Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21-City Manager I , ORIGINAL CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO — REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Charles McNeely, City Manager Subject: Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Dept: Office of the City Manager Bernardino Establishing Tow Carrier Franchise Fees As required by Resolution Date: February 16, 2011 2005-286 and the City's Existing Tow Service Agreements. M/CC Meeting Date: 2/2212011 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: July 13, 1995 First Tow Service Agreement was approved by Council (Resolution #1995-2411) requiring a minimum storage capacity of 200 vehicles. July 8, 1998 Resolution #1998-195 was approved by Council thereby repealing the previous resolution. A population ratio was created permitting one tow carrier to operate within the City per 40,000 residents August 15, 2005 Resolution 05-286 Established Standard Towing Criteria December 19, 2005 Resolution 05-434 through 05-439 Authorized Tow Service Agreements with Six Tow Carriers September 8, 2008 Resolution 2008-347 Set Franchise Fees at $38,841 per Month Total and Amended Resolution 05-286 and the City's Existing Tow Service Agreements to Require the Police Department to determine the franchise fees annually. March 4, 2009 Impound Yard concept presented to the Ways & Means Committee and directed to return with a comprehensive business plan. July 22, 2009 Business Plan presented to Ways & Means Committee August 5, 2009 Ways & Means Committee recommended the item be forwarded to the Common Council for Consideration August 17, 2009 Motion to approve a Police Operated Impound Facility was considered, but not approved by the Mayor and Common Council February 16, 2010 Mayor and Common Council Approved Tow Carrier franchise fees as required by Resolution 2005-286 and I the City's existing Tow Service Agreement I July 6, 2010 Council Directed Staff to Update the Business Plan for FY 2010/2011 January 10, 2011 Mayor and Common Council Directed the City Manager to place an agenda item on the Council meeting agenda for February 22, 2011, either (1) establishing the revised franchise fee for Tow Services Agreements for calendar year 2011, or (2) approving a revised form of Tow Services Agreement. Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution Establishing Tow Carrier Franchise Fees As Required By Resolution 2005-286 and the City's Existing Tow Service Agreements. Signature Contact person: James Graham Phone: 3557 Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: City Wide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $36,372 Revenue Reduction Source: Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report SUBJECT Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino establishing tow carrier franchise fees as required by Resolution 2005-286 and the City's existing Tow Service Agreements BACKGROUND On July 13, 1995 the first Tow Service Agreement ("TSA") was approved by Council (Resolution 1995-2411). It required a minimum storage of 200 vehicles as is required today. A population ratio was created permitting one tow carrier to operate within the City per 40,000 residents. The carriers were identified as City Towing, Big Z Towing, Tri-City Towing, Wilson Towing, and Loma Linda Towing. There was no franchise fee and there was a rotation agreement but not definitive. On July 8, 1998 Resolution 1998-195 was approved by Council and repealed the previous resolution. The language in the TSA remained fairly consistent except the population ratio was changed to read one tow carrier for every 35,000 residents, which exist today. All tow carriers were subject to vehicle towing administration release fee set by resolution and a franchise fee set forth in the TSA Agreement. On August 15, 2005, the Mayor and Common Council passed Resolution 2005-286 establishing standard towing criteria for the six tow carriers