The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/11/2009, PH2 - PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW 2009 council, M.6D ` June 11,2009 j acEnc)a RepoRt 1.Number CITY OF SAN L U I S OBISPO FROM: Jay Walter, Director of Public Wor Prepared By: Robert Horch, Parking Services Man er > SUBJECT: PARKING ENTERPRISE FUND REVIEW 2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. Review and discuss the 2009 annual Parking Enterprise Fund Review. 2. Conceptually approve the Parking Enterprise Fund budget of 2009-11,with final action on June 16, 2009 with the adoption of the 2009-11 Financial Plan. I Provide staff with directions regarding other parking management strategies, if desired. DISCUSSION Background At the conclusion of the Ad Hoc committee examination of the viability of the Parking Fund to generate sufficient capital to build the.Monterey Street Parking Structure, findings were presented to Council in March 2009. The consultant and the committee determined the fund to be in good financial condition at that time. The analysis provided in this report still shows a very similar result from the March 2009 Council meeting with similar keys assumptions as: 1. The Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects will still occur based on projected time lines; 2. Every three years parking rates will increase by 10%; 3. The Monterey Street parking structure is forecast to begin construction in 2014-15 at an estimated cost of$20 million. $10 million from working capital will be contributed to the cost with the City bonding for the remaining $10 million; and 4. During the same fiscal year the bond payments for the 842 Palm Structure and the original Marsh Street structure conclude and the new bond indebtedness for the new structure begins. The Economy In comparison to the General Fund, parking revenues are not doing that badly. Some revenue sources are projected to be lower than the prior year, while others are holding steady, or have increased. While overall parking in the Downtown is below previous years, street parking continues to be the preferred location followed by surface lot parking, then structure parking. Parking revenues reflect this trend. ��a- 1 Parking Enterprise Fund Review 2009 Page 2 2007-08 2008-09 Revenues Actual Projected +or- % Metered Lots 379.600 366,200 -13.400 4% Meters on Street 1,039,800 1,038,200 -1,600 0% Structures 796,200 735,400 -60,800 -8% Long Term parking 391,800 362,100 -29,700 -8% Leases 243,100 211,300 -31,800 -13% Parking In-Lieu 17,400 15,900 -1,500 -9% Parking Fines 774,100 768,400 -5,700 -1% Investments 384,600 607,600 223,000 58% Totals 4,026,600 4,105,100 78,500 2% As the table above shows, for this fiscal year, a 2% increase in revenues is projected as compared to the previous year. This is due to the investment revenues which staff does not expect to be as lucrative in years to come. Lease revenues are down by 13% because a couple of the office spaces at the Marsh Street structure are not occupied. Parking in-lieu fees are down because redevelopment activity has slowed with the downturn in the present economy. Structure and lot revenues are down because fewer vehicles are parking in the downtown. Parking fine revenues were reduced because of the retroactive payment of State surcharges instituted this year. Council approved a$10 increase to all fines which took effect on June 1, 2009. Since the City owed back to January 2009, the loss is projected to be about $72,000. Again the overall downturn is relatively modest, and staff is optimistic that this is a short term downturn. Operating Budget Reductions In response to the $11.3 million deficit faced by the General Fund, the Parking Fund was also asked to look for ways to trim costs and be more efficient. All line items in the Parking budget were looked at with a goal of cutting as much as 15%. The problem with going that deep is it could adversely affect revenues and services. Staff decided on the following areas for reductions, trying to minimize the impact on services that the Parking Fund provides. Amount Reduction Explanation Service Impact Reduced Trustee Service Reduced to actual costs for debt services No impact (2,000) Advertising Reduce advertising and promotional items Less public information (4,000) Printing Reduce brochure printing Less printed information (4,000) Structure&Lot Cleaning Reduce frequencies of daily cleaning Lots&Structures less attractive (40,000) Totals (50,000) In comparison to the current fiscal year, operating costs in the Parking Fund for 2009-10 have been reduced by$188,400. The cost reductions in the table above make up $50,000 of that savings. The remaining savings are derived from taking a more detailed approach to staffing costs this year and from employee salary concessions by SLOCEA and management. General Fund Relief The Council has conceptually approved a few