Resolution 389-1996
Planning Department
RESOLUTlO1\T NO. 389-96
.
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS APPROVING THE MONROE COUNTY 1996
IMPACT FEE REPORT.
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning must submit an annual report on impact fees to the Planning
Commission and the Board of County Commissioners prior to the adoption of the annual budget and
capital improvements program pursuant to Section 9.5-490.2 of the Monroe County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the annual impact fee report dated July 30, 1996,
and comments by the Director of Planning, Timothy McGarry and recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners had no changes to the annual impact fee report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: THAT
Section 1.
This Board specifically adopts the findings of fact and recommendations reached in
the Monroe County 1996 Impact Fee Report as its own; and therefore
Section 2.
The Monroe County 1996 Impact Fee Report is approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a
regular meeting of the Board held on the 19th day of SeptemlreID., 1996." ~ ,:!
yes
yes
aosent
a
C":I
---l
f"T1
CJ
o
.,.,
C)
:::0
:;.a
rrJ
C")
a
:::0
a
yes
yes
-0
N
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
o MONROE C~TY, FLORIDA
B~. -::r~
MAYO CHAIRMAN
(SEAL)
A TTEST: DANNY L. KOHLAGE, CLERK
~~C. o.,)c1~
,
Deputy Clerk
0M0e
I '
PC RESOLUTION NO. P52-96
,
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING
APPROV AI. TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF THE MONROE COUNTY 1996
IMPACT FEE REPORT.
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning must submit an annual report on impact
fees to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners prior to
the adoption of the annual budget and capital improvements program pursuant to
Section 9.5-490.2 of the Monroe County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the annual impact fee report
dated July 30, 1996, and comments by the Director of Planning, Timothy McGarry;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission had no changes to the annual impact fee
report.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, to recommend approval
to the Board of County Commissioners of the Monroe County 1996 Impact Fee
Report.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of August, 1996.
Chair Haskell
Vice-Chair Hansley
Commissioner Chaplin
Commissioner Mannillo
Commissioner Nugent
YES
YES
YES
ABSENT
YES
BY
PLANNING CO
MONROECOUN
By
Monica Haskell, Chair
Signed this
day of
, 1996.
I '
MONROE COUNTY
1996
IMPACT FEE REPORT
July 30, 1996
I '
Monroe County
1996 Impact Fee Report
Prepared for the
Monroe County Planning Commission
and
Board of County Commissioners
by the
Monroe County Planning Department
July 30, 1996
1996 IMPACT FEE REPORT
Introduction
Purpose:
Pursuant to Monroe County Code Section 9.5-490.2(b), the Planning Director is required to
prepare this annual report, prior to the adoption of the annual budget. This document
represents the first report complying with the County Code. It is intended to provide
recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners on appropriate amendments to the
code affecting the impact fee system, to identify capital improvements projects anticipated to
be funded wholly or partially with impact fees, and to identify any other recommended
changes or improvements to the impact fee system.
Background on Impact Fees:
Under Section 9.5-940 of the Monroe County Code, impact fees are imposed on new
development to ensure that such development pays for its fair share towards the costs of
capital improvements reasonably necessitated by such growth. [Non-capital projects and
maintenance costs can not be funded through impact fees.] The new development must
reasonably benefit from capital improvements made with proceeds of impact fees. Except in
certain situations, if these impact fees are not spent within six years they must be returned to
the property-owner.
Auditors Report:
On April 10, 1996, the County Clerk's Internal Audit Department presented an audit report
on the County's impact fee expenditures to the County Administrator. The report, entitled
Audit Report Review of Monroe County Impact Fee Expenditures, outlined findings and
recommendations to resolve problems with the current impact fee system.
The auditor concluded that the Planning Director has not prepared the required annual impact
fee report and that the report should be prepared "in order to ensure that the proper amount
of fees is collected and spent as intended." Additional findings in the audit reveal that no
financial plans, from which the annual report may be prepared, had been provided by the
departments with the authority to utilize such funds and impact fee funds were not being fully
utilized.