on the City's tow rotation. On December 19, 2005, Resolutions 2005-434 through 439 were passed approving contracts with the six tow carriers to tow vehicles at the City's request. On September 8, 2008, Resolution 2008-347 was passed amending resolution 2005-286 and the existing Tow Service Agreements to require the police department to determine tow carrier franchise fees annually based on a cost analysis and the average number of tows during the prior fiscal year. This resolution authorized the execution of amendments to agreements for tow services with the six tow carriers and set the monthly towing franchise fees at $38,841 per month total for the City's six tow carriers. On February 16, 2010, Mayor and Common Council approved Resolution 2010-28 changing the franchise fee to $31,689.28 per month or $5,281.55 per carrier. The Mayor and Common Council directed the City Manager to place an agenda item on the Council meeting agenda for February 22, 2011, either (1) establishing the revised franchise fee for Tow Services Agreements for calendar year 2011, or (2) approving a revised form of Tow Services Agreement. f i The proposed resolution will change the franchise fee to $21,299 per month which constitutes $3,550 per month from each of the six tow carriers. This rate is based on a recently completed cost analysis (see attached study). The Police Department will begin collecting the new fees on March 15, 2011. Staff is currently identifying additional changes to the existing Tow Service Agreement in order to ensure full cost recovery and operational efficiency. These proposed changes will be resented for consideration at the Mayor and Common Council Meeting on March 7' . FINANCIAL IMPACT For FY 2010-11, the tow franchise revenue was budgeted at $380,300. The proposed resolution will decrease the franchise fee from $31,691 to $21,299 per month, which is a 33 percent reduction. As the Police Department will begin collecting the new fee rate on March 15, 2011, the total decrease in FY 2010-11 will be $36,372. However, staff is currently conducting an analysis of the existing Tow Service Agreements to determine additional changes to the provisions in order to ensure efficiencies in operations and complete cost recovery. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution i cn V D O z r C m z N v „ CD D m o D Cl) o O M 0 z D The Matrix Consulting Group utilizes a cost allocation methodology, commonly known and accepted as the "bottom-up" approach to establishing User Fees. The term means that several cost components are calculated for each fee or service. These components then build upon each other to comprise the total cost for providing the service. The components of a full cost calculation are typically as follows: Cost Component Description Direct Salaries, benefits and allowable departmental expenditures. Departmental Overhead Division, Program, or Departmental administration /management and clerical support. Citywide Overhead City costs associated with central service costs such as payroll, human resources, budgeting, City management, etc. Established for this Study through a separate Cost Allocation Plan analysis performed by the Matrix Consulting Group. Cross-Departmental Support Costs associated with review or assistance in providing specific services. For example, costs established via study of the Public Works Department for review of Planning applications and Building permits are either included as an applicable cost toward the Planning and/or Building fees for service, or are listed as separate fee items chargeable by Public Works. Plan, Policy, and Systems Examples often include: General Plan Update, code enforcement, Update and Maintenance and technology costs. The general steps utilized by the project team to determine allocations of cost components to a particular fee or service are: • Develop time-estimates for each service included in the study; • Calculate the direct cost attributed