programs that will assist the General Fund with its much more severe budget shortfall. The Parking Fund is being asked to assist the General Fund by providing relief in the following areas. P14 a-a Parking Enterprise Fund Review 2009 Page 3 1. Purchase of the property located at 610 Monterey. (Estimated to cost$650,000 in 2009-10) The property located at 610 Monterey (comer of Monterey and Nipomo) is owned by the General Fund and is managed by the Housing Authority as low income housing. The property's backyard is within the footprint of the Monterey Street parking structure. The current site plan shows the remaining house and front yard in the set back on Monterey Street. Since this is within the general site plan, it makes financial sense to transfer ownership of the property so the Parking fund owns all of the properties for the structure. After the transfer occurs, the Parking fund will realize increased lease revenues by approximately $14,000 a year. The final sales price will be determined by an independent appraisal. 2. Transfer of approximately $50,000 of parking fine revenue annually to the Police Department budget Police and SNAP officers issue approximately 5,000 parking citations annually, and the Parking Fund currently receives approximately $187,800 in parking fines. Council has initially approved the transfer of these fine revenues, less the Parking Fund's time and expenses to process and handle appeals of these fines, to the Police Department operating budget for those parking citations issued by General Fund employees. 3. Parking Services Manager's position as the Downtown Champion. As a part of the "Other Important Objective" for Downtown Maintenance and Beautification, the Parking Manager has been assigned to work as the `-`Downtown Champion" to work with downtown stakeholders as a conduit for communication and internal staff coordination on downtown issues. Although part of that communication will be parking related, a good portion will be for General Fund related issues. There will be some staffing cost attributable to that function. Staff is roughly estimating that this will take about 7-10%of the Parking Manager's time. Pending Rate Increases—Approved in 2006 After accepting the recommendations of the 2006 Parking Task Force, the Council approved several revenue enhancements that took effect immediately and some that will take effect on July 1, 2009. This was intended to be a phased approach so that rates were not all increased at the same time,but would be increased to provide the revenues for the Monterey Street parking structure. The following increases are set to occur on July 1, 2009: Current 2009-10 Rate Increase Rate Rate Core parking meter rate(2-Hour zone) $1/hour $1.25/hour Perimeter parking meter rate(10-Hour zone) $0.75/hour $1 /hour Parking Structure rates $0.75 an hour $1 /hour Overtime Meter rate$I per year until 2011-12* $27 $28 (*includes parking surcharge) Future Revenue Ideas On April 21, 2009, the Council requested additional information about two ideas that could be evaluated in the future to enhance parking revenues: creating another higher downtown core meter rate and considering charging for parking on Sundays. Parking Enterprise Fund Review 2009 Page 4 L Higher Core Meter Rates. Developing another higher-rate parking in the peak demand parking areas on the street is one of the ideas that staff has been asked to provide background on. In essence, there could be three (3) different parking rates in the downtown as compared to the two (2) that exist now. The closer someone parks to the higher demand areas in the Downtown core, the more they would be asked to pay. Staff estimates that the highest demand areas are on both sides of Higuera Street between Broad Street and Osos Street. This new zone would also include both sides of the connecting side streets of Osos, Morro, Chorro, Garden, and Broad Streets, extending away from Higuera Street one block. This new core zone would have the highest per hour rate. The remaining 2-hour limit meters would have a lower rate than the new core, and then the 10 hour limit meters would have the lowest per hour rate. The challenge with this idea is that the ability of our current single-space parking meters to accept only coins would be limited by this higher price. The parking meters would have to be collected more often which would increase operating costs. To make this idea work effectively, staff would like to finther explore new parking technologies like multi-space meters or credit card accepting single space meters, which could mean a sizable capital investment to replace the current meters. Aside from technical issues, there may also be concerns with setting meter rates even higher than $1.25 per hour at this time. If the Council is interested in further exploring this concept, staff could return in late Fall 2009 with added information, which would also provide an opportunity to discuss this concept with downtown stakeholders. 