Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-11-19; City Council; 13921; Proposition 218#TY OF CARLSBAD - AWDA BILL IOU (.:. DEPT. HI 1 .. TITLE: AB # != z MTG, 11 /I 9/96 PROPOSITION 218 z 0 U E 0 2 z 0 i= 0 U 6 2 3 0 0 DEPT. CM I IClTY MG I I RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the staff report and provide direction to staff if necessary. ITEM EXPLANATION On November 5, 1996, the voters approved Proposition 21 8 by a 56.5% to 43.5% margin. This proposition, titled “Voter Approval for Local Government Taxes, Limitations on Fees, Assessments, and Charges”, establishes new rules for the creation of property related taxes and charges effective November 6, 1996. Although the long range effects of Proposition 21 8 will not be fully known for some time, it is important for the City to understand as much as possible about what this new law may mean, and how it will affect the City in the future. The attached staff report provides the Council with an overview of the Proposition. As the attached report states, the City has about $1.6 million which it currently receives from Lighting and Landscape districts that will require ratification by the voters in the near future. In addition, future increases in taxes, assessments and certain property related fees will need to be submitted to the voters or affected property owners. City staff will present a brief overview of the Proposition to the City Council and will also be available to answer any questions the Council may have. More complete information will be available during December and January as the League of California Cities develops implementation guidelines to help cities understand the very complex rules .included in the text of the proposition. FISCAL IMPACT The immediate effect of Proposition 218 on the City will be to place in question the revenue received from the City’s 1972 Act Lighting and Landscape District. This revenue source funds street lighting, street median maintenance, and street tree maintenance throughout the City. The projected revenue to be received from this source in 1996-97 is about $1.6 million. Proposition 21 8 appears to require the Council place the ratification of the existing lighting and landscape assessment before the voters. I a Page two of Agenda Bill No. j 3 1 ? 2/ ( If ratified, these services may continue at the current level. If the voters reject the assessments, the City will need to consider service level reductions in either the street lighting, landscape and tree maintenance efforts, or other City services. EXHIBITS 1. Memo from the Financial Management Director dated July 24, 1996 * 0 a EXHIBIT NO. 1 L i ( - July 24, 1996 L TO: CITY MANAGER FROM: Financial Management Director a+ "VOTER APPROVAL FOR LOCAL GOVERN i- ENT TAXES. LIMITATIONS ON FEES, ASSESSMENTS, AND CHARGES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT." AKA RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT The attached report summarizes the key provisions of the "Right To Vote Act" and how they will affect the City of Carlsbad. The bottom line contains a few key points which are of interest to the City: 1. The Act has many provisions which are written in a way that begs litigation should the act be approved. The courts will ultimately decide on points which will affect how the Act changes local government's ability to tax and to set certain fees. 2. The Act will not materially affect how the City operates with respect to the majority of revenue sources. The City's tax base is either largely exempt from the provisions of the Act (property tax and sales tax), or has already received voter approval (TOT). The Council has historically chosen to submit tax increases to the voters even when voter approval was not clearly required by law. 3. The City has three sources of funds which appear to require voter ratification under the Act. These are the Street Lighting, Tree Maintenance, and Median Maintenance Assessment Districts. These assessments collected under the 1972 Street Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District represents about $1.4 million in annual revenue. If the voters did not validate the existence of these assessments, the City would have to reduce services, absorb these costs into the General Fund, or seek further voter approval for finding alternatives. The Act appears to provide a two year window for calling for voter approval of these assessments. 4. Fees appear to be affected only if they are "property related fees". The Act creatz-s a fairly onerous procedure for establishing fees which overlaps existing law. Generally, the act limits these fees to the amount necessary to cover the cost of providing the service. Carlsbad has attempted to use this guideline in the past, so this should have a minimal effect on the City. The most important aspect of this rule will 0 0 - be how the implementation rules are written. This could create a very complex and costly system of fee setting on top of the rules already imposed on fees for development related services. 