to each time estimate; • Utilize the comprehensive allocation of staff time to establish an allocation basis for the other cost components; and, • Distribute the appropriate amount of the other cost components to each fee or service based on the staff time allocation basis, or other reasonable basis. The result of these allocations provides detailed documentation for the reasonable estimate of the actual cost of providing each service. The following are critical points about the use of time estimates and the validity of cost allocation models. Workshops are conducted to gather time and activity estimates for each service included in the study, using the following approach- • Interview key personnel from each department and analyze the various activities being performed within it that are both revenue and non-revenue generating. Document basic process steps in application / permit processing or other fee related services. • Establish the net available hours for each employee. This starts with the full time total of 2,080 hours per year less reductions for vacation, sick, training, etc., and also for estimated "non-billable" time spent in meetings and supervisory or clerical roles. In each department's review, 100% of staff available hours are identified to both fee and non-fee related services to ensure a complete and defensible analysis. i f -< cn k n , ro -n n N ro m o CO) o n ' 0 00 0 0 Q- co c rn: G 3 ro O. ro M U' m Cl) CD m fl- -i v n c -n t71.' m ro Z cn �D Q. C O C �D Z n ii CD m -n <- n n :3 r' < m 7 m -n a o c z O.TF u =n n = o m O m N v � m , �, O D W (.0 mn O Ln y Q m I N n �1 W D O 74,': 00 c, (.0 @ E, O cn 3 fl1 C m G n o 0 0 = o =3 �;' :Z) n z, N m m m m � rn o m = i p = o 'Y (D 00 ! C 'n CD 5 m N ID m =O O 3 CD D 3 me v < m o o Cl) D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m D m ' CD c — m m m m O O m m D m x w � � co W OOOOOMKKM �O -mcnrr % n c g0000D � � nO � mc� n :. O � Oo000cnxDZ _I � O O D o (n (nww2 << .- Z « r 0 . � M00 - -{ mmn = „ � Cl) o � mmcOXcncn " DmM ; (D 00no � � - 00 �. D � _ _ � mm � _ �� CD 00 < m ?� m Fn 00 m -� // U) cn Ram m m D x Z = (n IN m G Vn -n n ,r _ CO OW N W (r a) A w O -Al m CO A co W F -h O W Cn (n W (fl O N v N O W / , ? ^ O O O O O O (n N OD 00 A (O (n (n O O A (n I A O O O N Cn OD O CO 0) O N O ': O rr N N N J Cn CO O O N Cn O W :-I (n N -I 00 --• -I J = (T DD Cn W Cn ao N W �l N j n N O W O N O W O -1 m O O (n Cn O O O O (n W (r -I W W A 00 O Cn OD N V/ W N ?,,gg (n N N co A- O (0 A (n -I CO O A O0 -+ O) W A (A 00 A �' �• Cn v A N �I v 00 Cn A A (n O 00 A -I O A O - W A A m " W A O N -1 N O W W N J CO A M A Cn N O O m m -4 N -1 W 00 (D 0) (O W Cn O N Q W o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 o 0 o O o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 y N N Na (n Cn (n (n m (n (n (n Cn (n m m cn -1 (O N N N N N -I N O N N N N N N 'k % O O (A CA (A W 0') v O) N O M O W W W 69ffiEfl -a 69 to to 6961 ErgfAb9 69 EA 69 W O (n -I N W A Cn A Cn Cn tp O (n CO A 00 CD C) W A -I Cfl N W Cn W (O (n -1 N () (n :,,h fD v J v W M M W (D - (O �l W W -I W v N W CO -I (A J 00 00 �I O) OD J v In 'I Q O CD O 3 D o c (D Z m Q c Cl) c D v m m n ((DD C/) a a(D 0 3 -o 3 Q U o -0 3 UK, O o O CL 0 CL N S O N N N S O (D GI N 00 OD ? X UODi 000 OD 00 F Cn OD A c p N n m CD N { (D s x a 0 CD fl. C Q CL C �• N En _ , r n -s o CD n <. n w 17i O E N - n N ( N �r m Q_ N / ;X to N Z CD o CD :r U) CD c -.9 d3, "n -en tsi (19 v 4.9 4A ) to to 60 61) <0 69 69 lD w w N © n O A � N V N CSi � N N W Cl) O N N CJi N O W N N W O C Cl) CO O 00 -N Ui W O W V O OD (O O W � (J1 N (T O (J1 V CO (D i ? i OD OD CO (A V N O v. . 3 O w O co O 0 0 0 0 O Cl O O O O w W -• Ui O O 0 0 0 0 O Cl 0 0 0 rr '1l 7l T1 TI TI TI TI TI 000 _0 0000 0000 _ -n -n -n -n CO m co co co W co W 0 Q_ Q Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ Q_ o- a1 C7 n n C7 cQ O (Q (Q (Q (Q (Q (Q D D D D m o m(D m (D (D (D Q u -u -0 -u CL Z 0 p U) ., O 0' O t' Cl) o i o v o v CD CD LLL Q v o 0 3 - n D <C L� m a � N O a � a n o ° 0- A 0. 