2 Charging for Sunday Parking Charging for parking on Sundays makes economic sense because the City parking structures, parking lots, and streets are equally used for commercial purposes on Sundays and could be an added revenue-generator for the parking program. During the deliberations of the 2006 Parking Task Force, the Downtown business interests indicated their support of this idea while the Downtown churches did not. The Task Force provided a recommendation to only charge for street and parking lot parking with parking enforcement, and allow free parking in the structures. This was thought to be a compromise for those attending services at the Mission, at Grace Church, First Presbyterian and other churches near the downtown. At the time of the analysis, it was calculated that the Parking Fund would net approximately $162,100 in additional annual revenues. The Council could direct staff to explore this option again. FISCAL IMPACT Attached to this report is a detailed analysis of the Parking Fund revenues, expenditures, and changes in financial position, including the key assumptions used in preparing this review. Consistent with the analysis presented to the Council in March 2009, the revenue programs already in place are adequate to meet the operations, capital projects, and debt service needs of the Parking Fund. Parking Enterprise Fund Review 2009 Page 5 ALTERNATIVES Council can direct staff to explore new revenue enhancements like a higher downtown core and charging for parking on Sundays. ATTACHWNT 2009 Parking Fund Analysis TABudget Folders\2009-11 Financial PlanTriterprise Fund Working Capital\5.Parking\CAR 2009-11 Pkg Fund Review.DOC ATTACHMENT 1 2009 Parking Fund Analysis d t June 11 , 2009 Prepared by the Public Works Department city Of San WIS OBISPO PHa - � Attachment 1 Page 2 city of san Us oBispo 2009 Parking Fund TABLE OF CONTENTS I. OVERVIEW II. 2009-11 FINANCIAL PLAN A. Summary of Operating Programs B. Operating Cost Reductions C. Capital Improvement Plan Requests D. Debt Service Payments III. ASSUMPTIONS IV. EXHIBIT A—2009-11 FINANCIAL SCHEDULE Attachment 1 Page 3 - _ -I city of san Luis OBISPO 2009 Parking Fund Report I. OVERVIEW This report presents the financial condition of the Parking Fund, based on the draft 2009-11 Financial Plan operating program budgets, and recommends program and capital requests to address the identified needs in the Parking and Access Plan. The Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects have been programmed into this budget cycle, however these projects may or may not occur in the time frames projected or may change during the approval process and environmental review stages. The Monterey Street parking structure has also been programmed into the last year of report, 2014-15. During the same year the debt service for the 842 Palm Street and original Marsh Street structures conclude. Il. 2009-11 FINANCIAL PLAN A. Summary of Operating Programs 2009-10 2010-11 BUDGET ' BUDGET Staffing 960,700 991,500 Contract Services 530,000 528,200 Other Operating Expenditures 172,300 117,500 Minor Capital 0 0 Total Parking Services $1,663,000 $1,699,200 Operating cost information is provided on page D-82 of the Preliminary 2009-11 Financial Plan B. Operating Cost Reductions 2009-10 2010-11 Cost Reductions BUDGET BUDGET Contract Services-Trustee Debt Service Expense ($2;000) ($2,000) Reduced Printing ($4,000) ($4,000) Reduced Advertising ($4,000) ($4,000) Reduced Structure& Parking Lot Sweeping& Cleaning ($40,000) ($40,000) Reduced Landscape Maintenance* TBD TBD Totals ($50,000) ($50,000) At the time of this report the true cost reductions are to be determined(TBD)through the RFP process. 4 C;- —U Attachment 1 Page 4 C. Capital Improvement Projects 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET Parking Structure Equipment Upgrade -113.000 Parking Lot Reseal and Resurfacing 122.000 Purchase of 610 Monterey 650,000 Fleet Addition for back up Utility Cart 36,600 Fleet Replacement-Sedan and Utility Carts 96.880 Technology Infrastructure 3.800 11000 IT Disaster Recovery Plan 1,100 IT Strategic Plan - 7.700 SharePoint Electronic Content Mgmt. 1,700 Office Software Replacement 6,500 Garden Street Advance per MOU 2,400,000 Palm Nipomo Construction 20,000,000 FRA Projection-Adjustment* 113.320 233,100 250,400 260.400 885,000 40,400 231,500 240,800 2,650,400 20,260,400 * Fieldman Rolap&Associates(FRA)used a base projected amount of$200,000 annually for capital project calculations plus CPI. For the"out years"staff used ERA's projections with an adjustment for known capital projects. CIP project descriptions are provided in Appendix B, pages 3-269 through 3-286. D. Debt Service 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET 842 Palm& Marsh until Jun 2014 499,300 502,300 501,600 499,500 502,100 0 Marsh Expansion until Aug 2031 425,200 424,500 423,700 423,000 422,200 421,400 919 Palm until Jun 2036 539,600 538,200 539,300 540,000 . 