5. The Act emphasizes the concept of direct notice to each affected property owner, and a system of voting which may prove to be different from previous initiative measures. The Act appears to require a 2/3 majority of the electorate, rather than a 2/3 majority of voters casting ballots for the approval of taxes, assessments, and property related fees. This is a significant burden when you consider historic electorate participation levels. This provision will certainly be the subject of litigation should the Act receive voter approval. In summary, the City has about $1.4 million at risk if the Act is approved by the voters. If the voters do not ratify the existing lighting and landscape assessment district, the City will need to consider reducing or eliminating services. If the City absorbs some or all of these costs into the General Fund, reductions would need to be made in the General Fund services. The effect of the reduction would not be felt immediately; however, under some interpretations of the Act, the City would have to refund any collections made after the effective date of the Act and the ratification vote, should the result of the vote be negative. Future increases in taxes and certain fees will be significantly more difficult to process. There will be some additional costs related to complying with the Act, however the magnitude of the additional cost will depend in large part on the implementing legislation and subsequent court decisions. The City Council should be aware of the statutory limitations on their ability to advocate a position on any measure before the voters. In brief, the City may educate, but it may not advocate. The attached report dated August 1, 1994 provided by the League of California Cities spells out the rules in more detail. mhs c: Leadership Team Attachments 1 ) Analysis of the "Right to Vote on Taxes" Act 2) Summary of Provisions of the "Right to Vote on Taxes" Act 3) League of California Cities Report - August 5, 1994 - Legal Issues Associated with City Participation in Ballot Measure Campaigns 9 - 0 0 ATTACHMENT 1 July 24, 1996 Analysis of the "VOTER APPROVAL FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TAXES. LIMITATIONS ON FEES, ASSESSMENTS, AND CHARGES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT." AKA RIGHT TO VOTE ON TAXES ACT INTRODUCTION The Right to Vote Taxes Act (the "Act") is a proposed amendment to the California Constitution that restricts the ability of local government to raise revenue through taxes, assessments and fees. The Act has been proposed by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association in response to a perception that local governments have subjected taxpayers to excessive tax, assessment, fee and charge increases that circumvent the intent of Proposition 13 - to provide effective tax relief and to require voter approval of tax increases (see Section 2 "Finding and Declarations" of the Act) - The Act will be on the November 1996 state-wide ballot, and if enacted by majority vote, will be effective July 1, 1997. This report provides a summary of the provisions of the Act and a discussion about the potential impacts on the City of Carlsbad. The findings of this report are also presented in a matrix in Exhibit 1 . Exhibit 2 is a copy of the text of the Act. PROVISIONS OF THE ACT - GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES Taxes imposed by local governments are either (1 ) general taxes or (2) special taxes, Special purpose districts or agencies, including schooi districts, have no power to levy general taxes. (1) General Taxes: All new, extended or increased general taxes must be submitted to the electorate in a regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body of the local government (unless an emergency is declared by a unanimous dote of the governing body) and approved by a majority vote. These provisions apply to general taxes imposed without voter approval back to January 1, 1995. The provisions also allow for a tax measure to establish a maximum rate which would then mean that an increase is defined only as that which is above the maximum rate so approved. 