0 ° (n p O p v < T m m o A N T Wi a Upi n p m m cm7j" �'y 3 N m A T A z < a A x = m c v vvxxx T x x T x x v x x T x x v x x v x x ti m m m o 0 o m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 n A AACCC A c c A c c A c c A c c A c c A c cl y N N N A A A N A A Cl) A A N A A y A A y A A y A A ry O O N N N O N co O N N O N N O N N O co N O N m Z N-1 m Z - m Z � m Z � m Z -4 m Z -4 m Z � m / c i Imo oA ° A "r ° A `r" ° A r ° A m o A o A _. nn me p m c p m c p m c n m c 0 m c p m c p p p m 3 Z 0 3 z 0 3 z O r z p 9 z p 9 z p 9 z vi T N y D y y D -i N D 1 N D 1 N D N D 1 N D 1 -/ � i0Z � 0 1 0 � 0 1 0 � 0 1 0 � 0 v v i 0 'o v a .6 T � z a. r D m z<z z z z z z „,•;.. N N 01 IV W fJ N N W A O O N i H H E» H H EA T O O O A O v O m O O j £ N.. ty0 O O o O °o T tp 00 W W ?° W. H H H H H H .0 N N J 41 ll1 (l1 01 81 A A OWi r A A N N A N OOi A � A A y p p (� r'yZ, Z � � W m �p A A ��77yy Tfl H H H H H H H H C O N O to fJi A N A V fIN IN m N O A Oo N N N N J N O N N N n N V N 7,25 -i (p O y W O V V 01 W t!1 N V 10 IV y t0 N Z W 0o N oo A A m x A O O A N N m N tN)� n O a` O - o J tP Ul V N N N x N < N A CO D .z o O o 0 0 o n 8 o a m 0 m v m p 3 m p m o � N � m i I - c < m n (D o (D � n c o cp o o 0 c' m o x c c m a � -0 m m a r 2 0 c N a C Z <0 0 ID Z a 9 D m fD m \ n Z CL A 2) 0 m W r °' °Cl) (n CD r ,' r0 g y x a AD tD' m > 0 — m .., o v z _ 0 N CD N m o 0 cn W W w o O P ao v y o A is oo M iv c°n w coo 0 0 - is Cn CD o ° (o m o o s w < w CD m 00 -� N N O �p p CT1 (Wn W o r Y t0 Sv n' C N 4 N \ C y N - v+ (D o, O (n co o N N pO (J1 N n c (fit. N� O co O ((n N �• 00 a) (D � N C4 tl3 CO ° m ' '00 CO GAP 0 Z 0 0 Z < (n 'co °� rn a)0 w _i m n j cn w (^' cs a m - v oo rn o (n �' m o m cn � v o � (D m v C v CD a CD o 3 o n D / \ 2 -n < s ee . m » / > (D CD 2 § / \( � 0 \ � -n 2 § \ (D£ & / 0 (D � / E & s ® I \ \ \ \ ° -n \ $ m 0 [ � « m a $ < \ 0 _ < CD � o � « ¥0 (D / - Lo / o � � E ? � D « _ % ; � ; \ ( / �� mf a 0 m m - 9cc \ J (� \ > / % % � \ � CDCD CD CD C) > cnro w -t� $ff0 m \ j � � 0 �( 2. � ƒ5 ® 2 2232 \) \ƒ CD e \\ E § E ) [ k \ \ �Jf 3 C 2 & > 1 RESOLUTION NO. PQ 2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNC <ITY AF SAN BERNARDINO ESTABLISHING TOW CARRIER FRANCHISE FEES AS REQUIRED BY 3 RESOLUTION 2005-286 AND THE CITY'S EXISTING TOW SERVICE AGREEMENTS. 4 WHEREAS, Resolution 2005-286 and the City's existing Tow Service Agreements, as 5 amended by Resolution 2008-347,require the City to adjust the monthly tow franchise fees each 6 year based on a cost analysis and the average number of tows conducted during the prior fiscal 7 year; and 8 WHEREAS, the Police Department has done a cost analysis and has determined that the 9 average number of tows during fiscal year 2009/2010 was 590 per month; 10 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY 11 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 12 SECTION 1: The Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino 13 hereby set the Tow Carrier Franchise fees pursuant to the Tow Services Agreements with Wilson 14 Towing, LLC; Big "Z" Auto Works, Inc.; Danny's Towing; Tri-City Towing; City Towing; and 15 Hayes Towing at$3,549.83 each per month for a total of$21,299.00 per month, effective March 16 15, 2011. The tow carriers shall begin paying those fees to the City on March 15, 2011. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 /// I RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ESTABLISHING TOW CARRIER FRANCHISE FEES AS REQUIRED BY 2 RESOLUTION 2005-286 AND THE CITY'S EXISTING TOW SERVICE AGREEMENTS. 3 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and Common 5 Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the 6 day of , 2011, by the following vote, to wit: 7 COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 8 MARQUEZ 9 VACANT 10 BRINKER 11 SHORETT 12 KELLEY 13 JOHNSON 14 MCCAMMACK 15 16 17 Rachel G. Clark, City Clerk 18 The foregoing Resolution is hereby approved this day of ,2011. 