Scope and Study Process:
The Planning Director has prepared the 1996 Impact Fee Report in response to some of
significant findings of the audit report and in accordance with Section 9.5-490.2(b) of the
Monroe County Code. It is not the intent or design of this report to address all the concerns
raised in the audit report.
In preparing this report, the Planning Department requested information from the Sheriff s
Department, Division of Community Services, Division of Environmental Management,
Division of Public Works, Division of Public Safety and the Planning Department's Parks
and Recreation Planner. This information was intended to be used to identify proposed
projects eligible for the expenditure of impact fees and to recommend appropriate changes to
the current impact fee system.
The Planning Department staff worked closely with representatives from the Office of
Management and Budget and other County agencies to address changes in the impact fee
project budgeting and tracking process. In addition, the Department is currently working
with the Division of Public Works to investigate the expansion of road projects that could be
eligible for impact fee funding. The Planning Department has also retained the consulting
firm Barton-Aschman to evaluate the existing transportation impact fee schedule and
methodology. The results of this investigation were unavailable in time for inclusion in this
year's report.
Report Organization:
The report's contents are organized into sections, which are consistent with the provisions of
Section 9.5-490. Significant findings and recommendations are presented in bold.
Proposed Changes to Impact Fee Categories
Current regulations on the application of impact fees are found in Ordinance 33-1992. This
ordinance amends the language found in Monroe County Code Section 9.5-490. A series of
Board of County Commissioners' resolutions establishes fees for each of the five categories:
Transportation (#497-1992), Police and Fire Protection (#089-1993, #492-1992), Libraries
(#493-1992), Solid Waste (#496-1992) and Community Parks (#494-1992). The audit
report recommended that the Monroe County Land Development Regulations be
amended to incorporate the aforementioned ordinances as well as correct conflicting
language in the code concerning refunds oJ impact fees.
The Planning Department received from the County Engineer a recommendation to amend
the current transportation impact fee regulations (LDRs) to include using funds for local road
improvements. The Planning Department staff, its transportation consultant, and the County
Attorney's office are currently evaluating this request. Any recommendations resulting
from this investigation will be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners in next
year's report and/or in proposed revisions to Monroe County Land Development
Regulations.
2
Proposed Capital Projects and Funding
Only the Division of Public Works, Sheriff's Department and the Parks and Recreation
Planner provided the Planning Department with information on anticipated FY97 impact fee
expenditures and projects. The Division of Solid Waste Management reported that no
projects are anticipated to utilize impact fees in FY97.
A list of proposed projects to be funded by impact fees is presented in the following
subsections. This list is not entirely consistent with those projects identified for impact
fee funding in the County's tentative capital budget; this inconsistency is addressed in
the recommendations concerning the County's impact fee project budgeting and
expenditure process presented in the last section of this report.
Proposed Transportation Projects:
As shown .in Table 1, approximately $3.6 million of impact fees are forecast to be available
for county-wide projects in FY 97; $718,000 for District 1; $771,000 for District 2; and
$1.525 million for District 3.
The county-wide account is for projects that benefit the entire county, such as Card Sound
Road. The impact fees for this account generally come from transfers from the three district
accounts or directly from collection of impact fees. No specific funding or set-aside formula
is followed for the disbursements into the county-wide account.
A proposed list of road improvements using impact fee funds for FY 1997 was provided by
the Division of Public Works and is presented in Attachment A. Collector road projects are
proposed for 24.2% funding by impact fees. Bikeways and paths are proposed for 100%
funding. Specific project information and costs will not be available until later in the
engineering and design phase.
The following summarizes the Division of Public Works' request by district:
District 1 (Lower Keys):
District 2 (Middle Keys):
District 3 (Upper Keys):
$740,689.49
0.00
$321.133.36
Total
$1,061,822.85
Proposed Park and Recreation Projects:
The Division of Public Works plans to utilize $64, 654 in impact fee funds for the Marr
Property or Settlers Park improvements in District 3. However, specific expenditures for
facilities will be earmarked only after public input has been received. No funds from District
1 or 2 accounts were proposed for use in FY97.