4 - 3 0 0 lmpactfsl to ?he City of Carisbad: The requirement for voter approval does not represent a change from the way in which general taxes are levied currently in the City of Carlsbad. Revenue the City receives in general taxes is already subject to voter approval under Proposition 62. However, under Proposition 62, general taxes must be "submitted to the electorate of the local government, or district and aDDroved bv a maioritv vote of the voters votim in an election. " The Act requires that general taxes be "submitted to the electorate and amroved bv a maioritv vote. /' If this means' that a majority of the electorate must approve the tax, the Act makes it much more difficult to pass a general tax since "throw- a wa yN ballots would be the equivalent of a "no '* vote. (2) Special Taxes: All new, extended or increased special taxes must be submitted to the electorate and approved by a two-thirds vote. The provisions also allow for a tax measure to establish a maximum rate which would then mean that an increase is defined only as that which is above the rate so approved. lmpact(s) to the City of Carlsbad: Again, under Proposition 62, approval by a two-thirds vote of the voters voting is required. As is the case for general taxes, the Act may make it more difficult if, as it appears, a two- thirds vote of the electorate is required for approval. PROVISIONS OF THE ACT - INITIATIVES TO REPEAL OR REDUCE TAXES, ASSESSMENTS AND CHARGES The Act authorizes the use of the initiative to repeal or reduce "any local tax, assessment, fee or charge. It also prohibits signature requirements higher provides that nothing in Article XIIIC, which includes the initiative language, "shall be construed to: " .... (b) affect existing laws relating to the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of property development;...". Currently, the constitution forbids the use of the referendum to repeal "statutes providing for tax levies or appropriations for the usual current expenses of the state." Generally, the levy or adjustment of special assessments may be accomplished only in accordance with the authorizing statute and are not subject to adjustment by referendum or initiative. If the Act is read literally, virtually all forms of revenue generation, except perhaps development fees and fees for purposes other than a property related service, are subject to potential repeal or reduction by an initiative. Revenues irom such diverse levies as drainage utility charges, water and sewer fees, benefit assessments for fire, flood control or park facilities, or than those applicable to statewide statutory initiatives. Finally, the Act 4 0 0 any other charge or fee levied on property for any infrastructure or service, whether in a general law or charter city, are subject to alteration by initiative. lmpactfsl to the City of Carlsbad: One serious effect of this provision is its potential effect on bonds which have been previously approved by the voters or are used to support other capital facilities funding methods such as certificates of participation ("COPS"). The potential for repeal or reduction through the initiative process would undoubtedly adversely affect the rating and marketability of future bonds. Although this does not appear to be a problem to the City of Carlsbad, there are many cities where this could be a major issue. The City's sinole COP issue is Hosp Grove, done in 1988. It is not supported by any special tax or assessment. All payments are made from General Fund revenue. PROVISIONS OF THE ACT - ASSESSMENTS All existing assessments (except those (1 ) levied before 7/1/97 to finance capital costs or maintenance and operation expenses for water, sewer, flood control, drainage systems, vector control, sidewalks or street construction: (2) levied pursuant to petition signed by parcel owners in the district; (3) used exclusively to repay bonded indebtedness; or (4) previously approved by majority vote), new or increased assessments must comply with the following approval requirements: (a) The agency must identify all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed. The proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel must be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement or the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement or for the cost of the property related service being provided. The agency must separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel. Parcels within a district that are owned or used by any agency are not exempt from assessment unless the agency can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that such parcels receive no special benefit. (b) All assessments must be supported by a detailed registered engineer's report. tc) The record owner of each parcel must receive a mailed notice of the assessment, the total assigned to the district, total to the owner and basis for the assignment, duration of payments, the reason for the assessment, a notice of a pubic hearing on the assessment, and a ballot. 