Más De Este Usuario
Related Docuements
Managed Futures and Emerging Commodity Trading Advisors
A look at using an emerging Commodity Trading Advisor when considering invest...
From zmktwzrd
Access Living,
et al
vs. Chicago Transit AuthorityNo. 00 C 0770Settlement Agreement
QUARTERLY REPORTOFINDEPENDENT MONITORReport 22nd Quarter (April - June) 2002Shelley A. SandowIndependent Monitor July 31, 2002
INTRODUCTION
This second quarterly report is prepared in compliance with the Settlement Agreement in Access Living,
et al
vs. Chicago Transit Authority (No. 00 C 0770). The Settlement Agreement requires that theIndependent Monitor submit a report each quarter during its five-year duration on the CTA's performancein the items listed in the Settlement Agreement.This report follows the order of items in Section II. Terms of Settlement (pages 2 - 14). For each item, theverbatim text from the Settlement Agreement is shown first. A statement of the Independent Monitor’sinterpretation of the status as of 6/30/02 follows this, which may be one of the following categories:
IN COMPLIANCE - The requirements have been met in full. The Independent Monitor willcontinue observing this item, but will not report on it in the future unless a problem arises.
COMPLIANCE IN PROCESS – This item has a due date past the date of this quarterly report,and is in process of being completed. Future reports will document progress or completion.
IN COMPLIANCE - ONGOING – The item has been addressed to date according to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, which imposes an ongoing obligation throughout the five-year Settlement Agreement period. The matter will continue to be observed and reported onthroughout the monitoring period.
FOR FUTURE FOLLOW-UP – This item is not in arrears according to the timetable given in theSettlement Agreement, or compliance is required only when triggered by another action such aspurchase of new equipment. Future reports will contain updates, as needed.
UNABLE TO DETERMINE - The Independent Monitor was not able to obtain information thatwould support a responsible opinion on the status of compliance.
NOT IN COMPLIANCE - The item has not been complied with according to the terms of theSettlement Agreement.Some items include a section entitled, “Independent Monitor Comments and Recommendations.”
Pleasenote that this section has observations and suggestions only, and does not impose anyrequirements on the CTA.
The final section of the report includes Attachments referenced in the text.Some requirements of the Settlement Agreement describe due dates based on the effective date of theSettlement Agreement. Item 28 states that the effective date is 45 days after the entry of the final judgment, which was entered on September 24, 2001. My understanding of the timeline and the actualdates that would be applicable are described below. In calculating actual dates, I assumed that when theSettlement Agreement refers to 21 days or 45 days, it means 21 or 45 calendar days, rather thanbusiness days.Item 28 “Effective Date. The Settlement Agreement will become effective 45 days after the entry of a final judgment…”This would mean 11/8/01. Item 5 Elevator Repair Service Hours“For one year from the effective date of the Settlement Agreement…” and “Commencing one year after the effective date of the Settlement Agreement…”This would mean until 11/8/02, and commencing 11/9/02, respectively.
Report 2 Quarterly Report2
ND
Quarter 2002 Access Living,
et al
vs. CTA Settlement Agreement
2
For the following items, the language is “…within 45 days of the effective date of the settlement…”
Item 9 - Customer Service Controllers
Item 12 - Customer Complaints
Item 13 - Disciplinary Guidelines
Item 17 - Performance Control SpecialistsThis would mean 12/23/01. Item 22 - Independent Monitor “The CTA shall give notice within 45 days after the effective date of the settlement.” (before retaining amonitor)This would mean 12/23/01. “If plaintiffs do not agree with the CTA’s selection, the CTA shall propose retention of another Monitor within 21 days after plaintiffs’ rejection.”There is no timeframe given for the plaintiffs’ attorneys to respond to the CTA, so 21 days after plaintiffs’rejection would be 1/14/02 at the earliest.
Submitted by:
Shelley A. SandowIndependent Monitor July 31, 2002
Report 2 Quarterly Report2
ND
Quarter 2002 Access Living,
et al
vs. CTA Settlement Agreement
3
of 00
B 2002 April-June Independent Monitor Quarterly Report
240 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 05/06/2009 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment