioners for input regarding reconstruction.
194
195 Commissioner Stockman Maher stated the referendum issue is a hot button topic that is
196 ultimately intended to give citizens their rights; at the same time, it is important not to give voters
x.197 too many choices. She stated residents are concerned about any type of work that would require
98 raising taxes.
199
200 There was considerable discussion regarding a referendum requirement for reconstruction.
201
202 It was the consensus of the Commission to not require a referendum for any street reconstruction.
203
204 Further Discussion
205 Commissioner Dahl stated she felt there should be some limit placed on reconstruction.
206
207 Chair Duffy stated that Section 8.09 is intended to address this concern, requiring a petition with
208 signatures of 12% of the number of votes cast for mayor in the last mayoral election to trigger a
209 referendum. She indicated that based on this year's mayoral election, a petition would require
210 approximately 250 signatures.
211
212 Commissioner Trehus stated the required number of signatures will vary widely from year to year
213 based on voter turn -out. He added the norm has been approximately 70% turn -out versus this
214 year's 21%; as a result, a petition for a referendum would require approximately 900 signatures
215 with a 70% turn -out.
216
217 Commissioner Carlson respectfully disagreed, stating that the 2005 election had 4,300 votes cast
218 in the mayoral election.
"*""ss,19
220 Chair Duffy asked if the Commissioners felt the 12% requirement was too high or too low.
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 6
DRAFT
221 Commissioner Dahl asked if a number could be utilized instead of a percentage.
222
223 Ms. Marty replied in the affirmative, and stated a number could be utilized in addition to a
224 percentage, e.g., 12% up to a maximum of 500 signatures.
225
226 Commissioner Stockman Maher stated that 250 signatures is a lot of signatures to obtain on a
227 petition.
228
229 Chair Duffy stated that the Commission discussed this issue at length at its last meeting and
230 stated her preference for using 12% up to a maximum of 500 signatures.
231
232 Commissioner Dahl asked what the ramifications would be if, instead of requiring 12% to
233 petition for a referendum, you reverse it, i.e., if you do not want a referendum on a particular
234 road, you have to petition for that.
235
236 Ms. Marty replied it creates an option that would likely never be exercised.
237
238 Chair Duffy stated the Commission previously discussed eliminating a blanket referendum
239 provision.
240
241 Ms. Marty stated if you make the petition process easy, you protect your residents.
242
243 Commissioner Trehus asked if the Commission was attempting to appease the City Council. He
244 stated the Commission should be looking at the referendum issue in terms of what is good for the
245 entire city, not what the City Council is going to accept, and let the voters decide. He indicated
246 the Charter Commission has included strong citizen rights in its proposal.
247
248 Ms. Marty asked what each Commissioner would like to have included in the amendment with
249 respect to giving people the right to petition for a referendum. She stated the simplest way is to
250 have a petition process where people can ask for referendum.
251
252 Commissioner Dahl stated that perhaps a good compromise would be the requirement for a
253 referendum on any project over a certain dollar amount.
254
255 Chair Duffy stated that if the amendment includes a set dollar amount, the Charter will have to be
256 amended to keep up with inflation.
257
258 Commissioner Bor requested that the Commissioners consider two questions: Does the
259 Commission want every road reconstruction project to go to referendum automatically, or does
260 the Commission want to keep it as currently being proposed where you petition for a referendum
261 with 12% of the votes cast for mayor in the last mayoral election?
262
6
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 7
DRAFT
263 Chair Duffy called for an informal show of hands on the following question: Who wants to keep
264 a blanket referendum provision in the Charter where all road reconstruction projects go to a
265 referendum?
266
267 Five Commissioners voted in favor.
268
269 Chair Duffy called for an informal show of hands on the following question: Who wants to
270 require a petition for a referendum with 12% of the votes cast for mayor in the last mayoral
271 election?
