Board of Directors Meeting

May 25, 2006 7:30 PM

The Chestnut Hill Library

President Maxine Maddox Dornemann Called the Meeting to order at 7:30p.m. with a moment of silence.

Vice President of Operations, Chris Kemezis introduced the new Board. The results of the election for At-Large directors are as follows:

3-year term: Ned Mitinger, Wm.Stewart Graham, Marie Lachat, Carol Cope, Kathleen Jones, Joanne Dhody, Virginia Mallery, Stan Moat, Ron Recko, Thomas Fleming, Susan Pizzano and Howard Lesnick.

1-year term: James Foster, Christopher Padova, Nancy Hutter, Joseph Pizzano, Ed Feldman, Scott Alloway, Jane Piotrowski, Richard Becker, Ed Budnick, Elaine Aiello, Jonathan Sternberg and James Gleason. A letter was received from Scott Alloway who is giving up his seat to be able to remain employed by the Chestnut Hill Local. Sarah Maneely, the first runner-up in the election, will move into his one-year position.

Chris Kemezis, outgoing Vice President of Operations extended thanks to all who assisted in the election process.

Stewart Graham, Chair of the Nominating Committee reported there was no contest for the new officer’s positions or for the At-Large positions on the Executive Committee. The recommendations from the Nominating Committee were as follows: President, Ron Recko; Vice President of Operations, Lou Aiello; Vice President of the Physical Division, Susan Pizzano; Vice President of the Social Division, Jane Piotrowski; Treasurer, Ned Mitinger; Secretary, Ann Spaeth. The Recommendations for At-Large members of the Executive Committee were : Ed Budnick, Janine Dwyer, Tom Fleming, Jim Foster and Nancy Hutter.

Chris Kemezis started the voting process by circulating ballots to all board Members. Dick Becker asked what process to use if one was not interested in voting for a particular candidate. Chris Kemezis responded that one should mark one’s vote for those one wished to vote for and not vote for the others.

After Mr. Kemezis left the room with the collected ballots so as to count the votes, Mr. Becker introduced himself as a Board member. He stated his concern that while we’ve met elected board members, there are more than elected Board Members who are eligible to vote in all of our proceedings. He pointed out that the responsibility for keeping a Board list rests with the Secretary .Mr. Becker made a request of the Secretary to compose a list of the names of At- Large, Institutional and Student Directors for the next meeting. He went on to say while we had met the At -Large members we had not met the Institutional, Interlocking and Student Directors and requested that Board members be introduced either at this meeting or the next so everyone could put a name to a face and a face to a name. Tom Fleming suggested that it be done immediately. Ron asked Board Members to stand as he read their names from the lists that were available to him at that moment: from Chestnut Hill Business Association (CHBA) Anne McNally; from the Chestnut Hill Senior Center, Meredith Sonderskov; from the Chesnut Hill Parking Foundation (CHPF), John O’Connell; from Teenager’s, Inc, Marianne Dwyer; from Chesnut Hill Academy (CHA), Frank Steel; from Chestnut Hill College, Sister Carol Jean Vale; from Chestnut Hill Historical Society (CHHS), Bob Bacino; from Rotary Club, Bright Judson; from the Crefeld School, Amelia Carter; Stewart Graham, Past President, Past Community Manager; Ned Mitinger; Marie Lachat; Carol Cope; Kathleen Jones; Joanne Dhody; Virginia Mallery; Stan Moat; Thomas Fleming; Susan Pizzano; Howard Lesnick; Jane Becker; Tia Burke; Jeremy Heep; Tom Hemphill; Dina Hitchcock; Janice Manzi; Walter Sullivan; Ann Spaeth; Janine Dwyer; Lou Aiello; Jim Foster; Chris Padova; Nancy Hutter; Joe Pizzano; Ed Feldman; Sarah Maneely; Jane Piotrowski; Richard Becker; Ed Budnick; Elaine Aiello; Jonathan Sternberg; James Gleason; Maryanna Ross Cowper; Maxine Dornemann, Past President

Mr. Kemezis returned to the room and announced the vote count for the 40 ballots:
President, Ron Recko, (29); Vice President of Operations, Lou Aiello, (30); Vice President of the Physical Division, Susan Pizzano, (30);Vice President of the Social Division, Jane Piotrowski(35); Treasurer, Ned Mitinger, (31); Secretary, Ann Spaeth (31). For At-Large Members: Janine Dwyer (32); Nancy Hutter (29), Ed Budnick (29), Jim Foster (30), and Tom Fleming (29). The ballots were numbered 1- 40. Mr. Kemezis passed the ballots to the Secretary to be filed with the Minutes.