19 Patrick J. Morris, Mayor 20 City of San Bernardino 21 Approved as to form: 22 JAMES F. PENMAN, City Attorney 23 24 By: 25 26 27 28 the City's existing Tow Service Agreement July 6, 2010 Council Directed Staff to Update the Business Plan for FY 2010/2011 January 10, 2011 Mayor and Common Council Directed the City Manager to place an agenda item on the Council meeting agenda for February 22, 2011 , either (1) establishing the revised franchise fee for Tow Services Agreements for calendar year 2011, or (2) approving a revised form of Tow Services Agreement. Recommended Motion: Adopt Resolution Establishing Tow Carrier Franchise Fees As Required By Resolution 2005-286 and the City's Existing Tow Service Agreements. Signature Contact person: James Graham Phone: 3557 Supporting data attached: Staff Report Ward: City Wide FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $36,372 Revenue Reduction Source: Finance: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. Entered Into Rec. at MCC/CDC Mtg: . z Agenda Item Pao: ,o City Clerk CDC Secretary City of San Bernardino CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO—REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report SUBJECT Resolution of the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino establishing tow carrier franchise fees as required by Resolution 2005-286 and the City's existing Tow Service Agreements BACKGROUND On July 13, 1995 the first Tow Service Agreement ("TSA") was approved by Council (Resolution 1995-2411). It required a minimum storage of 200 vehicles as is required today. A population ratio was created permitting one tow carrier to operate within the City per 40,000 residents. The carriers were identified as City Towing, Big Z Towing, Tri-City Towing, Wilson Towing, and Loma Linda Towing. There was no franchise fee and there was a rotation agreement but not definitive. On July 8, 1998 Resolution 1998-195 was approved by Council and repealed the previous resolution. The language in the TSA remained fairly consistent except the population ratio was changed to read one tow carrier for every 35,000 residents, which exist today. All tow carriers were subject to vehicle towing administration release fee set by resolution and a franchise fee set forth in the TSA Agreement. On August 15, 2005, the Mayor and Common Council passed Resolution 2005-286 establishing standard towing criteria for the six tow carriers on the City's tow rotation. On December 19, 2005, Resolutions 2005-434 through 439 were passed approving contracts with the six tow carriers to tow vehicles at the City's request. On September 8, 2008, Resolution 2008-347 was passed amending resolution 2005-286 and the existing Tow Service Agreements to require the police department to determine tow carrier franchise fees annually based on a cost analysis and the average number of tows during the prior fiscal year. This resolution authorized the execution of amendments to agreements for tow services with the six tow carriers and set the monthly towing franchise fees at $38,841 per month total for the City's six tow carriers. On February 16, 2010, Mayor and Common Council approved Resolution 2010-28 changing the franchise fee to $31,689.28 per month or$5,281.55 per carrier. The Mayor and Common Council directed the City Manager to place an agenda item on the Council meeting agenda for February 22, 2011, either (1) establishing the revised franchise fee for Tow Services Agreements for calendar year 2011, or (2) approving a revised form of Tow Services Agreement. The proposed resolution will change the franchise fee to $21,299 per month which constitutes $3,550 per month from each of the six tow carriers. This rate is based on a recently completed cost analysis (see attached study). The Police Department will begin collecting the new fees on March 15, 2011. Staff is currently identifying additional changes to the existing Tow Service