Comment on Rule 14a-8(i)(9), Securities and Exchange Commission, June 30, 2015

The Securities and Exchange Commission has been analyzing its interpretation under Subsection (i)(9) of Rule 14a-8. This provision allows for the exclusion of shareholder proposals that conflict with those submitted by management. The staff has been examining its interpretation since instructed to do so by the chair of the SEC following a no action appeal in a case involving Whole Foods. A number of letters and memos submitted in connection with the review have analyzed the issue. At least one asserted that any change in interpretation required the Commission to go through the process of notice and comment. This letter asserts that notice and comment is not required, relying extensively on Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.

Improving the Success of Wetland Mitigation Banking: Lessons Learned in Monitoring and Compliance

Wetlands that are lost to development are not effectively compensated by the current wetland mitigation banking regulatory program due to inadequate monitoring and compliance. Based on a critical investigation of two wetland mitigation banks in Colorado described herein, recommendations are given to improve the effectiveness of the wetland mitigation banking program. The recommendations to improve mitigation banking are to specify and follow comprehensive monitoring and reporting plans, develop solid contingency and adaptive management plans, utilize specially developed checklists and templates, and impose enforcement when compliance is not met. Implementing these recommendations will assist regulators and bankers in achieving more effective wetland mitigation and will help the United States reach its no net loss of wetlands goal.