Maxine thanked everyone and wished good luck to the new Board, handing over the gavel to the new President, Ron Recko.

Ron spoke and said what an honor it is to represent the community and that he will do everything he can to heal the fracture existing on the Board. He feels there is a better than 50/50 chance to move forward. His biggest concern is that in the past it has not been about the community but about individuals and their self-serving interests. His goals for the Board are: 1) stabilizing the Chestnut Hill Local; 2) freedom of the press; 3) eliminating conflicts of interests on committees 4) establishing an oversight committee to make sure that everyone is operating for the community and not for themselves. 5) following the Bylaws, which were frequently not followed in the past. He would like to appoint George Spaeth as the Parliamentarian, who is completely objective, not
on the Board, and therefore, not allowed to vote. 6) straightening out the finances - the community needs to know where the money is and where it’s going. Ron mentioned looking into a way of saving money on the printing of the Local. “Money earned by the Local should stay with the Local”. The new board, he said, represents diversity - professionals, older people, younger people, people from the east side, people from the west side.

Ron said that the Community Fund is very important and we need to look to see where the money is. Recruit Brian Tilley to continue in helping with the fund-raising with Tom Fleming, member of the Board of Trustees of Chestnut Hill Academy, to help.” We need to set goals and recruit people to achieve these goals.”

Ron said there would be a quick question and answer session. Anyone wishing to direct a
question to him could do so at this point.
Anne McNally, President of the Chestnut Hill Business Association, and Interlocking Director from that group, noting that there was no listed agenda for the meeting other than the election of the Executive Committee, requested that questions and answers be moved to a later time in the meeting in order to accommodate those who had come with a specific request for Board approval so they would not have to wait through the rest of the meeting.

Ron said of course that would be done.

Maxine Dornemann stated that both Roxy Auto Body and Chestnut Hill College had proposals which had been approved by DRC and LUPZ which needed to be addressed promptly because of the upcoming hearing before the Zoning Board of Adjustment.

Anne McNally introduced John Ferrino, of Roxy Auto Body which is located at 7729 Winston Road, just above Mermaid Lane, and which she said had been in business in this location for over fifty years since 1948. Neighbors had been contacted and there were no objections to the proposed useage, which is unchanged from the past. Ned Mitinger asked that Mr. Ferrino, explain what he does and why the application was rejected by the ZBA. Mr. Ferrino explained that he repairs cars and sells them and has been doing this for more than forty years. There are no more than twelve of these cars on the lot at any one time. There are no real changes being made to the property. Application for Use Permit was refused - Philadelphia Code Section 14302, code does not permit an auto sales lot. This is a request to legalize an existing use. Ed Feldman said both he and Jim Foster had attended the DRC Meeting where this was approved subject to certain stipulations which the applicant had agreed to . Jeremy Heep asked what these stipulations were. Stewart Graham read these conditions from a letter forwarded by Mr. Jain from Mr. Greg Woodring of the Development Review Committee requesting that the Board endorse Roxy’s application for a certificate for auto sales of up to 12 cars, provided that: 1) The existing 6 foot fence must be maintained in good order for the duration of Roxy’s occupancy of the property; 2) Additional floodlighting or any added lighting that would, or might, illuminate any neighboring property is prohibited; 3) Advertising, or banners or signs relating to auto sales is prohibited; and 4) If or when the property is sold ,or if the character of the existing business use changes, solely in the view of the CHCA, the property owner agrees to cause the removal of the car sales use certificate from the zoning file on the property, all at his or her sole expense. A motion was made to approve
the proposal and was approved unanimously by the Board. It was agreed that a letter would be delivered the next day to Roxy Auto stating the Association’s approval so that Mr. Ferrino would have that for the ZBA hearing.

Sister Carol Jean Vale, Institutional Director from Chestnut Hill College was called regarding variances needed by the College for its proposal to build a new dormitory. She herself felt unsure as to the exact variances that were needed but knew that one was for a height variance. The College had been before both the DRC and the LUPZ. Both had approved the Colleges’ proposal. The architect for the College had been here to present the proposal to the Board but had had to leave unexpectedly. A motion was made to support the College’s proposal. It was seconded and passed.

