HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-02-28 Council Appointed Officer Agenda Packet Council Appointed Officers Committee
1
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
5:00 PM
Special Meeting
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Council Conference Room
Palo Alto City Hall
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA
Call to Order
Oral Communications
Agenda Items
1.Consideration of a Recommendation by the CAO Committee to the City
Council to Approve the Contract with Sherry Lund Associates for the
Amount of Not to Exceed $35,050 to Complete the Four CAO
Evaluations for the 2011-2012 Performance Review Cycle
Adjournment
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the Public are entitled to directly address the City Council/Committee concerning any item that is
described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the
Council/Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the
table at the entrance to the Council Chambers or by the City Clerk, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to
discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the
Council/Committee, but it is very helpful.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who
would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may
contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
February 28, 2012
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Consideration of a Recommendation by the CAO Committee to the
City Council to Approve the Contract with Sherry Lund Associates for
the Amount of Not to Exceed $35,050 to Complete the Four CAO
Evaluations for the 2011-2012 Performance Review Cycle
Purpose of the Meeting
The purpose of the CAO Committee meeting on February 28, 2012 is to review
and reaffirm the CAO performance evaluation process by recommending to the
City Council approval of a contract with Sherry Lund Associates for the amount
not to exceed $35,050 to provide consulting services to support the completion of
the four CAO evaluations for the 2011-2012 CAO evaluation cycles. The CAO
(Council Appointed Officers) include the City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney,
and City Auditor.
A proposal from Sherry Lund of Sherry Lund Associates outlining the scope of the
services is attached in Attachment A.
Background
The annual CAO (Council Appointed Officers) performance evaluation process has
been guided by the CAO Committee in partnership with Sherry Lund of Sherry
Lund Associates since 2007. Last year three of the four CAOs were evaluated with
the exception of the City Auditor since there was an interim City Auditor in place.
In lieu of an annual evaluation for the City Auditor, Council asked Ms. Lund to
interview employees in the Auditor’s office to provide additional information that
would inform the recruitment for the new City Auditor.
With the hiring of Jim Pelletier as the new City Auditor in early 2012, his
evaluation will be conducted this year. During the scheduled Closed Session on
March 27, 2012, the City Council will have a discussion with Mr. Pelletier in order
to establish his goals for the remainder of the year. The consulting services
required for this meeting are part of the approved contract for the 2010-2011
1
Packet Pg. 2
Updated: 2/23/2012 12:52 PM by Beth Minor Page 2
CAO evaluation cycle. Last year, the City Council approved a contract for the
amount of $32,550 which included $2,500 for additional billable hours needed to
complete the work, subject to the approval of the CAO Committee Chair.
The Proposal for Consulting Services (Attachment A)
Ms. Sherry Lund, the consultant, has prepared a proposal for consulting services
for the CAO evaluations. This proposal is similar to the process conducted last
year. It will consist of two project elements: Element 1: CAO Annual Evaluations
(June/July 2012) for all four CAO’s, and Element 2: Mid-Year Check-in and
Alignment Discussion for the City Manager, City Attorney, and City Auditor
(November/December 2012). The proposed consulting services fee for the two
phases is not to exceed $35,050 assuming the full annual performance review for
all four CAO’s and Mid-Year Discussions for the City Manager, City Attorney, and
City Auditor. The $35,050 could be reduced by up to $4,000, which includes a
reduction of: 1) $2,500 in additional contract hours needed if City Council
Members do not complete the evaluation forms in a timely fashion (and thus
requiring rework) in order to complete the project and 2) $1,500 discount for
completing the evaluation work prior to July 23, 2012.
Since the City Auditor Jim Pelletier will have only been with the City of Palo Alto
for a few months, it is anticipated that his review will provide feedback on his first
half-year in areas such as leadership, communication and relationship with the
Council, colleagues, the public, and the quality of the audit reports. Since the
Council summer break begins on July 24th, it will be imperative that the schedule
of meetings is established soon for the annual review cycle.
If you have any questions, please contact me prior to the meeting.
Gail A. Price
CAO Committee Chair
City Council Member
ATTACHMENTS:
-:FINAL Lund CAO Annual Eval Proposal 2-22-12 (3)(DOCX)
-:Sherry Lund Contract Last Year (PDF)
-:Sherry Lund ACTION JUNE 6 2011 (DOC)
1
Packet Pg. 3
Updated: 2/23/2012 12:52 PM by Beth Minor Page 3
Department Head:Donna Grider, City Clerk
1
Packet Pg. 4
Updated: 2/23/2012 12:52 PM by Beth Minor Page 4
1
Packet Pg. 5
Sherry L. Lund Associates, Portola Valley, CA (650) 619-5500 Page 1 of 5
247 La Cuesta Drive
Portola Valley, CA 94028
(650) 619-5500 fax (650) 561-8414
sherrylund@aol.com
February 22, 2012
Councilmember Gail Price
Chairperson, Council CAO Committee
City of Palo Alto City Council
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Dear Councilmember Price:
Following is my proposal for this year’s CAO performance review process. It includes the project
description; timeline;what’s different this year;benefits; project phases;tasks and consultant
responsibilities;client responsibilities;project cost and assumptions; consultant qualifications;and next
steps for the CAO Committee.
Project Description and Timeline
At the end of FY 2011-2012, the Council will evaluate the four Council Appointed Officers (CAOs): the
City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney,and City Auditor.The four CAOs control the major financial and
human resources in executing the Council’s vision and priorities. Performance evaluation is an important
opportunity to get feedback on the past year. More importantly, it is an opportunity to get fully aligned
with the Council about expectations of performance going forward.
What’s Different This Year
Performance evaluation criteria for all four CAO positions will have been refined and approved by Council
prior to the beginning of this performance cycle.I propose the process proceed similarly to that of FY
2010-11. Ideally, the CAO evaluations would be completed before the Council’s summer meeting break,
depending on Councilmembers’ schedules, which begins on July 24th this year.
The City Auditor will have been on the job for nearly half a year. As part of last year’s contract, I am
working with him on refining his performance criteria. He, Council, and I are scheduled for a one-hour
March 27 closed session to set goals for him. By June, in the nearly half-year he will have been on the
job, Council will be able to provide feedback on the quality of audit reports; his leadership style in the
organization and with his staff; and communication with Council, staff, and the community. Council will
also be able to make early course corrections as needed and answer questions about early
implementation of the goals set in March.
Suggested Changes in Scheduling, Subject to Availability of All Parties.I’d like to propose that we
schedule July Council closed sessions for annual reviews as follows:
§Closed Session #1: CC closed session to agree on performance reviews for City Clerk and City
Manager
§Closed Session #2: CC closed session to agree on performance reviews for City Attorney and
City Auditor
1.a
Packet Pg. 6
-:
F
I
N
A
L
L
u
n
d
C
A
O
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
v
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
2
-
2
2
-
1
2
(
3
)
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
Sherry L. Lund Associates Proposal: 2011-2012 CAO Performance Management Page 2
§Closed Session #3: CC/CAO closed session to present review for City Clerk and City Manager
and discuss
§Closed Session #4: CC/CAO closed session to present review for City Attorney and City Auditor
and discuss
The advantages: We can present and discuss reviews at more predictable times, do that earlier in the
evening when everyone’s energy is fresher, and keep those evenings a manageable length. We have
attempted to do this in previous years, but were unable to do so due to CAO and Council travel
schedules. Starting this process earlier gives us all a much better chance at improving scheduling.
Benefits of a Facilitated Review Cycle
The primary benefits I bring to the process are as follows:
1.The ability to leverage Council’s time to best use. Council has a exceptionally heavy work load
with major budgetary and other issues in front of you.
2.Knowledge of your Council objectives, your unique City culture, your CAOs, plus technical
expertise in executive evaluation and work with Councils and Boards.
3.As a result of items #1 and #2, the ability to be efficient in helping Council deliver a quality
process and outcome.
4.Assurance of a safe, professional, and mutually respectful environment for review
discussions/feedback. I serve as an advocate for all points of view being heard within a
professional and respectful environment.
I have worked the previous four years in customizing a process and approach that has produced good
results for the Council and CAOs. I can work flexibly with you to make any changes in the process that
you may desire within the framework of maintaining a quality process.
Project Phases, Tasks,and Consultant Responsibilities
In addition to the specific project steps listed below, I, as Consultant, will do the following: prepare for all
meetings, assure necessary communications occur, serve as project manager, and assure a sound
methodology for the process. The following performance evaluation project steps correspond to the last
year’s review cycle:
PROJECT ELEMENT #1: CAO Annual Performance Evaluations (June/July Timeframe)
Phase I –Preparation for Review Session
Consultant:
§Works with internal liaison to develop contract and schedule project meetings and milestones.
§Solicits CAO self-evaluations, reviews them and provides feedback and advice.
§Assures CAO questions are clarified and raised with Council.
§Prepares and distributes binders to Council, including instructions, CAO self-evaluations and
blank evaluation hard copies. Distributes soft copies of forms on the same day.