272
273 Five Commissioners voted in favor, resulting in a split vote.
274
275 Chair Duffy stated the Commission's deadline is December 6th; if the Commission does not
276 resolve the issue and presents nothing to the City Council, it is likely the Council will proceed
277 with the amendment prepared by the Task Force.
278
279 Commissioner Trehus asked if the Commission does not present anything to the City Council
280 and/or if the Council rejects the Commission's proposal, whether the Council has to put
281 something on the ballot.
282
/'.N. 283 Ms. Marty replied the City Council is under no obligation and stated she does not know if there is
284 an ordinance in place requiring this to be put on the ballot.
285
286 Commissioner Trehus asked if the City Council would entertain a motion from the Charter
287 Commission to postpone the matter.
288
289 Ms. Marty stated there is nothing in state law requiring the City Council to approve a particular
290 process in a particular timeframe. She added if the Council does not have anything from the
291 Charter Commission on which to act, they will likely proceed with the Task Force's proposed
292 amendment.
293
294 Commissioner Trehus stated that one of the big things with the Charter is that it lets the people
295 decide important issues. He expressed his strong belief that the Charter must give power to
296 residents to make changes.
297
298 Ms. Marty stated it appears the Commission desires to have simple majority rule as much as
299 possible, with taxes and special assessments to be included here as well.
300
301 Commissioner Stockman Maher stated it was her opinion that the Commission should keep the
302 blanket referendum provision and added that raising taxes is a big deal and people should have
303 the option to say "I don't want my taxes raised" or "okay, I want my road fixed."
304
""\-,\305 Commissioner Stockman Maher left the meeting at 8:34 p.m.
306
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 8
DRAFT
307 Commissioner Rosemary Williams stated she preferred to keep the blanket referendum
308 provision.
309
310 Commissioner Richard Williams stated it was his preference to keep anything that isn't 100%
311 paid for my property owners, adding if road improvements or reconstruction were done without a
312 referendum, then everybody's taxes would go up disproportionately.
313
314 Commissioner Storberg stated she felt she was on the fence regarding the issue. She stated she
315 liked the way it was currently written, but felt it needed to be changed.
316
317 Commissioner Zastrow stated he felt it was okay to give the City Council some authority, but it
318 appears that the City wants to assess everybody.
319
320 Ms. Marty asked whether the Charter should allow smaller projects and projects that don't
321 involve streets, with major projects and street projects requiring a referendum.
322
323 Commissioner Carlson reiterated that at the last Commission meeting, there were two nay votes
324 on this issue. He stated there are currently millions of dollars in projects going on in the City and
325 it is against human nature to vote to raise your taxes, and some things have to be mandated. He
326 felt the 12% requirement gives citizens an option, and added he did not feel it was necessary to
327 put a cap on the number of signatures required on a petition.
328
329 Commissioner Bor stated that she wants the City roads to be maintained and to be safe. She
330 stated the proposed Section 8.09 allows all residents to vote on a referendum whether to
331 reconstruct a road or not; the amendment simply adds a component that allows initiation of the
332 process. She stated she is in favor of leaving the requirement at 12%, with no cap.
333
334 Commissioner Dahl stated she has always been an advocate of giving the power to the people
335 and the right to vote on important issues. She stated she voted for the 12% requirement at the last
336 Commission meeting. She indicated a particular neighborhood always has the option to pay for
337 an entire project, with or without the Charter; the proposed amendment makes the Charter very
338 unique and allows residents to actively take part in voting.
339
340 Commissioner Trehus stated it is a big responsibility to get signatures on a petition. With the
341 rapid growth in the City, the bar is going to be raised and could require over 1,000 signatures at
342 some point in the future. He questioned whether residents would go out and obtain that many
343 signatures.
344
345 Chair Duffy reiterated her preference to keep the 12% requirement with a cap up to 500
346 signatures. She stated the current draft includes a number of steps that provide for public input;
347 these steps are not a part of the current Charter. She indicated that if we were to require that all
348 projects get put on the ballot, she did not feel any road projects would get completed. She felt
349 there were sufficient safeguards in the proposed amendment giving more power to the residents.