Ron, again asked for questions or comments, but said before any question was asked he was announcing that the Second Opinion Caucus was officially over. There will be no secret meetings. We are one Board now .What he would like to see happen is to have committee reports posted on the web site and/or e-mailed to the Board Members, and also to have these reports available in the CHCA office at so anybody in the community can go up and see them. If any member of the community or any member of the Board has a concern with any of these reports they can bring those concerns up for discussion at the next Board or Executive meeting. This would allow for less time to be taken up with committee reports at the meetings. Board meetings are, he said, very precious. We have only nine of them a year. He would like to increase the number. He would also like the format to change so that action items are taken care of first, and then committee reports
and discussions follow later.

Virginia Mallery disagreed, noting that since approximately 35 or 40 years ago committee
chairmen have made their reports and that it was a way to know who the volunteers are and to recognize them. She noted that it was best if such reports were not long.

Discussion Concerning the Publisher’s Committee

Ed Feldman moved that the Publisher's Committee be ended and replaced by an ad-hoc committee that takes its impetus from the newspaper. Thomas Fleming seconded that, referring to an article in that morning's Inquirer indicating that the buyers of that paper vowed that the newspaper would not be influenced by its owners. He noted that this was a big issue in the recent election campaign, and suggested that the sooner Ed Feldman's motion was acted on the better.

Virginia Mallery suggested the idea of returning to the model of the Local Management
Committee that preceded the Publisher's Committee.Tom Fleming reiterated that the issue of undue influence on the newspaper was pivotal in the recent elections, and that this undue influence was a function of the Publisher's Committee. Noting that various possibilities existed for a new committee to manage the local, including returning to the model of the preceding Local Management Committee or forming a new committee with make-up and responsibilities to be determined, Tom Fleming said it should be apriority to end the existing Publisher's Committee, and to form a new committee with the complete cooperation of the Local staff.

Anne McNally noted that Ed Feldman's' motion was still on the floor.

Tom Fleming asked Ed Feldman if he would be willing to amend his motion so that it dealt with the abolition of the Publisher's Committee without specifying what its replacement might be. Ed Feldman agreed to amend his motion accordingly.

Tia Burke asked if such an abolition could be made without a bylaws change. Ed Feldman
suggested that the relevant bylaws be suspended. Tia Burke asked if there was a procedure in the bylaws for such a suspension and Ed Feldman stated that there was.

Discussion continued on the subject of whether the Publisher's Committee could be suspended without changing the bylaws. Ann Spaeth suggested that the action of the Publisher's Committee be suspended.

Mark Keintz expressed concern about the legality of suspending the Publisher's Committee without a bylaws change. He also suggested that it would be beneficial to have the committee overseeing the Local serve as a forum for open discussion about editorial policies.

Richard Becker said that this idea was recommended by the Bylaws Committee two years ago and that this and other items were voted on and accepted by the Board in its February meeting, and again at the year-end Board meeting which was open to the public; there was a Bylaws Committee that operated last year, and on that committee there was a person who sat in on those discussions.

Richard Becker noted that the Bylaws Committee does not change the bylaws, but makes
recommendations about changing the bylaws.Richard Becker suggested that the Board listen to Mark Keintz's plan , that the issue go back to the Bylaws Committee, that the Bylaws Committee adapt these recommendations into a new bylaw, and that the Board then vote on it. Anything else, he suggested, would be a violation of the Bylaws.

The Chair noted that the creation of the Publisher's Committee was a direct violation of the bylaw that states that the Local editor is to have control over the content of the Local.

Richard Becker reiterated that the Bylaws change creating the Publisher's Committee was done according to correct procedure, and that the Board voted on this change.

David Fielding suggested that members of the Publisher's Committee be directed to refrain from influencing the content of the paper in any way, but that the committee should not necessarily be abolished because it can be a helpful committee.

Carole Cope agreed with this and suggested that the Board take a little time to hear from Maurice Chandler who might have some ideas. She stated that the Publisher's Committee is a resource for the Publisher; no one should be looking over the editor's shoulder, and that it would be acceptable to have such wording in a Bylaw; the Publisher's Committee could serve to help the editor by protecting the editor from being bombarded with phone calls from the public.

Marie Lachat noted that the Publisher's Committee has been operating without any guidelines, and wondered how the Board could have installed the Publisher's Committee in the place of the Local Management Committee, which had guidelines, and let them do whatever they wanted to do. The Local's management committee is supposed to represent the Board, and how can it do this with no operating guidelines? The DRC, the LUPZ and the Executive Committee have guidelines. In the absence of such guidelines, Publisher's Committee could not know what to do, and this resulted in the Local's management problems of the past two years.