540,400 538,100 Palm Nipomo until 2045 447,200 Dispatch Center Upgrade until Jun 2039 9,800 10,000 10,000 9,900 9,900 9,900 1,473,900 1,475,000 1,474,600 1,472,400 1,474,600 1,416,600 III. ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions have been programmed into the long term forecast of the Parking Fund. The Chinatown and Garden Street Terraces projects impact three of the City's parking lots. The dates of when these projects occur are staff s estimate of the soonest they could occur. If they occur later than projected it will allow for additional revenues to accumulate for the Fund. General Assumptions 1. Minimum working capital (reserve) should equalat least 20% of the total Operating Program expenditures according to the City's fiscal policy and Standard and Poor's rating criteria. Parking Lots 1. Assumes a conservative I% growth in parking demand. 2. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9772, Section 2.2 assumes a meter rate increase of$1.00 to $1.25 for high meter rates and of$.75 to $1.00 for low meter rates in 2009-10. 1�a "I r Attachment 1 Page 5 3. 10% rate increases are assumed for 2012-13, 2015-16, and 2018-19 (every 3 years). 4. Section 2.4a of the MOU between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners,.L.P., dated July 18, 2006, states that 0% of parking spots.for Lot 2 will be available during the two year period of Garden Street Terraces Project construction(assumed to be in 2011-12 and 2012-13). 40 of the 62 spots (65%) are available for use after the completion of the project (assumed to be 2013-14 onward). 5. It is anticipated that some of the drivers who would have parked in Lots 2, 3, and 11 will instead park in garages due to the loss of lot parking spots. Due to the first hour free policy in garages, it is anticipated that only 50%of the "revenues formally tied to lots 2, 3, and 11 will be retained through garage parking fees. 6. Parking revenues from Lot 3 and 11 will cease due to Chinatown Project construction (assumed to begin during 2010-11) according to the "Second Modification to Option to Purchase Real Property" between the City of San Luis Obispo and SLO Chinatown, LLC, dated July 1, 2008. 7. Parking revenues from Lot 14 will cease.due to the construction of the Monterey Street parking structure in 2014-15. 8. It is anticipated that the drivers who park in Lot 14 will shift to buying 10 Hour Meter Permits when Palm-Nipomo construction begins on the site of Lot 14 in 2014-15. Street Parking 1. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand. 2. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9772, Section 2.2 assumes a meter rate increase of$1.00 to $1.25 for high meter rates and of$.75 to $1.00 for low meter rates in 2009-10. 10% rate increases are assumed for 2012-13, 2015-16, and 2018-19 (every 3 years). Parking Structures 1. Assumes a conservative I% growth in parking demand. 2. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9772, Section 2.4 assumes a garage hourly rate increase of $.75 to $1.00 in 2009-10. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2012-13, 2015-16, and 2018-19 (every 3 years). 3. It is anticipated that some of the drivers who would have parked in Lots 2, 3, and 11 will instead park in garages due to the loss of lot parking spots. Due to the first hour free policy in garages, it is anticipated that only 50% of the revenues formally tied to lots 2, 3, and 11 will be retained through garage parking fees. Long Term Parking 1. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand. — Attachment 1 Page 6 2. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9772, Section 2.2 assumes a.meter rate increase of$1.00 to $1.25 for high meter rates and of$.75 to $1.00 for low meter rates in 2009-10. 3. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2012-13, 2015-16, and 2018-19 (every 3 years). 4. Merchant validation increases from $45.a month to $60 a month (33%) in 2009-10 based on increase in structure rates. 5. Construction meter bag rates increase from $14 to $17 a day in 2009-10 based on new parking meter rates. Parking Leases 1. Assumes a conservative 1% growth in parking demand. 2. Lease revenue of approximately $2,000 a year for trash leases in parking lot 2 will cease beginning in 2011-12 due to the Garden Street Terraces Project. 3. Section 3.1 of the MOU between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P. dated July 18, 2006 states that a $2.4 Million Parking Fund advance will be made to the developer of the Garden Street Terraces Project to finance a new parking facility in 2013- 14. In 2013-14, the developer will begin repayment to the City Parking Fund by reimbursing $105,000 per year for 30 years. The calculation of$105,000 per year is as follows: the amortization payment of$165,000 plus the supplemental parking revenue replacement payment of$28,000 reduced by the net realized increase in property tax of$88,000. 