Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/06/2010 Council Agenda Packet~~~~ ~~~ <.~~ ~:~ ~n~~ REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653 Council Chambers, Apri16, 2010, at or after 7:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Herb Kai, Vice Mayor Russell Clanagan, Council Member Patti Comerford, Council Member Carol McGorray, Council Member Jon Post, Council Member Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member ACTION MAY BE TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM LISTED ON THIS AGENDA. Revisions to the agenda can occur up to 24 hours prior to the meeting. Revised agenda items appear in italics. As a courtesy_to others please turn off or~ut in silent mode all pagers and cell_phones, Meeting Times Welcome to this Marana Council meeting. Regular Council meetings are usually held the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at the Marana Town Hall, although the date or time may change, or Special Meetings may be called at other times and/or places. Contact Town Hall or watch for posted agendas for other meetings. This agenda may be revised up to 24 hours prior to the meeting. In such a case a new agenda will be posted in place of this agenda. Speaking at Meetings If you are interested in speaking to the Council during Call to the Public, Public Hearings, or other agenda items, you must fill out a speaker card (located in the lobby outside the Council Chambers) and deliver it to the Town Clerk prior to the convening of the meeting. All persons attending the Council meeting, whether speaking to the Council or not, are expected to observe the Council Rules, as well as the rules of politeness, propriety, decorum and good conduct. Any person interfering with the meeting in any way, or acting rudely or loudly will be removed from the meeting and will not be allowed to return. Accessibility To better. serve the citizens of Marana and others attending our meetings, the Council Chambers are wheelchair and handicapped accessible. Any person who, by reason of any disability, is in need of special services as a result of their disability, such as assistive listening devices, agenda materials printed in Braille or large print, a signer for the hearing impaired, etc., will be accommodated. Such Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 1 of 45 special services are available upon prior request to the Town Clerk at least 10 working days prior to the Council meeting. Agendas Copies of the agenda are available the day of the meeting in the lobby outside the Council Chambers or online at www,marana.com, by linking to the Town Clerk page under Agendas, Minutes and Ordinances. For questions about the Council meetings, special services or procedures, please contact the Town Clerk, at 382-1999, Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Posted no later than Monday, Apri105, 2010, 7:00 PM, at the Marana Municipal Complex, the Marana Operations Center and at www.marana.com under Town Clerk, Agendas, Minutes and Ordinances. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA CALL TO THE PUBLIC At this time any member of the public is allowed to address the Town Council on any issue not already on tonight's agenda. The speaker may have up to three minutes to speak. Any persons wishing to address the Council must complete a speaker card located outside the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Town Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. No electronic capability will be provided by the town beyond existing voice amplication and recording (for DVD, CD Rom, USB drives, etc.) Pursuant to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, at the conclusion of Call to the Public, individual members of the council may respond to criticism made by those who have addressed the Council, may ask staff to review the matter, or may ask that the matter be placed on a future agenda. PROCLAMATIONS MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS MANAGER'S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS PRESENTATIONS CONSENT AGENDA The Consent Agenda contains items requiring action by the Council which are generally routine items not requiring Council discussion. A single motion will approve all items on the Consent agenda, including any resolutions or ordinances. A Council Member may remove any issue from the Consent agenda, and that issue will be discussed and voted upon separately, immediately following the Consent agenda. C 1: Resolution No. 2010-33;__ Relating to Community Development; authorizing Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 2 of 45 the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona to fund planning and design for water distribution line replacement in the Marana Estates neighborhood (T VanHook) C 2: Resolution No. 2010-34: Relating to Town Facilities; authorizing the town manager or the town manager's designee to take all actions on behalf of the town that are necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities to lands, structures, or facilities owned by the Town of Marana, including without limitation the execution of an electrical right-of-way easement across the Dove Mountain trailhead parking lot (Frank Cassidy) C 3: Minutes of the March 9, 2010 special council meeting and March 16, 2010 regular council meeting LIQUOR LICENSES L 1: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Harley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I-10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION A 1: _PUBLIC HEARING:__Relating to Annexation; public hearing to discuss and consider an application by the property owners to annex approximately 1,200 acres of land located predominantly north of Avra Valley Road, approximately one-mile east of Trico Road and southwest of Silverbell Road (Kevin Kish, AICP) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION D 1: Legislative/Inte_rg_o_v_ernmental_Re_port: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies (Steve Huffman) EXECUTIVE SESSIONS E 1: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this agenda. E 2: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning possible acquisition of certain water infrastructure and accounts and water rights andlor resources