Tom Fleming suggested that some of the ideas being proposed did not recognize the urgency of regaining the trust of the community with regard to editorial independence. Regardless of the intent behind the Publisher's Committee, the reality is that the Committee officially has control over editorial, and this is incompatible with regaining the public trust. In order to do this, the operations of the Publisher's Committee should be suspended while a new committee is formed which has operating guidelines and which does not have control over editorial content.

Jane Becker cited language from the changed bylaws, noting that the Publisher's Committee represented the Publisher of the Local regarding the "editorial, financial and business management" of the Local, emphasizing the reference to “management”. This language could have been changed, she said, and there were two Board members on the Bylaws Committee when this happened. Those two talked with people about this change and no one did anything.

Another Board member stated that she did not see what provision of the Bylaws would be violated by suspending the Publisher's Committee and installing an ad-hoc committee; the community would appreciate such an action.

Christine Sullivan indicated that the Bylaws could not be properly discussed without having full copies of the Bylaws available.

Nancy Hutter cited language from the new Publisher's Committee bylaws and the bylaws for the preceding Local Management Committee, noted the specific elimination of language that protected the editor's control over the content of the Local, and stated that this could only have been done with intent to shift editorial control away from the editor.

Richard Becker stated he served on the Bylaws Committee at the time of the change and that the reason for the change was that the CHCA had been sued on several occasions because the editor printed articles that were libelous, and the purpose of the change was to reduce exposure to such suits.

Another Board member said that the Publisher's Committee cannot be suspended, because rules contained in the Bylaws cannot be suspended no matter how large the vote in favor of doing so.

The Chair stated that the crux of the matter was that there were contradictions in the Bylaws, in one place saying that the Local's editor has responsibility for the content of the paper and in another that the Publisher's Committee has such control. This must be resolved , and if a new bylaw is necessary to do that, then such a bylaw will be made. In the meantime, the Publisher's Committee should be considered defunct.

Jim Foster noted that no one was currently serving on the Publisher's Committee, but that new Publisher's Committee members could be appointed and then it could proceed. He also noted that it is less relevant that there were two Board members on the Bylaws Committee at the time the changes were made and that they did not propose changes than it is that a majority of the current board wishes to change these bylaws.

Tom Fleming highlighted the significance of the change in bylaws language cited by Nancy
Hutter. The new change to correct the earlier change taking away control of content form the Local's editor should be made by means of a bylaws change, and this change must be a priority.

Jeremy Heep stated that he did not believe the Publisher's Committee could be suspended, but stated that the current board could probably unanimously agree now that the Publisher's Committee is to have no editorial control over the Local. This could be done tonight, while improved bylaws language is developed. Then over the next months a working group could develop guidelines for the committee, to rectify the problem referred to by Marie Lachat.

Tia Burke noted that this plan would leave unresolved the issue of protecting the community's assets from lawsuits, and recommended that the proposed bylaws changes be reviewed by legal counsel competent to do so.

Janine Dwyer expressed support for the ideas of Jeremy Heep and Tia Burke and recommended that people having ideas concerning the proposed changes in bylaws should put these on paper for consideration by the legal adviser.

It was suggested that Jeremy put a new motion in writing and give this to the Secretary. He did this, and the motion read as follows:

"We have reviewed the Bylaws entitled the Chestnut Hill Local Publisher's Committee Purpose and Duties and we do not support an interpretation that would afford control over the editorial contents of the Local, although it does have a role in protecting the CHCA from libel. We also encourage the Bylaws Committee with adopting a clarifying amendment accordingly, consistent with the process for amending Bylaws. We further hereby appoint an ad-hoc working committee to develop guidelines for the Publisher's Committee for consideration at the next Board meeting."

The motion was moved, seconded and passed.

Parliamentary Procedure

George Spaeth distributed materials concerning parliamentary procedure which he said it was important for all Board members to be familiar with. Jane Becker inquired whether George Spaeth meant to suggest that he was not comfortable serving as parliamentarian, and George Spaeth stated that this was not the case. Walter Sullivan stated that Board members had received similar materials from him on previous occasions when he served as parliamentarian.Policy Concerning the Filling of Vacated At-Large Board Seats

Next, the issue of the replacement of an at-large seat, vacant since the earlier removal of a board member. The Chair asked for clarification of the rules concerning this.

Walter Sullivan: Chris Kemezis acknowledged in his report that it was correct that there should be 36, not 35, at-large members of the Board. Walter Sullivan requested that the Chair propose a resolution concerning the unfilled seat.