3
Category
Transportation
Parks and
Recreation
Solid Waste
Library
Police
Fire
Source:
Notes:
. TABLE 1
IMPACT FEES AVAILABILITY
FORECASTS FOR FY 1997
County-wide
3,659,700
District 1
717,588
District 2
770,565
District 3
1,524,716
NA
155,876
258,369
681,250
NA
159,414
NA
NA
NA
91,150
183,492
NA
NA
NA
32,750
555,465
NA
NA
NA
110,850
FY 1997 Tentative Monroe County Budget, Appropriation Summary By
Fund, Office of Management and Budget, July 1, 1996.
1.
The amount of impact fees availability by category and district include
carry-over funds from FY 1996, interest income, and forecast FY 97
impact fees less administrative expenses. It also includes proposed
appropriations for refunds.
2. District 1 = Lower Keys; District 2= Middle Keys; and District 3=
Upper Keys
4
Table 1 provides a breakdown of project impact fee funds available by district in FY97. A
total' of almost $900,000 is forecast to be available for park projects throughout the County.
Although not recognized in the County's Tentative Budget for FY97, some or all of these
monies have been previously earmarked for specific projects. Furthermore, the actual
amount of funds available by district may be less than shown in Table 1, since the Tentative
FY 97 Budget does not account for expenditures for some park projects during the current
fiscal year.
Proposed Sheriff Facilities Projects:
Sheriff facilities impact fees are allocated on a county-wide basis and are not distributed to
subdistrict accounts. The following list describes how the Sheriff s Department plans to
utilize impact fees in FY97, which is almost all of the project impact funds available for
FY97 (see Table One):
$350,000.00 Plantation Key Detention Center Addition
55,000.00 Air Conditioning System for the Stock Island Jail
95,000.00 Construction of an Impound Yard on Stock Island
150,000.00 Construction of a Firing Range on Crawl Key
$650,000.00
Proposed Fire and EMS Projects:
Public Safety provided no list of projects to be funded with impact fees. Table 1 provides a
breakdown of the amount of impact fees available by district for FY 97. A sum of
approximately $243,750 will be available for all three districts.
Proposed Library Projects:
The Division of Community Services did not provide any information on proposed capital
projects for utilization of impact fees to the Planning Department. However a review of the
Tentative FY 97 Budget indicates that approximately $28,000 in impact fees has been set-
aside for buildings. Table 1 shows that approximately $258,000 will be available in impact
fee funds for library facilities next fiscal year.
Proposed Solid Waste Projects:
The Division of Solid Waste Management has not identified to the Planning Department or
OMB any projects for funding with impact fees. Table 1 shows that approximately $155,000
is anticipated to be available in impact fees next fiscal year.
Proposed Changes in Impact Fee Districts
No findings or recommendations.
5
Proposed Changes in Impact Fee Schedules
No findings or recommendations.
Proposed Changes in Levels of Service
No findings or recommendations
Proposed Changes in Calculation Methodology
No findings or recommendations.
Proposed Changes to Budgeting and Expenditure Process
The Director of Planning and the Director of OMB worked with the appropriate agencies that
utilize impact fees to evaluate procedures for the budgeting and expenditure of impact fee
funds to identify deficiencies and recommend changes. The following are the findings and
recommendations of this effort:
Findings:
1. Impact fees are not being fully utilized by the County agencies, which
may be attributed to any or all of the following reasons:
o Lack of general knowledge about availability of funds and the
criteria for use of these funds;
o Real or perceived difficulties in meeting criteria for use of impact
fees; and,
o Lack of effective process for integrating impact fees funding into
the capital budgeting process.
2. The existing budgeting and expenditure process for use of
impact fees requires improvements to the following:
o County agencies need to be better informed about the use and
availability of impact fee funds;
o Capital projects should go through a
budgeting process that fully considers all funding
sources, including impact fees; and,
6
o All projects to be funded by impact fees should be identified and
approved in the ado.pted current fiscal year budget, similar to
projects using other funding sources.
3. Any enhancements and improvements to the existing budgeting and
tracking process for use of impact fees must consider the manpower
limitations of County staff.
Recommendations:
1. It is recommended that revised budgeting process for projects using
impact fees be implemented in FY 97, as shown in Table 2.
2. It is recommended that impact fee expenditure process follow the
existing procedures (with slight enhancements) as outlined in Table 3.