§Reviews Council evaluation feedback; meets with each Council member in person or by
phone to refine and clarify written feedback prior to performance review session.
§Compiles written comments and numerical feedback from Council and develops a written
evaluation summary for each CAO. Prepares and sends confidential hardcopy packet with
this information prior to each CAO review session.
§Prepares information for closed review sessions that enable Councilmembers to focus their
discussion efficiently.
Phase II –Performance Review Session
Consultant:
§Provides facilitation and technical assistance as needed during closed session Council
performance review meetings with each CAO.
1.a
Packet Pg. 7
-:
F
I
N
A
L
L
u
n
d
C
A
O
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
v
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
2
-
2
2
-
1
2
(
3
)
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
Sherry L. Lund Associates Proposal: 2011-2012 CAO Performance Management Page 3
Phase III -Post-Session Wrap-Up
Consultant:
§Documents agreed-upon unified Council feedback for written reviews.
§Meets with each CAO to debrief evaluation meetings.
§Prepares final evaluation file copies and obtains necessary signatures. Copies are given to
CAO Committee Chair for filing and to each individual CAO. Final action on Council agenda
is scheduled with Liaison.
§Follows up with CAO Chair to debrief and solicit any additional process improvements.
PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Mid-Year Check-In Performance Discussions (Nov./Dec. Timeframe)
The Mid-Year is a simpler, more streamlined process than the annual review, and it has a different purpose.
Mid-Year discussions allow CAOs and Council to do four things:1) Provide answers to CAOs’
performance-based questions from the entire Council; 2) Address any misalignments in expectations;
3) Discuss goals that require mutual involvement and participation; and 4) Address emergent issues. They
allow Council to more actively support and manage performance rather than letting a goal potentially drift
for an entire year.
Consultant:
§Gathers feedback from CAOs and Councilmembers in advance.
§Creates a summary of key issues for discussion and distributes it to Council and CAOs
in advance.
§Facilitates closed session meetings.
§Provides post-meeting summaries.
Due to the highly confidential nature of this assignment, I personally perform all work on this contract.
Client Responsibilities
In order to support the success of the project and to stay within quoted costs, Client agrees to:
§Assure involved parties a)are available for one-on-one and group meetings;and b) complete
evaluations on time in order to meet project milestones.
§Identify an internal liaison who can schedule appointments and provide support in getting
evaluation items on Council agendas.
§Provide an efficient and coordinated contracting process through a single liaison.
§Provide meeting space and A-V equipment required.
§Commit to a professional and respectful process.
Proposed Timeline (subject to Council and CAO schedules)
§March12 –CAO Recommendations on proposal to Council, modified Auditor
review criteria to Council
§March 13 –April 3 –Contract development
§May 1-13: Consultant works with CAOs on self-evaluations
§May 14: Final CAO self-evaluations due
§May 16:Binder and solicitation of feedback materials to Council
§June 22:City Manager and City Clerk input due from Council
§June 29:City Attorney and City Auditor input due from Council
§Week of July 9:Closed session Council meetings to discuss/agree on CAO
performance reviews (2 per evening x 2 evenings).
§Week of July 16:Closed session review meetings for all four CAOs (2 per evening x 2
evenings)
§July 23:Get CAO and Council signatures on final review documents
§Nov.(dates TBD)–Gather feedback from CAOs and Council for Mid-Year Performance
Discussions
§Dec. (dates TBD)–Facilitate Mid-Year Performance Discussions
1.a
Packet Pg. 8
-:
F
I
N
A
L
L
u
n
d
C
A
O
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
v
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
2
-
2
2
-
1
2
(
3
)
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
Sherry L. Lund Associates Proposal: 2011-2012 CAO Performance Management Page 4
Project Cost and Assumptions
The total project can be completed for a project fee NTE $35,050**,which includes the following:
§$26,000 for four CAO annual performance reviews (Project Element One). A $1,500 discount is
applied if this work (Project Element One) can be completed by July 23, 2012*;
*This discount reflects the ability to capture some economies of scale when the project is
contained within a shorter timeframe vs. spreading out the work before and after
Council’s summer meeting break. To qualify for this discount assumes that the project
begins in early April and that Council commits to scheduling review meetings accordingly.
§$6,550 for Mid-Year Check-In Performance Discussions for three CAOs:the City Manager, City
Attorney, and City Auditor.**
**To add a Mid-Year Performance Discussion for the City Clerk, add $ 950.00 to the
project NTE amount.
§A $2,500 contingency (up to 10 hours @ $250/hour) is included in the above project fee, subject to
approval by the CAO Chair. Re-work that results from Council members not submitting evaluation
forms in a timely fashion (thus requiring re-work in order to complete the project),meetings missed
without 24 hours notice, and/or expansion of project scope will be billed at discounted public sector
rate of $250/hr. (private sector rate is $375/hr.).
§There is no compensation work required this year.
Consultant Qualifications:
For the benefit of new Council members who do not know me, I believe my skills and experience have
been and are a good match for this work. I offer:
§An insider’s understanding of City culture and citizen expectations with the outsider’s
ability to be fully objective about the process and relationships.
§Deep and broad experience in performance management (including executive evaluation),
executive coaching, negotiation, interpersonal communication, rewards and recognition,
and career development –all important components of this project.
§Thirty-seven years experience in organizational consulting with twenty-five years consulting
experience in my own firm—for a broad variety of organizations in the public and private sector:
o Public sector/non-profit experience examples include:Cities of Fremont, Santa Rosa,
Dublin,Mission Viejo, San Ramon, Chula Vista,Tracy, Fairfield, Union City, CA, plus the
City of Tualatin, OR; Counties of San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda, San Joaquin, and
Riverside,CA;BAAQMD, Carnegie Mellon University (Provost), the Dr. Susan Love
Research Foundation, the S. H. Cowell Foundation, the University of California;
o Global private sector examples include:Intel, HP, Acco Brands, Seagate, The Gap,
Levi Strauss, Driscoll’s, Xoma, Genelabs, among many others.
This broad experience allows me to collect best practices from many sources and to
avoid getting locked into the paradigms and traditions of a single type of organization.
Next Steps
Upon acceptance of this proposal by the CAO Committee and Council, the next steps are to:
1.Execute a contract per your internal procedure.
1.a
Packet Pg. 9
-:
F
I
N
A
L
L
u
n
d
C
A
O
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
v
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
2
-
2
2
-
1
2
(
3
)
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
Sherry L. Lund Associates Proposal: 2011-2012 CAO Performance Management Page 5
2.Develop a project schedule, based on availability of all parties; revise it, as necessary, with Council at
the earliest meeting possible.Please note that a schedule cannot be confirmed until the contracting
process is complete.
I would enjoy the opportunity to work with the Council and the CAOs again in the next evaluation cycle.
Please let me know if I may provide additional information.
Best regards,
Sherry Lund
Principal
1.a
Packet Pg. 10
-:
F
I
N
A
L
L
u
n
d
C
A
O
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
v
a
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
2
-
2
2
-
1
2
(
3
)
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 11
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 12
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 13
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 14
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 15
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 16
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 17
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 18
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 19
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 20
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 21
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 22
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 23
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 24
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 25
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
1.b
Packet Pg. 27
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
L
a
s
t
Y
e
a
r
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
ACTION MINUTES FROM CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF JUNE 6, 2011
ACTION ITEMS
4.Approval of an Amendment to the Agreement with Sherry L.
Lund Associates in an Amount of $7,450 for Mid-Year Check-In
and Alignment for Council Appointed Officers, and Review and
Approval of Revised Criteria for City Attorney Performance
Evaluation.
MOTION: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council
Member Scharff to approve Staff recommendation to: 1) authorize the
Mayor to enter into an amendment to the contract with Sherry L. Lund
and Associates in an amount of $7,450 (subject to 10% standard
contingency) for facilitation of Council Appointed Officer Mid-Year
Check-ins, and 2) approval of revised criteria for the City Attorney
performance evaluation.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council
Member Shepherd to not authorize an amendment to the contract with
Sherry L. Lund and Associates in an amount of $7,450 for facilitation
of Council Appointed Officer Mid-Year Check-ins.
AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Burt, Klein, Shepherd yes
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF
THE MAKER AND SECONDER to delete the Mid-Year Check-in of the
City Clerk and to reduce the contract amendment for Mid-year Check-
ins with Sherry L. Lund and Associates by $900.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council
Member XXX to add $4,550 to the Council budget to do the Mid-Year
Check-ins.
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
AMENDMENT: Council Member Shepherd moved, seconded by
Council Member Klein to delete the Mid-Year Check-in of the City
Auditor.
AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Burt, Klein, Shepherd Yes
1.c
Packet Pg. 29
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
A
C
T
I
O
N
J
U
N
E
6
2
0
1
1
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF
THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add $4,550 to the Council budget
for the Mid-Year Check-ins.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-3 Klein, Price, Shepherd no
1.c
Packet Pg. 30
-:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
A
C
T
I
O
N
J
U
N
E
6
2
0
1
1
(
2
5
9
6
:
S
h
e
r
r
y
L
u
n
d
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
)