5 0 0 (d) The agency must conduct the public hearing 45 or more days after the public hearing notice was mailed. At the hearing, the agency must consider all protests and tabulate the ballots. The agency may not impose the assessment if there is a majority protest. A majority protest exists if ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment. In tabulating the ballots, the ballots must be weighed according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property. (e) In any legal action contesting the validity of any assessment, the burden will be on the agency to demonstrate that the property or properties in question receive a special benefit over and above the benefits conferred on the public at large and that the amount of any contested assessment is proportional to, and no greater than, the benefits conferred on the property or properties in question. A specific aim of the Act is the type of assessment levied under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. In the California Supreme Court's decision in Knox v. City of Orland, the Court upheld a citywide assessment district under the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 to finance park maintenance. The plaintiff contended that a special assessment for maintenance of a park is never appropriate because a park is not the type of improvement that confers a special benefit on real property. The Jarvis Taxpayers Group literature states that such districts constitute a "new and devious way to sneak around Proposition 13 and into your wallet." The Act defines "special benefit" as a "particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enhancement of property value does not constitute 'special benefit."' Under existing law, public agencies have been given wide leeway to determine whether a portion of the benefit of an improvement is "general" as opposed to distinctly local and "special," and an agency's determination will Under the Act, in any legal action brought to challenge the assessment, the local agency will have the burden to demonstrate that the property or properties in question receive a special benefit over and above the benefits conferred on the public at large and that the amount of any contested assessment is proportional to and, no greater than, the benefits conferred on the property or properties in question. Another significant aspect of the Act is the provisions relating to majority protests. Assessment district formation laws traditionally allow each property owner a right to protest the imposition of the district. Almost universally, the legislative body must abandon the proceedings to form an be upheld if there is any substantial evidence in the record to support it. 6 0 assessment district if a majority protest exists after the public hearing held to consider protests. In addition, under current law, a public agency has the authority to delete improvements, modify the engineer's report or other wise^ respond to a protest in many circumstances. In some proceedings, the legislative body is permitted to override the majority protest. Finally, under existing law, it is presumed that no protest exists unless property owners affirmatively register each protest with the legislative body. The Act changes the majority protest process for assessments into a type of mail ballot election with respect to the proposed assessment. When notice a ballot to each property owner of record, At the public hearing the agency must consider the protests and count the ballots. A majority protest exists, if upon conclusion of the hearing, the ballots submitted against the assessment exceed the ballots in favor of the assessment. It is unclear whether persons may withdraw a protest by changing a ballot during the public hearing. Under current law, protesters are generally permitted to withdraw the protest prior to or at the hearing on the protests. The Act also changes the method of tabulating the vote. Under current law, the most commonly used assessment protest provisions define a majority protest as protest by property owners owning more than fifty percent of the area of assessable land. Under the Act, the ballots are to be weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of each assessed parcel. Also, the Act provides no ability for the legislative body to override a protest. One result of this change in method of tabulating the vote is that a small minority of owners of more intensely used property who for that reason are assessed more to pay for beneficial improvements could block an assessment favored by numerically more property owners of less intensely used property. Finally, as mentioned previously, even if an assessment district is successfully implemented and challenged, the Act authorizes a local initiative to "affect" assessments and provides that an assessment can be terminated by the voters