7
TABLE 2
REVISED BUDGET PROCESS
FOR IMPACT FEE FUNDED PROJECTS
1.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
2.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
3.
Action:
Lead Agencies:
Time Frame:
4.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
5.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
6.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
Send forecast impact fee revenues by category and
district for next fiscal year to the Planning Department for
review and comment and make necessary revisions based on
this review.
OMB
Middle of December
Send next fiscal year revenue forecasts on impact fees to
appropriate departments, including revised capital project
request forms (project description, costs, ranking, and
justification), new instruction sheet for completing the
forms, and request for any suggested changes in impact fee
districts, fee calculation methodology, fee schedule, level of
service, etc.
Planning Department
First week in January
Brief departments on availability and use of impact fees.
OMB and Planning Department
First week in February
Submit completed capital project forms for all capital projects
over $5,000 [actual threshold amount to be determined] in cost
to the Planning Department.
All appropriate departments
First week in March
Review completed forms for each proposed capital project
to determine the level of eligibilty for funding with impact fees
and send completed forms and information on projects eligible
for impact fee funding to the County Attorney's Office. [Note:
The capital project forms for projects not identified for impact
fee funding will be sent directly to OMB.]
Planning Department
First week in April
Review proposed projects for utilization of impact fees for
legal sufficiency and send reviewed projects to OMB.
County Attorney's Office
Last week in April
8
9.
11.
TABLE 2 (Continued)
REVISED BUDGET PROCESS
FOR IMPACT FEE FUNDED PROJECTS
7.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
8.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
10.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
Incorporate proposed capital projects
including those utilizing impact fees, into the capital
improvements element of next fiscal year's proposed county
budget. [Note: Project numbers will be assigned to capital
projects for tracking and financial purposes.]
OMB
May through July
Prepare annual impact fee report, including the list of capital
projects being funded in proposed county budget with impact
fees.
Planning Department
End of July
Submit annual impact fee report through Planning Commission
to the Board of County Commissioners prior to adoptton of
the county's annual budget.
Planning Department
August through September
Approve annual impact fee report.
Board of County Commissioners
September [prior to adoption of annual budget]
Adopt annual county budget, including capital budget.
Board of County Commissioners
Prior to October 1
9
TABLE 3
IMPACT FEE EXPENDITURE PROCESS
1.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
2.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
3.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
4.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
5.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
6.
Action:
Lead Agency:
Time Frame:
I ,
Submit project expenditure request form for
utilization of impact fees to Planning Department.
Appropriate departments
As required
Review project expenditure request forms [to be revised] for
use of impacts to confirm or determine eligibility and send to
County Attorney's Office. (Note: Projects for which funds are
requested should be in adopted budget and therefore will
require little or no review, unless significant changes have
occurred in project costs or description or the proposed project
is not defined in the adopted budget.]
Planning Department
As required
Review project expenditure request forms for legal
sufficiency and submit to OMB. [Review should be limited;
see note for Action 2.]
County Attorney's Office
As required
Review request and submit to the Board of County
Commissioners for authorization to transfer of funds for
expenditure on project.
OMB
As required
Approve transfer of funds for project.
Board of County Commissioners
As required.
Send copy of Board's authorizing resolution to
Planning Department, Finance Department, and appropriate
department.
OMB
As required.
10
ClUJ
~~
~t5
1::"(
en ~~
~
en
0 >-
(.) -JCl
W Cl)UJ
:;:)Cl
W OC!
u. S;UJ
~ UJ~
(.) !flU
c(
D.
~ Cl l!J
w ~~~
...J ~!:91-
lie (!)t>
f::-"(
C) I"'- ~uj~
:::i en
I
W CO
en
C > ~
W u.
~
c( I-
D. t>
(3 ~
~ ~
Z
c( .
u. 0::
0 e
> frl
a:::
c( -J
-J
:e 0
:e t>
:)
en
I-
t>UJ
~UJ
~~
l-
t>
~ .... .... .... ("') .... ("') .... ("') ("') ("')
CI) .
Q'
'It
I-
C!