350
8
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 9
DRAFT
351 Ms. Marty reviewed Section 8.07 regarding indication of preferences and Section 8.08 regarding
352 City Council action. She pointed out that the City Council is required to approve the alternative
353 which was preferred by the largest number of property owners; this goes straight to majority.
354 She added if the residents reject all of the alternatives, the City Council may tell staff to come up
355 with another alternative. She stated it is impossible to list all of the possible scenarios and at
356 some point, you end up giving people too many options.
357
358 Ms. Marty then outlined the changes made to each section of the draft amendment.
359
360 Section 8.01. Power to Make Improvements
361
362 Ms. Marty stated she revised this section to reflect the fact that public improvements can only be
363 done for projects that principally benefit existing residents.
364
365 Section 8.02. Relation to State Law
366
367 Ms. Marty stated no changes were made to this provision.
368
369 Section 8.03. Power to Impose Special Assessments
370
371 Ms. Marty stated there were questions about the term "special benefit." She stated this is a
72 flexible term defined by the Courts and the definition will vary from project to project.
373
374 Ms. Marty stated there were also questions about the term "principally" and stated it would be
375 interpreted in each individual situation. Ms. Marty noted the way benefit to a property is
376 measured is by the increase in property value. She added she did not use the phrase "benefited
377 property" because the real issue is which properties will be assessed. She stated she also took the
378 word "project" out and referred to everything only as "public improvement."
379
380 Section 8.04. How to Initiate Public Improvements for Which Special Assessments May Be
381 Imposed
382
383 Ms. Marty agreed this section was cumbersome and has reformatted it to make it easier to read.
384 She stated Subdivision 1 outlines the policy; subd. 2 states there are three ways to initiate public
385 improvements; subd. 3 states that owners of 100% of the property proposed to be assessed may
386 petition the City Council. She added that subd. 3 states if you get 100%, you do not have to
387 follow the rest of the Charter; that is why an exception was made in Section 8.03.
388
389 Ms. Marty explained that subd. 4 uses 25% to 99% for the petition and this process will be
390 determined by how many people sign a petition that they want a particular project. She stated in
391 determining whether sufficient signatures are present on a petition in this subdivision, four rules
392 need to be followed, as outlined in the draft.
/'`ti�393
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 10
DRAFT
394 Ms. Marty stated that in subd. 5, the City Council may initiate public improvements without a
395 signed petition by a 4/5 vote.
396
397 Section 8.05. Feasibility Study
398
399 Ms. Marty stated the language in subd. 2 of Section 8.05 was revised to reflect the feasibility
400 study shall include information on alternatives, such as doing individual improvements or doing
401 different combinations of the improvements. She added state law defines "feasibility study" and
402 noted that adding more details makes this section more cumbersome and difficult to understand;
403 it also raises the risk that the language will be outdated sooner.
404
405 Commissioner Trehus reiterated his concern with respect to the size of storm ponds.
406
407 Ms. Marty stated a feasibility study is meant to find out whether a project can physically be done
408 and whether it makes good economic sense. She stated that storm pond calculations get figured
409 out further into the project.
410
411 Commissioner Trehus asked if a feasibility study locks the City into giving an accurate picture of
412 what is going to take place.
413
414 Ms. Marty replied that it should; if it doesn't, you would have a good legal argument.
415
416 Section 8.06. Public Hearing
417
418 Ms. Marty stated that the ten day requirement is already contained in state law; as a result, the
419 revision requested by the Commission was not made.
420
421 Section 8.07. Indication of Preferences
422
423 Ms. Marty stated she simplified this provision to make it easier to understand.
424
425 Section 8.08 City Council Action
426
427 Ms. Marty stated this provision was revised to include a majority rule provision.
428
429 Section 8.09 Taxpayer Referendum
430
431 Ms. Marty stated that the Commission requested subd. 3 be revised to add the word "determined"
432 for a determined percent of the named public improvement project. She requested input from the
433 Commission as to their reasoning for this change.
434
435 Following discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to delete the "X" and insert a
436 blank line for the percent figure.