4. An increase in lease revenues for 610 Monterey is estimated at $14,000 annually, including minor expenses and costs for the Housing Authority, beginning in 2009-10 Parking In Lieu 1. Garden Street in-lieu fees are a result of lost parking spots due to the Garden Street Terraces Project. Section 2.4a of the MOU between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P., dated July 18, 2006, states that the parking in-lieu fee will be $660,000 (22 parking spaces x $30,000/parking space) for the spaces lost due to the Garden Street Terrace Project. Estimated to occur in 2011-12. 2. Chinatown In-Lieu Fees are a result of lost parking spots due to the Chinatown Project. According to the Second Modification to Option to Purchase Real Property, dated July 1, 2008, the EIR mitigation.measure for loss of the parking spots is approximately $2,600,000. Estimated to occur in 2013-14. 3. San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9960, Section 4 states that the parking in-lieu fee will be adjusted on July 1 of each year by the annual percentage change in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index for all urban consumers for the prior calendar year. 2009-10 and 2010-11 are assumed to experience 2%. For 2011-12 onward, a 4% CPI increase per year is assumed, based on a 20 year historic CPI average of 3% (according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics) plus I% for a conservative estimate. The one-time Garden Street Terrace Project and Chinatown Project parking in-lieu fees are not adjusted by the CPI. P a - { Attachment 1 Page 7 4. Beginning in FY 2011-12, parking-in-lieu fee revenues reflect the anticipation that 3 parking spaces are being paid for annually. Investment Earnings 1. Assumes projected interest earnings of 2% in 2009-10 through 2010-11 and 3% in 2011-12 through 2019-20. Parking Fines 1. Transfer of parking fines to the Police Department is approximately$50,000 annually beginning in 2009-10. 2. State and County fine surcharges of$10 per paid parking citation is added then deducted each year for a zero net gain. 3. 9% decrease in fine revenues due to loss of parking spots resulting from the construction of the Garden Street Terraces Project starting in 2011-12. 4. 5.81% increase in fine revenues due an increase in the number of parking spots resulting from the completion of the Garden Street Terraces Project in 2013-14. 5 11%decrease in fine revenues due to loss of parking spots resulting from the construction of the Chinatown Project starting in 2010-11. 6. Overtime parking meter fines will increase annually by$1 each year beginning in 2007-08 until they reach the maximum of$20 in 2011-12 according to San Luis Obispo Resolution No. 9772, Section 1(a). This means that in 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12 meter fines will increase from $17 to $18, $18 to $19, and $19 to $20, respectively. 7. 10%rate increases are assumed for 2012-13,2015-16, and 2018-19 (every 3 years). 8. Assumes a conservative I% growth in parking demand. New Demand & Residential 1. Based on proposed new project in downtown San Luis Obispo as provided by Planning Dept. Land Uses run through demand model and are reduced by parking available on-site. 2. Average Rate for prior 3 yrs of roughly$1.00 per vehicle in garages, assumed new demand will either compress existing demand or go directly to garages. 3. Rate increase provided in FY 10, and increases by 10% every 3 yrs. 4. It is estimated that there is a base number of 500 packers in residential areas surrounding downtown, assumes 5% capture in City's facilities, times 12 months (500*0.05*12 = 300). 5. Assumes that monthly parking will be moved into structures at a rate of$75 per month with rate increases of 10% every 3 years starting in 2012-13. PH� ` I � Attachment 1 Page 8 Transportation & General Government Expenses 1. Initial $7,600 decrease in transportation expenses due to the temporary loss of 62 parking spots resulting from the Garden Street Terraces Project in 2011-12. 2. Initial $13,200 decrease in transportation expenses due to the loss of parking spots resulting from the Chinatown Project in 2010-11. This is conditioned on Chinatown taking lots 3 and 11, if this does not occur this amount needs to be part of the operating expenses. 3. Initial $3,900 decrease in transportation expenses due to the permanent loss of 22 parking spots resulting from the Garden Street Terraces Project in 2013-14. 4. Initial $5,000 decrease in transportation expenses due to the closing of Lot 14 in.2014-15. 5. General Government is reduced by$4,400 for the SNAP augmentation because the Police Department will receive their parking fines beginning in 2009-10. 