:;:)
0
t>
t>
<:(
I- 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ("') <Xl .... 00 <0 <Xl 0 0 N <0
a1 0 V 0 1.0 0 0 N 1.0 N 0 0 N 00 0) 0 0 0 N 1.0
0 ~ 0 ,...: 8 .... r- a) en eO N N 00 .... a) 0 eO N ("')
~ ("') V 0 .... .... r- .... N V <Xl 1.0 ffi ffi N 0) 0 1.0 r- 0
<0("') 0 .... 0 0 ("') N v_ N <Xl N 0 r- 0<Xl 0)<0
CI) Mffi .0 ....... ci r- MN r- m .0 cD ci M ci --~ ....... ("')-
gs ffi r- ffi 0) ("') Nffi 0) ffi <0 ffi ~ffi <Xl ffi ("') ffi
ffi ("') ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi
ffi
~
jjj
a::
CI) 0 0 00 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 0 0
l!J 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 0
0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 0 0
~ ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi
l-
t>
~
~
0 0) 0 0 00 0 0 0 ("') <Xl .... 0 0 <0 <Xl 0 0 N <0
I- 0 V 0 1.0 00 N 1.0 N 0 0 N 0 0 OJ 0 0 0 N 1.0
?5 0 V 0 r- o~ ,...: a) en eO N N 0 0 .... a) 0 eO N M
("') V 0 .... 0.... r- .... N V <Xl 1.0 ffi ffi N 0) 0 1.0 r- 0
<0 ("') 0 .... 00 (",)N v. N <Xl N 0 r- 0<Xl 0)<0
0 Mffi .0....... ci r-- MN r- m .0 cD ci M c::i~ .......M
~ ffi r- ffi 0)("') N ffi 0) ffi <0 ffi ~ffi <Xl ffi ("') ffi
<:( ffi ("') ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi ffi
ffi
UJ
(!)
~ ?/!.'?fl '#.'#. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
a1 " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "
N N 00 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 N N
~ ~ 00 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V 0 0 ~ ~
t> N N .... .... .... .... N N N N N N N N N N .... .... N N
IE
a.
-J 0 0 0 0 88 8~ 0 V o <Xl 88 0 <0 00 0<0
0 1.0 0 1.0 0 r- 0 1.0 0 1.0 00 or-
~ 0 M 0 ,...: 0"": 0"": 0 eO 0 .0 00 0 ~ oeO 00
e 8~ 0 .... 0.... 0 <0 0 0 V ("') ffi ffi <Xl 0) 0 1.0 ....0)
0 .... 00 <0 .... <ON N<Xl ("')<0 o <Xl 0) <Xl
L()~ ~- .0....... ci r-. cD m NeD N- .0 .0.0 0- ,-- cD";
Cl .... ffi r- ffi 0)("') 0) ffi 0 ("') r- N <0.... <Xl ffi 1.0....
~ ffi ffi ("') ffi ffi ~ffi Nffi .... ffi ffi .... ffi
ffi ffi ffi ffi
a::
I- 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
CI) c: c: ,= c: c: c: c: c: c: c:
0 ';:: .;:: Q; ';:: ';:: ';:: .;:: .~ .~ .~
t> c: Ql c: Ql c: c: Ql c: Ql c: Ql c: Ql c: c: c:
Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql Ql
~ 0 c: 0 c: 0 c: 0 c: 0 c: 0 c: 0 c: ,2 c: 0 c: 0 c:
0 U 'OJ t5 'OJ n 'OJ ti 'OJ :0 'OJ ti 'OJ t5 OJ ts 'OJ U 'OJ U OJ
UJ ::J c: ::J c: ::J c: ::J c: 2 c: .E c: ::J c: ::J c: ::J c: ::J c:
... W ... W ... W ... W W W ... W .b W ... W ... W
~ iil (j iil (j iil (j iil iil (j CIl iil VI iil iil
c: c: c: c: U c: c:(j c:(j c:(j c: U c: U
I- 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 o . o ' o . 0 0
u u u u :E u :E u:E t>:E u:E u :E u :E
~ l5l <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0 <0
0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
~ 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
.... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ....