Agreement in order to ensure full cost recovery and operational efficiency. These proposed changes will be 9 resented for consideration at the Mayor and Common Council Meeting on March 7 FINANCIAL IMPACT For FY 2010-11, the tow franchise revenue was budgeted at $380,300. The proposed resolution will decrease the franchise fee from $31,691 to $21,299 per month, which is a 33 percent reduction. As the Police Department will begin collecting the new fee rate on March 15, 2011, the total decrease in FY 20 10-11 will be $3 6,3 72. However, staff is currently conducting an analysis of the existing Tow Service Agreements to determine additional changes to the provisions in order to ensure efficiencies in operations and complete cost recovery. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Resolution or i Cl) -� D p v z r c � 00 n cn o rn rn m v CD C:)D rn D v o D cl) ;u AIL O o O � < j � m n z D -� I i I s I The Matrix Consulting Group utilizes a cost allocation methodology, commonly known and accepted as the "bottom-up" approach to establishing User Fees. The term means that several cost components are calculated for each fee or service. These components then build upon each other to comprise the total cost for providing the service. The components of a full cost calculation are typically as follows: Cost Component Description Direct Salaries, benefits and allowable departmental expenditures. Departmental Overhead Division, Program, or Departmental administration /management and clerical support. Citywide Overhead City costs associated with central service costs such as payroll, human resources, budgeting, City management, etc. Established for this Study through a separate Cost Allocation Plan analysis performed by the Matrix Consulting Group. Cross-Departmental Support Costs associated with review or assistance in providing specific services. For example, costs established via study of the Public Works Department for review of Planning applications and Building permits are either included as an applicable cost toward the Planning and/or Building fees for service, or are listed as separate fee items chargeable by Public Works. Plan, Policy, and Systems Examples often include: General Plan Update, code enforcement, Update and Maintenance and technology costs. The general steps utilized by the project team to determine allocations of cost components to a particular fee or service are: • Develop time-estimates for each service included in the study; • Calculate the direct cost attributed to each time estimate; • Utilize the comprehensive allocation of staff time to establish an allocation basis for the other cost components; and, • Distribute the appropriate amount of the other cost components to each fee or service based on the staff time allocation basis, or other reasonable basis. The result of these allocations provides detailed documentation for the reasonable estimate of the actual cost of providing each service. The following are I critical points about the use of time estimates and the validity of cost allocation models. Workshops are conducted to gather time and activity estimates for each service included in the study, using the following approach: • Interview key personnel from each department and analyze the various activities being performed within it that are both revenue and non-revenue generating. Document basic process steps in application / permit processing or other fee related services. • Establish the net available hours for each employee. This starts with the full time total of 2,080 hours per year less reductions for vacation, sick, training, etc., and also for estimated "non-billable" time spent in meetings and supervisory or clerical roles. In each department's review, 100% of staff available hours are identified to both fee and non-fee related services to ensure a complete and defensible analysis. ZZ N 1 a o -n , hv�N CD CO v � C7 0 N 9 O Ca C Cn 7 O '-n Q z 0. 