6. Percentage expense increases per year are based on the historical annual percentage change in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. For 2009-10 and 2010-11 are assumed to experience 2%. For 2011-12 onward, a very conservative 4% expense increase per year is assumed (based on the 20 year historical average of the Consumer Price Index of 3%, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, plus an additional cushion of 1%). 5. Cost adjustments reflect projected annual CPI increases. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Expenses 1. The CIP is based on specific project requests for 2009-11 as set forth in Appendix B. For the. "out years,"while some projects are detailed for 2011-13, the overall cost is based on the forecast presented to the Council in March 2009 ($200,000 per year adjusted for inflation). 2. Section 3.1 of the MOU between the City of San Luis Obispo and Garden Street SLO Partners, L.P. states that a $2.4 Million Parking Fund advance will be made to the developer of the Garden Street Terraces Project to finance a new parking facility within 30 days following the first date on which the 40 public spaces in the new parking facility are available for use by the public(assumed to be 2013-14). 3. 2014-15 includes a $10,000,000 contribution from working capital for the construction of Palm-Nipomo and the $10,000,000 in net proceeds from the Palm-Nipomo Bond Issuance. 4. Percentage expense increases per year are based on the historical annual percentage change in the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index. In 2009-10 and 2010-11 are assumed to experience 2%. For 2011-12 onward, a very conservative 4% expense increase per year is assumed(based on the 20 year historical average of the Consumer Price Index of 3%, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, plus an additional cushion of I%). PNa - i3 — Attachment 1 Page 9 Debt Service 1. Assumes a 30-year level debt service at 7%, no capitalized interest, net proceeds of $10,000,000 and bond issuance on 11/1/2014. First interest payment is due 6/1/2015 and first principal payment is due 12/1/2015. �a Attachment 1 Page 10 EXHIBIT A 2009 PARKING FUND FINANCIAL SCHEDULES �� a-► 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N C N O O N O O O N O+ h O O O O 00 O O C O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O O O o0 00 v O �c 7 �c ON l' - M h - O - O^ - C 7 IR OO O O On h W .'•,� - .h r 7 O �6 O` N v h M O �c O O �c 7 M O �c 00 7 R �c N M 7 N O' ON O� �c ^ h O N h h •- M N N N C' M Or' M D\ M N. 00 V1 7 N `7 - C O\ \o h 00 N O N a O O O O O O O O O O O O N O N O O N O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O v'e O V1 O O h O O R ao F T y C^ �c �c �O n - - 7 h M 00 Cl - � `T �D �c N N llc 7 h N 7 10 h 7 M - 7 N N �o -1 O O m 7 vi h r 00 O h O h N M �c 00 � NON O1 7 • N V't N 7 M 00 N � N M oe -t �D 7 Z N � •--• M V'i - N N - �G V O T Ltl O O O O O O O O O O O O O\ O O, O O a\ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O - C O ^ O O W V^ Q M 691 7 h �c ? N nO h M 7 `T N Q C1 T 00 00 N M M ` h > N N �O N 00 �•+ •e - 7 N V N �c r4 N >D N O r '/1 M N 0 7 N d - O O C O O O O O O 000 N O N O O N O O m N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h O h �c O M O O �c as �cN y M •� •� N O M - n 00 O 7 00 00 �c Q �c h >0 00 00 O T r61 N O 7 O w O, o h M oe h h N N N n - M N h O - h - •- h V1 N N 7 d` h O N6 - - a 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 0 0 CD 0 O W o0 O O 00 O O N O N O O O O O O C O C O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 O_ O O` O O, r- vt M en N h O O �c N C\ [� N - O O 7 4o - 0 7 N N N - ^ N �c r - '0 - O\ �c Vl N 7 N O O O O O O O O O cc O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O C O O O O O O O O O O C 00 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O T h O\ h 7 N - r N h h 00 O C 'T O O1 M N e 7 N I� N n - - 00 O M O rh vi M N - - C\ r C\ 'fl �c - OC h N o0 7 7 h `T �o O z 00 h N 00 O� 00 '1 M C\ M N M - 00 of lc Vt - 00 7 Vl ^,l •T O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O Cl 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O\ 7 N N � - M T M et �c 7 7 ? M h M - - (� ew - O h OCh. O\ r S. h - � O h � `S 00 r- O\ CM M b - - N O �O O 'n h M \C �c �o V1 V1 T N M O h M N hV h - a0 7 M 00 7 1p h O 7 N �i N 7 N - - V h V1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O = T 01 V - M r OO - d• r- M O 7 h M O+ O1 7 - �c oc h N 7 �c O - M Q\ b Vl 00 U M O h M N W M h O Ul V OO N Q N 7 N - M 1p h 0 z LL u z 4 o; °Q t t d cto U U L u ° ti v 5 w op O en U O y U > 7 c O C y N Y y d v i O L L dE o as e U `e u U ti v 3 fY c E n'd G] c E ° ys eo u Zv d U ° m °� H ° v �, 2 E > '� >> o y . . E o ro U Y y o L u C L t = , o a c0 v o E L a, en ly onFSn obi U � •� vF oo �� F > 3 L Y > Z Ua a � °>' cF` C7 v C6 v y > _c s e as e o s a U U U � � F = cLO � O UQ � a 00° W c Q o ° L c m a1 L L > a r > �n 46