With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Monterey, Ltd., 526 U.S. 687, 702, 119 S. Ct. 1624, 143 L. Ed. 2d 882 (1999), which expressly defined the term “exaction” to be “the dedication of property to public use.” (Emphasis added.) The City, citing City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey, Ltd., 526 U.S. 687, 702, 119 S. Ct. 1624, 1635, 143 L. Ed. 2d 882 (1999), argues that the Dolan proportionality standard does not apply here because there was no “exaction” as the United States Supreme Court uses that term — “the dedication of property to public use.” We disagree for the following reasons: (1) the language in Del Monte Dunes defining exactions is nonbinding dicta, see Honesty in Environmental Analysis & Legislation (HEAL) v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Bd., 96 Wn. App. 522, 534, 979 P.2d 864 (1999) (<HOLDING>); and (2) even if Del Monte Dunes did control,

A: holding that pharmaceutical benefit management companies are generally not erisa fiduciaries because they lack discretionary authority or control in the management of the plan but rather engage in ministerial duties
B: holding authority to control limits duty to control
C: holding that del monte dunes dicta did not control applicability of nollandolan to growth management act regulations
D: holding that the puc does not have the authority to regulate or control the management decisions of a utility absent a finding that the management decision would adversely affect the public
C.