7 � CD N CD fn CD C a CD w Ch CD cn x n 3 — h / mn kt •" < a CD CL CD A. s' t9 'o 1t o <D (D Est% co 0) O m n ' g O O O cf) n OF) W ' O O O 0 O �0a" 6 Q J 0 21 (D n �' a D < C CD k' -n C7 cn D � � � � onc� O � C) � rnD v � CD 0 c = mmmmu) oommDmxwo c W 0000M -Imn r CD0 � - m � Imc» m , o OMMX � - mD () c -0 � -i � 0000c� cncn � DZ =1 =i0 0 ocnv) cn cn2 « � Z « C = r _' � --I cn m00— mmn Cl) c D 3cmio G� = cncn" � m � Z a D 00 = = m - 0 0 � = m. Fri n n m cn CA m m y 70 x a Z = cn v cc 00 m m M m CO) m 0 cfl a N N C � O COG OW N W Ui O A O O WA Cn (O A CO W -4 , O OD Cn OD J N J O - -� O tb J W W ` 0 O W Ui Cn W CO O N J N O W ^ 1 O co O CO O O CJt N 00 00 A Co Cn (J1 O `I O A (n A m O O N m co O w W O N O O U CO 0 -� O N N � O N J Cn J M -+ W O O �J1 00 CJ7 W Cn O N W J N - `% O W o) N O W C) J Cn O CA M Cn O 07 O O of W O J W C) A 00 — O Cn 00 N cn W N � N J N Cn " N N W O CO A m J CO W A w W W A W 00 A CA O J Cn w A O N J N O W O N J CO A O A m 0 O O CA J N -4 OD (o O) — (O A Cr O N CL 00 m rn � m Cn 0) W A =i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° - °r e-h 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t,° U) A W O J N N U1 CT Cn Ch Cn Un Un Cn Crl Ut (n cn Cn V (o N N N N N J N O N N N N N N CA O o) W CA W C) J CA N o) CA o) O CA a) 'O N J N W A Cn -Al. Cn m OD O Cn CO A 00 N CD CD O W A J CO N W Cn W CO (n J N W Cn y J J W O CA O CO " CO J W W J W J CD ID C� W CO J O J 00 OD J O W J J cn CD a �., 0 C.) � - CD n T C w < m 1 ' 1 k O_ C) cn O ; I o '0 D cn Cl) v D to v D r ,, x m C 5 CD y d C C (D V) v Q- C (D m Q co CD 0 t7_1 O co 00 CC) CO CO CX) O m � � CD a C ��► 7 n CD G1 (D 0' O CD CL CL a co lD y n n 0 0 cf) O N y O =« O C: IRE z U) N a 0 W m r' Q^ fn Ow 'n 69 69 fA Efl � bN <A 4.0 <.9 169 <A V► Efl _ EH <A ffl 69 69 CD 7%A" O N N — Cn N i a m N W 0 i�` Ul O -� 00 Z, (r �s W O CO -,j O OD (D (D W e n 9) N (n (D sY A U7 V O f,�D O O co i P i ao Du O v N W OD N O J N O J (D O O W Co 0 0 0 0 O O O O O .a (D W -� (n O O O O O O O O O O O F � km TI I TI -n -n -n -n -n -n -n TI N O O O O O O O O O O O O Q TI TI -n -n �`' W co W W m co Go co - - a a C_ a Ca. ann. 'r L11 C7 C) 0 n 0 (n (a cn cfl cn coca D D D D �m m (D -0 T -u CL 0 CD f. f✓ gy '0 N ' O � CD (D CD 1 a CD M 5. ; O ^ O (D l J -i a D 0 3 () C_ O O b ry O z N N G a m a ' 1 O < m m O p v D h m .N. D N n p m Cmi `s d �D77 � o N m m 'Tn Z < a 0 A -i m C X - m r 0 m mm 2 2 2 'O 2 2 2 S m 2 S V S S '9 S 2 V 2 S O m m m p 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 m 0 0 n A ;0;0 C C C X C C C C A C C D C C .'9 C C A C C y N N N p 77 p N .ZI A N ,T/ ,T7 N .Z7 .ZI CO A Z7 N A ll N 71 .Z1 00 N N N O N N O N N O N N O N co O N N O N N O Z Z D D'U z D -v Z D -u Z D v Z D -0 z D -u Z D m C N m Z y m Z 1 m z 1 m z 1 m Z m Z -� m z m » i r r e O p m O X m O Zl m O ;1 m O A r O m O ;a O O Op o i Z O D z O D z O D z O D z O z O D z N m N 2--1 1 z 'i Z -i -Ni Z -i -NI z -{ 1 z -' z oO .9 O 0 .� O O O O - O m 0 ;4 r '<C D C C C C C C D m z_< z z z z z z A N IJ N m N W W N N O O � IV N N Ut O N W p O O O m O O m O m y O c m + V N N f9 fA fM M (P d1 T 1 m (J W N N N N N Imli N m N d A A pyj __ rn 1 {mj W v IJ tJ i p A m r =r O N O y N A U� A V N Ut m O N W O V V y W N 01 V m N N m O W O t0 A N N W N N N m N o O o J <n J N N (n D N� �a o Z 0 0 :0 0 0 0 o a o o 0 m 0 m m � � ^z v � �3 o � N o p1 � m z i < N X' 0 C) (D O � ti O C to O CD c Rte' 3 N Q, < ;O r"^ �, O Cn ID T n tea : W s o tb. c, a x 90 O (D (n xf o OD s 00 °. c C) O 4 n �r Y W < h # (D N a (D ? 0 1 !�J W Ln CO G) n C N o (D (D a CA, (O yr fitC7 r CD N t�0 n a O WO A CMDY)_ (D �a O 0 Z y"M D Z 0 W m ' A v "i' U•? -� C G7 p cfl CY) w m C� 00 w W tp o C5 OD O N ;DD; � -n to OD (31 o cn; m o w "a o °) o °� m cn vw o n 6 m (D (D (D m CD W o o (D n D | . . | / e -n n < / } 2 --j § \ | . 07 R� \ z /f@ ) | \ \ \ J CD < 2z E 2E $ � \ ) ` ID 2 CL E 7 ` CD \ } | z § \ / < | § . o � } 0) | / /K - � } o0 > | w2 2. r- ) Ln(D RL a P 400 Q) @ o - ® / CD0C) | ° ƒ a ae 71 P, 0 k \ \� � J ƒ5 ® \/ 2 \ }\ _ >