The Chair stated that since there was no urgency to fill the empty seat, since many new Board members were not familiar with the manner of the removal of the former Board member, and since it was his feeling that this action may have been taken illegally, that time should be taken to enable the new Board members to learn the details of the removal before making judgment on the filling of the seat. The resolution of the matter should therefore be deferred until the next meeting.

Walter Sullivan stated that the Board has no control over the accession to the Board in the eventof a vacancy because the Bylaws specify that this accession takes place automatically. The vacancy from the removal in January was and is therefore filled, regardless of what the Board members feel about this.

Walter Sullivan reiterated his request for a ruling on the question.

The Chair stated that the matter would be tabled. Janine Dwyer motioned to table the question, and the motion was seconded and passed with three members opposing.

In response to an appeal of the Chair's decision by Walter Sullivan, George Spaeth noted that a motion had been made and duly seconded.

Committee Formation

Nancy Hutter asked about the formation of committees.
The Chair stated that this will take place, in due time, from the revisiting of committee lists, verifying who is still serving on what committees, determining who is interested in serving on what committees, and identifying chairs for the committees. A sign-up sheet will be posted so people can indicate their interests in serving on committees.

Richard Becker stated that according to the Bylaws only members of the CHCA can serve on committees, and Ed Feldman disagreed, saying non-members could serve also.

Ann Spaeth noted that the Bylaws specify that one must be a member of the CHCA and its Board in order to serve as a committee chair, but stated that she was not aware of any requirements in the Bylaws requiring committee members to be members of the CHCA. The reason for this was to facilitate participation in the CHCA and thereby make it easier for people to learn about and become interested in the CHCA.

Jim Foster suggested that in the upcoming months information about the various committees and the possibility of volunteering for them be publicized, since many Chestnut Hill residents don't know that they exist or what they do. Lou Aiello suggested that since each committee has seats with specific terms, the process of determining who was still on which committee, how much time remained in each person's term, and who wished to continue to serve would likely be a matter of several months rather than
weeks.

Marie Lachat noted that it is common for community associations elsewhere in the city, such as Logan Neighbors, to post committee descriptions and member lists on their websites.Accounts and Public NoticesEd Feldman presented the following issues as items requiring attention:
The CHCA’s financial books must be audited, and any ledger books held by Douglas Doman must be returned immediately. Meetings should be held at the Public Library or other suitable public venue, and meetings should be announced in the Local the week before, as stipulated in the Bylaws. These listings should include agenda, talking points, and an invitation to the community to attend.He recommended also that these notices should be provided to the CHCA free of charge.8431 Germantown Avenue

Ed Feldman referred to a letter concerning a $2600.50 fine related to this building, and suggested that this fine stemmed from a code violation that Sanjiv Jain ignored; he stated that on previously asking the former CHCA President about this, she told him that the matter was being taken care of.

Ed Feldman referred $3240.00 that was paid on May 15th by the CHCA to Legacy Real Estate as a fee for renting this property, and stated that this payment should not have been requested nor paid for the following reasons:
At the November 2005 Board meeting, when this issue was pressed, Mr. Jain withdrew himself as property manager.
At subsequent meetings the issue was repeatedly brought up and it was asked why the Legacy sign was still in place at the building. The then President said that Sanjiv Jain was still managing the property, but was no longer being paid to do so.

Jane Becker interrupted Ed Feldman’s statements to ask whether the meeting was proceeding in order, and saying that Ed Feldman’s discussion did not seem to be Q & A.

Parliamentarian George Spaeth agreed that was not a question and was therefore not appropriate to the current Q & A forum.

CHCA Board Training / LaSalle Non-Profit Center

Marie Lachat suggested that CHCA Board training was more important than new member
orientation, which had become little more in the past years than a cocktail party. She said that the LaSalle Non-Profit Center conducted sessions on board training and the CHCA would be able to receive a 3-hour training session without charge. She encouraged Board members to look at the website, www.lasallenonprofitcenter.org.

Ed Feldman interjected that he had not finished talking and that he had intended to finish with a question.

Marie Lachat moved to contact the LaSalle Non-Profit Center and make a date for Board training.

The motion was seconded, voted on and passed.

Mark Keintz asked whether non-board members would be able to attend the sessions.

8431 Germantown Avenue, resumed

Ed Feldman asked that since he had documented how specific sums were taken contrary to the Bylaws, how did Chestnut Hill intend to recover this money?

Mark Keintz presented information concerning various conversations he had had with industry professionals suggested to him that the sums paid to Legacy Real Estate for property management were in a normal range for the industry, and that it was his understanding that Sanjiv Jain did not personally receive the funds paid for these services, but rather that the funds went to an agent of Legacy Real Estate. He also stated that finding a tenant for a building is not typically the responsibility of a property manager, and so this service could be considered as something that would normally be an extra-service.

Ed Feldman noted that, notwithstanding Mark Keintz’s assertion that the funds in question did not go to Sanjiv Jain, they went to Legacy Real Estate, which is wholly owned by Sanjiv Jain, who was supposed o have been acting voluntarily as a property manager.

Jim Foster also stated that there were reasons to further examine the payments under discussion, including:

That it may not have been appropriate for Sanjiv Jain to have asked for the payment, while working on a pro bono basis.
The question of whether an arm’s length distance existed between Sanjiv Jain as VP of Physical Division and his business had already been discussed as a subject of concern.The check to Sanjiv Jain was not approved by any committee, but was requested one day and issued the next.Ed Budnick asked if there was ever an agreement concerning whether or not a fee would be paid in the event of finding a tenant. Mark Keintz agreed that this was an appropriate concern.Concerning the issue of the well-known prohibition in the Bylaws against any compensation being paid to a Board member, a Board member asked how anyone could not have viewed this payment as inappropriate, and asked if Mark Keintz brought up the question at the time about whether the payment was allowable. Mark Keintz stated that he did not bring it up because he did not view this payment as a payment to an individual.

Tia Burke stated that property managers for the CHCA had been paid like this before, and that it was not appropriate to single out one person.Anne McNally appealed to the Board to use its large reserve of energy and passion to move ahead.She suggesting that finger-pointing was not productive. There may have been mistakes made, but in order to move ahead the Board cannot be focusing on past mistakes.

Ed Feldman inquired whether this meant that the sums paid and in question should be forgotten about. The Chair, Anne McNally and others replied, no, that the matter should be looked into.

The Chair stated that he would be establishing an oversight committee so that this kind of issue could be avoided in the future. He said that the committee would also be charged with trying to recover any monies illegally paid, as he personally believed to be the case.Following expressions of concern that the Chair’s statements could be taken as slanderous
accusations, the Chair stated that the statements were not slanderous, but that he retracted them anyway.

Tia Burke stated that in due follow-up concerning the matter, it was possible that Sanjiv Jain would decide to return the funds without being pressed. She continued that she now knew of two other Board members who had received similar payments, and said that it was necessary to be fair in the consideration of any and all such payments.

Ed Feldman encouraged Tia Burke to be forthcoming in presenting any information she had about these similar other payments.

Walter Sullivan stated that the important point concerning this matter was that questions had been brought up by Ed Feldman and Jim Foster, and that these questions should be followed up by the Treasurer in order to ascertain the facts. Concerning the $2600 fine he stated that all the facts were not known, and that it could not be said decisively that Sanjiv Jain was or was not negligent in his handling of the matter; however, he said that in any case it was not appropriate to ask for the return of these funds, even in the event of negligence, and noted that the matter could be taken care of as easily today as at any time in the past.

John O’Connell said that the CHCA needed to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the building, noting that they were fined last year for not having one and were likely to be similarly fined again this year if a Certificate of Occupancy were not obtained. He also said that if the certificate is obtained, there is a good chance that the city will waive the previous fine.

Adjournment

A motion was made to adjourn the meeting. It was seconded and passed.

Respectfully submitted,

Ann Ward Spaeth, Secretary

Board Members present: Elaine Aiello, Lou Aiello, Jane Becker, Dick Becker, Ed Budnick, Tia Burke, Amelia Carter, Carol Cope, Joanne Dhody, Maxine Dornemann, Janine Dwyer, Marianne Dwyer, Ed Feldman, Tom Fleming, Jim Foster, James Gleason, Stewart Graham, Jeremy Heep, Tom Hemphill, Dina Hitchcock, Nancy Hutter, Kathy Jones, Bright Judson, Marie Lachat, Howard Lesnick, John Levitties, Virginia Mallery, Sarah Maneely, Janice Manzi, Anne McNally, Ned Mitinger, John O’Connell, Christopher Padova, Jane Piotrowski, Joe Pizzano, Ron Recko, Gina Sannicandro, Meredith Sonderskov, Ann Spaeth, Jonathan Sternberg, Walter Sullivan, Sister Carol Jean Vale.

Excused: Bob Bacino, Maryanna Ross Cowper

Absent: James Baker, Elspeth Lodge, Frank Steel, Lawrence Walsh