after it is formed. Impacts to the City of Carlsbad: The measure's total effect on landscaping and lighting maintenance districts is unclear. A literal reading of the measure leads to the conclusion that affirmative approval of each annual assessment is required. The Act proponents state that this is not their intent. But, unlike the provisions of Article XiilC, there is no exemption from the new majority protest provisions for the annual levy of a maintenance assessment within a previously established range. Under the Act, the Ciryrs existing 1972 Landscape & Lighting Assessment Districts would have to comply with the approval requirements of the Act by 7 of the proposed assessment and the public hearing occurs, the agency mails e a June 30, 1997. These districts are for street trees, median maintenance, and street lighting (the Buena Vista Creek Channel maintenance is also a 19 72 act district, but it appears to be exempt under the storm drainage and- flood control provisions of the Act). The assessments total approximately $ I. 4 million. The 19 13 assessments districts for Alga, Palomar Airport Road and College are exempt from the Act approval requirements. However, any future 19 13 assessment districts would be subject to the Act approval process. PROVISIONS OF THE ACT - PROPERTY RELATED FEES 8t CHARGES The Act creates stringent procedures and requirements for new and increased property related fees and charges. These provisions are difficult to analyze both because they are written in a confusing way and the notice and hearing provisions overlap with many existing provisions of state law. For existing, new or increased fees and charges, the revenues from the levy cannot exceed the cost to provide the service and cannot be used for any other purpose; the amount imposed on any parcel cannot exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel: the levy must be for the service used by or immediately available to the owner; and the levy cannot be imposed for general government services such as police, fire or substantially in the same manner as it is to property owners. The procedures for new or increased fees or charges are as follows. (1 ) The owner of each affected parcel must receive a mailed notice of the levy with the amount of the levy, the reason for the levy, the basis upon which it was calculated, and notice of a public hearing. (2) At the public hearing, to be held not less than 45 days from the date of the mailing of the notice, if written protests are presented by a majority of the owners, the levy cannot be imposed. (3) Not less than 45 days from the date of the public hearing, the levy must be approved by a majority of affected owners or, at the public agency's option, by a 213 vote of the electorate residing in the affected area. The term "fee" or "charge" is defined to mean any levy other than an ad valorem tax, special tax or assessment, "imposed upon a parcel or upon a for a property related service." A "property-related service" is one having a direct relationship to property ownership. Fees and charges for provisions of electricai or gas service are excluded. Fees for sewer, water and refuse collection are included, but may be imposed unless a majority protest exists (a vote of the property owners or electorate is not required). Existing laws relating to the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of development library services where the service is available to the public at large person as an incident of property ownership, including user fees or charges 8 e a , are unaffected by the measure. As in the provisions for assessments, the majority protest is based upon the number of owners, not the acreage of the property. As in any legal action contesting the validity of an assessment district, the public agency will have the burden of proving compliance with the requirements of the Act for property related fees and charges. SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC IMPACTS TO CARLSBAD For the City of Carlsbad, the significant impacts of this proposed legislation are limited mostly to the City's ability to levy new or increased taxes, assessments or fees. General and Special Taxes: Existing general and special taxes are not impacted at their current level. If the City wishes to create or increase existing general and special taxes, these levies must be submitted to the electorate and approved by a majority vote for the former, and a two-thirds vote for the latter. Assessments: 1972 Landscaoe & Liclhtinq Act - Revenue collected for street lighting, median maintenance, and street tree maintenance will require voter approval as of June 30, 1997. As a result, the revenue currently collected from these assessments, approximately $1.4 million, may be available