437
10
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 11
DRAFT
438 Section 8.10. Special Assessments for Services
439
440 Ms. Marty stated the Commission had requested advice regarding the consequences of
441 eliminating this section, noting this section is in the current Charter. She indicated this section
442 states the City Council can assess for City services; if this section is eliminated, the City Council
443 has to follow the special assessment process of giving people notice and a chance to appeal, i.e.,
444 due process. Ms. Marty recommended taking this section out of the amendment.
445
446 It was the consensus of the Commission to remove this section.
447
448 Section 8.11 Specified Commercial Areas
449
450 Ms. Marty stated it appears there is only one area affected by this section. She requested
451 confirmation of this fact.
452
453 Ms. Marty stated she revised subd. 6 to include a five year time limit after the completion of
454 construction of improvements.
455
456 Commissioner Bor stated there was previously some discussion about not hooking up to city
457 sewer/water and whether the City can mandate that residents hook up to public improvements.
458
59 Ms. Marty stated she will research this issue to determine if the language can state that the City
460 cannot mandate a resident hook up to public improvements unless the septic system fails or the
461 property is sold.
462
463 Further Discussion
464
465 Ms. Marty requested further comments from the Charter Commission on the proposed
466 amendment and asked to receive any comments by November 19.
467
468 Chair Duffy asked that written comments or questions be forwarded via email to her or
469 Commissioner Dahl as soon as possible; the emails will then be forwarded to Ms. Marty for her
470 consideration no later than Monday, November 19.
471
472 It was the consensus of the Commission to meet on Thursday, November 29, 2007, at 6:30 p.m.
473 in order to review the final proposed Charter amendment.
474
475 OTHER
476
477 Ms. Marty stated she had reviewed the proposed letters to the editor for publication and provided
478 her comments to the Commission.
479
'N480 The Charter Commission members expressed their appreciation to Ms. Marty for her efforts in
481 drafting the Charter amendment.
11
Charter Commission
November 15, 2007
Page 12
DRAFT
482 NEW BUSINESS
483
484 A. ELECTION RESULTS ON ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
485
486 Chair Duffy presented the election summary report from the November 6, 2007, election.
487
488 B. SET NOVEMBER/DECEMBER/JANUARY AGENDA
489
490 Chair Duffy stated the Charter Commission will meet on Thursday, November 29, 2007, at
491 6:30 p.m. to review the final draft of the Charter amendment. She stated she will present the
492 amendment to the City Council at its worksession on December 3, 2007, followed by the regular
493 City Council meeting on December 10, 2007.
494
495 Commissioner Bor suggested that Ms. Marty attend the City Council worksession with Chair
496 Duffy on December 3, 2007.
497
498 Chair Duffy presented the 2008 schedule of meetings.
499
500 ADJOURN.
501
502 MOTION by Commissioner Storberg, seconded by Commissioner Zastrow, to adjourn the
503 special meeting at 10:22 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
504
505 Respectfully submitted,
506
507 Barbara Hughes
508 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
12
Julie Bartell
From: the.duffys [the.duffys@msn.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 11:19 PM
To: Julie Bartell
Cc: Carolline Dahl
Subject: Yet Another Charter Meeting....
Hi Julie,
Page 1 of 1
The Charter Commission likes meeting so much that we are going to have another meeting in two weeks, November
29 at 6:30 p.m. Is there a room available for us? We'd like to have Barbara from TS again if that works with her
schedule.
Also, could you tell me where we are listed on the agenda for the work session on December 3?
Finally, in the existing charter document on page 23, there are three areas that are exempt from the provisions of the
Charter. It is my understanding that there is only one of these three areas that would even apply as exempt from the
charter provisions. Could you please tell me which area that is?
Thanks, Julie!
Cori Duffy
11/16/2007