CIl -
>- CIl
>- ell Qi -0
l'll ~ l'll
~ .r: Ql 0 .r:
, .r: n;'::: = a:: 1ii
:> 1ii e..CJ) CIl >- > e..
l- e.. -0= -0 Ql CIl
U CIl Ql ::J X l'll ::.:: -0 Ql X
-0 .>0::
a -0 > 0 0 Ql l'll i:i5
l'll Ql ellCl) CIl a:: - 0
0 > e.. .0 CIl a:: CIl
l'll - -0 >- E 0 -0
!f a:: e.. , -0 l'll Ql -0 >- <( l'll
0 ::J l'll 0
>- 0 >-> a:: ::.:: (.) 0 Ql V a::
Ql ~ii5 Ql a:: ::.:: -0
:..::: c: c: .r: 1ii
Ql Ql ... 0 (.) Ql c: ell 0 0
Ql > > Ql Ql ~ ... :E 0 0 01 01
c: ell ell c: Ql 0 E ~ a:: Co Co
ell l-
ii: :c :c ii:o ....J Q; l'll ....J ....J
~ Z c: Ql
>- >- 01>- >- a. 1ii >- >-
01 ~ Ql .- Ql Ql a. 0 l'll ~ Ql
i:i5 :..::: co :..::: ::.:: ::i :J Z c:: U5 ::.::
00
00
ON
om
0(")
ci ---
tO~
~
00
00
00
~~
00
00
ON
om
0(")
a~
~~
';f:.?fe.
00
00
~ ~
00
00
ON
om
0(")
o~
tO~
~
Cl
,~
Qj
c: CIl
o c:
~ '0,
2LTI
in
aU
U~
~
ol
~
.s::
1V
Cl.
CIl
.:.c. >-
iIi~
.;.. ~
vj'g
::lU
'<t......
N(")
g$
CXl. ~
~
00
00
00
~~
'<t......
N(")
g$
CXl.~
~
~cfl.
1"11"1
...,:...,:
1"11"1
Ocxl
Ocxl
oa::i
1"1 ~
NOl
o~ --.
1"1 ~
~
Cl
.~
Qj
c: CIl
,2 c:
ts 'm
:::l c:
=w
III '
ae.>
U~
~
ol
~
=
III
"C
III
o
0::
>-
CIl
~
~
'6'
:::l
U
(")
'<t~
tOOl
~l8
NCXl
~~
~
00
00
00
~~
~a;
~l8
NCXl
~~
~
'#.(1.
1"11"1
...,:...,:
1"11"1
O~
ON
O~
N~
ol~
-c-.o
~ 1"1
N ~
~
Cl
c:
't:
c: CIl
o ~
ts 'm
E~
III .
ae.>
U::E
~
ol
~
>
X
III
"C
III
o
0::
o
21
III
...I
>-
~
N'<t
1"1'<1:
~~
'<ttO
~~
00
00
00
~~
N'<t
~'<I:
lO~
'<ttO
~~
cf!.of!.
1"11"1
...,:...,:
1"11"1
O~
OLO
oa::i
~~
~ai
o~
N~
~
Cl
c:
c: 'm
o c:
ts '61
:::l c:
~w
in
c:cj
8::E
~
ol
~
III
"C
III
o
0::
"C
c:
III
2!
.:.c.
o
o
ii5
0l0......."
'<to(")CIO
a;OMN
CXl~(,,)N
to ~CIO
o ~.,,:
'<t NUl
...... (")0
~ ~....
.,.
0000
0000
0000
~~~~
OlO......LO
'<to(")cxl
a;oMN
CXl~(,,)N
to ~_~
o ----
~ PJ:g
~ ~-
;;
(")OLO......
~O'<tLO
a::iOLriM
0l~00
to to(")
ri o~
~ l:;~
~ ~~
~Nc.;
~~~
UUU
~~~
~~~
(f)(f)(f)
000
0::0::0::
000
I.L.I.L.I.L.
..J ..J ..J
<<<
~~~..
000...1
~~~o(
CDCDCD~
::l::l::lQ
(f)(f)(f)~
c:
~
(lJ
!
0>
,~
CIl
CIl
,5;
0>
c:
l.U
CIl
~
'"
.Q
CI)
c:
Q
]!
;,
~
(lJ
(.)
c:
o
'0
CIl
CI)
(lJ
Cl:l
.