this fiscal year only. New or increased assessments will also require voter approval. I91 3 Act Benefit Assessments - Currently, there are three 191 3 Act assessment districts: Alga, Palomar Airport Road and College. These assessment districts would be exempt from the approval process under the Act; however, any future assessment districts would be subject to the Act's approval procedures and requirements. Property Related Fees & Charges: It appears that existing fees and charges the Act. However, after June 30, 1997, new and increased fees and charges, with the exception of sewer, water and refuse collection fees, will require a majority vote of affected owners or a two-thirds vote of the electorate residing in the affected area. Sewer, water and refuse collection fees may be imposed unless a majority protest exists. at their current levels may not be subject to the approval requirements of 9 '_ * e 0 00 t 4' " " " " " jx ;a <r :- Y= 32 22 m:: -. - -n -2 " :L 23 12 2- =B -1 z5 22 52 &r! -7 23 2% $S " :I " - - -. -= - =a x-. s5 0- FS s3 r -- 3 - .3 =z 2 2" ZT 22 27 iz 7?$ g; 5; 1; - - z; %2 $5 " 5- 3' - -- - =n 3s a" 9% -. -L 2 2. " " - -. -d 52 'C 9= 0-2 -" -. ne =- 7- 29 2% - - - " - 2 1 - - - - - i 1 j 0 - E=.; - ~ - -%" - ; p g yg '; ; 5 1 5 : ;:: Egj; 5.; =z : $1 0 >.no. : =" . 2 :-I;,: z: 3 5 $j :. 3 -. I g:z 19. -. n - n ,n 'A -2" -. $3; 5 2. 1 li/ 2s $4 3 .? *, i7 ZL? g 1 2n:g 5 ;'a- 13 p.' - n 2 :: :.=J< hf 2 4:. 2- I f 5.z ;: w : .: y. s; ;;55 J2$ 5 ., 2 ;. =, E, z 2 ii $3 7 2' 7 j: 25 z -., a ?. zz g : yg 73 a z2 --< &$ - 3 'p2. 0-" : =. 3 g: :._; 3 0, g. 5G; E. =3 j 2.; "* z. a -2 E. 1, - "2 2 Tz = z5 22 $ a 5 Z.T= > 21 25 2!"-N= 2- q a -. 555 - 2 gz 2. &g ggg "r :: 3 . - 5 vm 2 5: +7 2 =dc :&e 2 3 =. FE ! $g 2. 5.25 ?=:" i;'l 3 25' 3 3% : E?.?? 3,@ %Lg 4 5: 3 I' a 22 47 i? g5 m q i 2. sx 2 ag 2 3z :: ,$ 3 * z 9. ;x a g 4 %ff 2 3- x. 2; : gz 2 05' - E &J Q'R z 2' "5 p. 2% J 88 - H $E :% 4' g$ $ 38 E, mum 4- 55 3 pj e_ 113 1 'y $3 ;i ."dg'= < 131 3 2; 4 !$ 0% 2 j2 "- g.21 c = y370 snz> ' 5j gz;: s-4 15 r- 4 z;= 0 n53? ",,.?,a: p2q: =: ; - 2%? 2sA-?- ", - +;? < 2%: ;$:;=,: - -- -- 3?% = '7:Eg;g 3E2:3,z %~.2,1~2 a= ng /jcg' 4,zz:-,;o :$$; - 2 & =x x=' n a,$:,? *z &:: 2.g 3, .? Fg; !$a?S2 aa=l;zo, .'1p 01 m -.z.: 33 * 5%. 5.90 3 2 ;a;;aOo5B.I ?a -. 5;+ g$4a.g % 3 E "C2 % 0 - -. s.T - 323.$2' zm-m 0 A 5=.2% 5 5 7. mm ?ZF1231 $5 zz& ir$gaa 4 ": 52 rn 2 2 55 rc -;E -. " $3, E g2.2 . n= 3a_IK2 -EmzgJ " .3:mrs ;?G;ga !2- 2, 3 z. * '< .? z. - - L -<e x - 52i7 =; - 2 z. ;> 5 9 -. -. - - ,< -I I 55 3 2' s <g 2;K 3 a; eL -, > 20- 0, PEE n % O33 ,a m nn - n 6' a n- F J -. -, -. 'Y -0 I - 1: - - "I -8 2.; 4 =-ps .? + 2s gsz 23 * x;m 0 -. 2. 7p 2.2 '4 = :m " 1 ;a $3 K " $ g 3, 1 2 X g. r 5' z "I "-a m= 9 2 3' a= o zc a F:= s "2 3- nrn '< '", -. -. - n '~.wu P * yl 5; .? "j 4 ::e 2 3- c P. - " rP ;e- - 23 -.;5;=ze 'E - z, 1. n ZE .:s 7 =,? - 3 n- - .€ 5.w; '< = 5. 0 :s >; 22 CL7 s ,< ZZ - z 3 gz: ..22 2 5',3 m.2 723 ,?e =c - - * > FI j i $1 ! ;: 2 .; 1 s-gs 2,,ap3 i 01 n ~ s-pnnz-3K~2 ;:a2az i jpp3 1 : 2.g 8 2 Yo 32'-a ;; s<zg =-. -.303~2% =.?E% ?'E Liz g: q 2 22 ?:I a;- -g5.5$ I *i 7 .* f; 51 $! j' 1, '. .. -. * q : I 4 VI? Fg?,$.;; -7 2.5 7E:S; 0= j 2s 5. 3 'e Lzr s -,5 g 0 5 2 .- I 3') 'C n 0 - :- -3 ,* Q t 4 ' i , 3: gz 2 +/a.s Q!g k3 sagrn g" e 'i 3 5.0 '< Ts: 3 2 2; Y- - $G% z- 0 j i I $a; $, 5. 3, i' 3' 2 ' ' n 3 3% zE.rT3=Qr;G&.%$;. 2 & zzg.2 :,ggj.i 2 -z%,s 0 $g3$42 2 c_g= ,< - = asf.$ I z i 33a~3g3;iQ.~3'gg3 5: 2 2 + 3' en= e? i *z c -. I Zn o 'A - 13 =L 9.g.- 1 'n -"I3 f ~ 1 OK^ e, c z?%;zL gzr sz,qg 3' .! E is1 2 F % B =.;.s ag I 1-2 3 5 e: "Z 2 nn~..-nh$jEW$?-no3 ? w 5. >: G- T Q 0'2.H3 H, 1 a s $;.? -.m a i; 0 ! -dJ,s 3 E ! r92r "";a 2;5<n- I G'< ;" i: g 2 2 z VI 975 p. 29nw> zz=nag $ 4%: 5.Gu =5"Sqg 2 gg: 5o'RoM -03- 0 %z:;,$ qtzgsm z zE3 mg 438q,yI 8ap,a3 e;gG x 3 5. CJ y. ?+ z;.n 3" 3 4~~n~~z I -2 moo 30 3 H = .g a 2.m 3 1 i; IV B i $=?a =so* ~ '<61,"-S- I $.%$ En '2 5 z.s $ 3 g n3e40 n 92'p-.8 .E -. saY'2a- f z =c9 -. I j I","+; o.~r~~~~P~~i~4~~~~~~~x - - d L, c 5 i-5; jjpgj >; Teg .~ - %q I - " C.? :: 2 - 'r; - - "; $; 2 2 1% 2 "2 ;; e; ;.?33 n g 3 E ZP 3 - -n D 2, EZ.2 4 >a:gs I$ ; ,!.?-; g 3 -"o'@z' 5 5 a z Fa ~~3 1Z - j 02.s.n 3 3E.2:zx? ; gz ~..~~~~~~~~~jl~~~~~3n~~a ;:- ;%': - . = - z rlp c1 $ I- ,+Tz2&-F:lp- y5;;zL?;/~3~sn- i=c;"~i;" .=2:ca " -55 2 $1 31 - II: I .* : (I 1; 0 0 I aZ.;;;oEj 2.- 2 22 3: .s&i, :?$g a 2, $ 03 2 ST ECS i 2 22 nC52::;Ps.L3rP: Jf'PZi: 0 I 2 02 i 0- - - rn 2 -: 2 F2 2,Z.Z a,: 5 A c +7 ij = x;g. $1 r 3 -3 " I j~~~*-a=-~ q3""h:TZ.%&~z n $2 f 2% z g2 z .r 4 ~ T o - ..I ms 3 " - J ;=e = I -0 nw- =a&~$$ 2"; nz 4 - 0 cs,. -z; a?$ gg$$ '3 $8 5% 3 - $ 1- si zgs.$~ - gfz=,,- waZ3 1vz=oa- % g 03 $2 I $;~-s~n. Fa 5 - =i "gO"3 'i, a' 3 - o 1 -"- .-j; 2 9 7°C - i z-6 - !L - I