E 3: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008-001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 3 of 45 of Marana wastewater collection and treatment to the Town of Marana FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Notwithstanding the mayor's discretion of what items to place on the agenda, if three or more council members request an item to be placed on the agenda, it must be placed upon the agenda for the second regular town council meeting after the date of the request (Marana Town Code, Title 2, Chapter 2-4, Section 2-4-2 B) ADJOURNMENT Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 4 of 45 ~f~~~~ ~~~~ti~ 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Apri16, 2010, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item C 1 From: T VanHook ,Community Development Director Strategic Plan Focus Area: Community Building Subject: .,Resolution No. 2010-33 .Relating to Community Development; authorizing the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona to fund planning and design for water distribution line replacement in the Marana Estates neighborhood Discussion: The Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona (W1FA) is requesting applications for grant funding to support planning and/or design projects that improve water and wastewater infrastructure. The Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Revolving Fund grant awards are restricted to planning and design and may not be used for construction. The Marana Utilities Department is undertaking the design for replacement of the water delivery system in and around the Marana Estates Neighborhood and feel that the project fits the criteria for grant funding under the WIFA program. A resolution authorizing the town manager to sign the application is required with submittal of the grant packet to WIFA. Additional authorization will be required to complete a grant agreement if funding is awarded. Financial Impact: The town intends to request $35,000 for this project. No matching funds are required. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: ^ WIFA - __ _Grant_Application_Resolution FY 201.0_- Reso authorizing WIFA Grant Application 2010 Resolution _2011.doc Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2010-33, authorizing the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona to support planning and design for water distribution line replacement in the Marana Estates neighborhood. Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 2010-33, authorizing the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona to fund planning and design for water distribution line replacement in the Marana Estates neighborhood. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 5 of 45 MARANA RESOLUTION N0.2010-33 RELATING TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT; AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO APPLY FOR FUNDING FROM THE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE AUTHORITY OF ARIZONA TO FUND PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR WATER DISTRIBUTION LINE REPLACEMENT IN THE MARANA ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD WHEREAS the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona (WIFA) is seeking proposals under the Planning and Design Assistance Grant Program that allocates money from the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water Revolving Funds; and WHEREAS the Town of Marana is interested in submitting a project to be considered for funding in the form of reimbursable grants from WIFA; and WHEREAS the Town of Marana recognizes its responsibility to provide continuous water service to its Utilities Department customers; and WHEREAS the Marana Utilities Department is working to provided continuity of service and ensure standardization of the delivery system; and WHEREAS grant funding will allow the Marana Utilities Department to plan and design replacement water lines in the Marana Estates Neighborhood and surrounding area that will meet current Town standards and increase reliability in the system. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, that the Town Manager is authorized to submit the grant application and execute all documents related to WIFA grant funding for the Marana Utilities Department for planning and design of replacement water lines in the Marana Estates neighborhood and surrounding area. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 6~' day of April, 2010. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 6 of 45 ~~f-# ~~ ,.~.~ a ~L~..~ 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Apri16, 2010, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council From: Frank Cassidy ,Town Attorney Strategic Plan Focus Area: Community Building, Recreation Item C 2 Subject: Resolution No. 2010-34: Relating to Town Facilities; authorizing the town manager or the town manager's designee to take all actions on behalf of the town that are necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities to lands, structures, or facilities owned by the Town of Marana, including without limitation the execution of an electrical right-of-way easement across the Dove Mountain trailhead parking lot Discussion: Parking lot improvements are being constructed on a trailhead dedicated to the Town pursuant to paragraph 3 of the 2003 amendment to Dove Mountain development agreements. Trico Electric Cooperative requires an electrical right-of-way easement across the trailhead in order to provide electric service for the parking lot lighting. Upon review of Trico's proposed easement, the Legal Department was unable to find a delegation of authority granting the town manager or any other town official authorization to sign easements for this purpose. To remedy this situation, the Legal Department proposes the adoption of this resolution authorizing the town manager to execute not only the electrical right-of--way easement for the Dove Mountain trailhead but also to execute any future documentation needed to facilitate utility service at Marana-owned facilities. A similar resolution was adopted on January 5, authorizing the town manager to execute documents needed to facilitate utility service at the Marana Regional Airport. Tonight's resolution will expand that authority to include all Marana-owned facilities. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: ~ Reso re utilities to Town facilities_(00020177).DOC Reso delegating authority re public utilities for town facilities Resolution Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 2010-34, authorizing the town manager to take all actions necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities at Marana-owned facilities. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 7 of 45 Suggested Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 2010-34, authorizing the town manager to take all actions necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities at Marana-owned facilities. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 8 of 45 MARANA RESOLUTION N0.2010-34 RELATING TO TOWN FACILITIES; AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER OR THE TOWN MANAGER'S DESIGNEE TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN THAT ARE NECESSARY OR PRUDENT TO FACILITATE THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES TO LANDS, STRUCTURES, OR FACILITIES OWNED BY THE TOWN OF MARANA, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE EXECUTION OF AN ELECTRICAL RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT ACROSS THE DOVE MOUNTAIN TRAILHEAD PARKING LOT WHEREAS the Town of Marana is constructing a trailhead parking lot within Block J of the Dove Mountain Resort Subdivision, as contemplated by paragraph 3 of the "Amendment to Development Agreements (Bajada, Phase 1 and Canyon Pass)" recorded in the Pima County Recorder's office on March 28, 2003 at Docket 12017, Page 6571; and WHEREAS Trico Electric Cooperative ("Trico") requires the Town to grant an easement across the trailhead parking lot in order to provide electrical power for the parking lot lighting and other related purposes; and WHEREAS the Town Council finds that it is beneficial to grant the Town Manager or the Town Manager's designee the authority not only to execute the requested easement but also to undertake all other actions on behalf of the Town that are necessary or prudent to facilitate the installation of public utilities at Town of Marana facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, that the Town Manager or the Town Manager's designee is hereby authorized to take all actions on behalf of the Town of Marana that are necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities to lands, structures, or facilities owned by the Town of Marana, including without limitation the execution of an electrical right-of--way easement across the Dove Mountain trailhead parking lot. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF MARANA, ARIZONA, this 6th day of April, 2010. Mayor Ed Honea ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Frank Cassidy, Town Attorney Regul~~~c~ ~~ti~g -April 6, 2010 -Page 9 of 45 3/26/2010 1:48 PM FJC .F f~~~~~ j I T ~~~~j t i SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653 Council Chambers, March 9, 2010, at or after 6:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Herb Kai, Vice Mayor Russell Clanagan, Council Member Patti Comerford, Council Member Carol McGorray, Council Member Jon Post, Council Member Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Mayor Honea called the meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Town Clerk Bronson called roll. Council Member Clanagan was excused. All other Council Members were present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCEIINVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE Led by Mayor Honea. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion to approve moved by Council Member McGorray, second by Council Member Comerford. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. CALL TO THE PUBLIC There were no speaker cards presented. PROCLAMATIONS MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS No reports. MANAGER' S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Gilbert Davidson noted that Tangerine Road would be closed at the railroad tracks beginning at 6:00 a.m. on Wednesday, March 10 and continuing through 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, March 11, 2010. PRESENTATIONS CONSENT AGENDA Motion to approve moved by Council Member Comerford, second by Vice Mayor Kai. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 10 of 45 March. 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes C 1: Relating to Personnel; first reading of a proposed amendment to the Town's Personnel Policies and Procedures, Chapter 8 -Termination of Employment, Section 8-1- 6 Layoff and Recall LIQUOR LICENSES BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION A 1: Resolution No. 2010-25: Relating to Personnel; approving and authorizing staff to implement an amended Separation Incentive Plan (SIP) for fiscal year 2011; and declaring an emergency Presented by Ms. Machain, who reviewed the amendments made to the plan as presented and approved on February 16, 2010. Motion to approve moved by Council Member McGorray, second by Council Member Comerford. Upon roll call, motion passed unanimously 6-0. A 2: Resolution No. 2010-26: Relating to Personnel; approving and authorizing staff to implement a Separation Transition Program for the remainder of fiscal year 2010 and for fiscal year 2011; discontinuing the Transition Package approved by the Town Council on May 5, 2009 via Resolution No. 2009-63; and declaring an emergency Presented by Ms. Machain, who reviewed with Council the'. highlights of the Separation Transition Program and the discontinuance.of the ?Of l~) Transiti~~n Package in favor of the updated 2010 package. Motion to approve moved by Council Member C~urer~ord, second by Council Member Post. Upon roll call vote, motion passed unanimously 6-0. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION D 1: Presentation: Relating to Budget; discussion and direction regarding the budget strategies to be used by thetown iT~anuger in preparing a FY 2011 balanced operating budget Presented by Gilbert Davidson, who noted that at Council's direction on February 16, he and his staff were instructed to lay -out the overall framework and come back with the balanced budget. Further, that there would be opportunity for feedback and direction at the conclusion of his prese~ttation. He also noted that this would be a broad overview presentation without getting into specifics. Tonight's presentation is a reflection of over a dozen community outreach meetings as well as setting the stage for as quick an economic recovery as possible while meeting the critical needs of the community during this fiscal crisis. He set forth a number of elements beginning with the budget deficit reduction strategies - broken into two parts. There are short-term things that must be done this year to make sure we have a balanced budget. We are looking at very tough decisions during the coming month. Beyond that, we want to begin thinking about the strategic plan structure and what type of model the Council wants to have as we move forward. There are lot of opportunities to engage in good discussion about the types of programs and services that we offer the community and making sure as we provide or add services in the future, it is Regular Coun ~~feeefdg c&Of~'~11~~0 ~ 9e f~iino~t~~ial structure. Ultimately, our total target reduction is 2 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes $4M. While that doesn't seem like huge amount, it needs to be taken in context of what has already been done. There are `knowns' that have been identified to cut out this year and move forward. There are easier items to deal with which we'll start with, growing more difficult. We have to get through March to know how many people are taking voluntary separations before making the next decisions. The first is the elimination of outside facility leases. The town has two primary leases within our parks and recreation program. There is a great opportunity to realign what we've been doing and move those functions into the MOC. The majority of the funding we provide to other entities within the community will have to be community. We need to maintain some level of funding for the Marana Chamber of Commerce. When Council adopted the Marana Economic Roadmap one of the key elements of that plan is to create jobs, and it's very important to not be shortsighted and cut everything -because cutting jobs will not help us get out of the fiscal crisis. We will try to maintain some portion of this. Next is fee schedule changes and cost recovery. Fee schedule changes -and we will not balance this budget on development-related fees or other feeti ~~-e charge. We need to be careful that we are still trying to amact business into our cun~munity while recouping our baseline costs. Our staff is working hard to go through line by line of the fee schedule to analyze fees on an item by item basis. That document will come to you on March 30, and any changes you make will be incorporated into the tentative budget. The other piece is cost recovery within areas where we provide certain types of programs where the participants may be able to pay more to have that level of service. There are breaking points with how high you can raise things. Fourth ~is the use of grant monies. We will continue to explore every opportunity at and I~ vcl that provides grants. It would not be wise to apply for every grant. Some grants hive many strings attached and may cost more by getting the money than if you hadn't applied for it at all. Next is the voluntary salary reductions -SIP and sabbatical. Sixth is starting to get into the effects of actual operations by every service and program we provide -service modifications on a program by program basis in order to maintain quality while reducing cost. That would be hours, number of days, etc. Marana will continue to maintain and expand community partnerships so that merging organizations helps programs function better. The savings wouldn't apply throughout the entire organization, but we will be exploring how we can increase those partnerships. The next is furlough options: We have to know what we can cut out of the budget today. Once we have a number from the voluntary separations, then he'll have a better idea of what has to be cut across the organization. Furlough is a day off without pay. If there's an excessive amount of furloughs taken, there will be severe ramifications to this organization. We are already very thin in a number of departments. We've already cut over 39 positions, so if you begin to get into the 10, 15 and 20 furlough days, the ability for a department to function almost ceases when you factor in sick and vacation days. This will take a lot of thought, but it is an option that will be looked at to bridge if there is still a gap. The final two items get into major changes within the organization -internal organization and restructuring. We did a little of that last year where we merged departments together to save on some key positions. Ultimately, it's looking at excess capacity. This is the most difficult one,. where you begin to deal with individual lives - layoffs, reducing someone's work schedule to where it really impacts their take-home pay. But what we're facing is a crisis - a crisis where we have more expense than Regular Coureic ~ e~ yor~~g i~ ~n~a~e~ h~v~ to adjust that. There are areas in the organization that Mazch 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes there will be some excess capacity. We will identify that and respond appropriately to match what the community needs. So in the budget provided to Council in April it will reflect that level of reduction. We' 11 be looking at every department. There will be some departments we will not touch. They are already at the bare bone minimum. If you cut any further, they will not be able to function at all, and we will not be able to meet either the statutory obligations we have. We will continue to look for reorganization and restructuring opportunities. We have to get through March before we can do that. He then talked about what has already been done. He thanked Erik, Deb, Suzanne and Legal for many, many hours of number crunching and computing and re-computing and verifying data. A lot of work has gone into what we have so far. Again, our goal for reduction is $4M. What we've identified to date is a range - $1.61 to $2.15M that we have potentially on the table today. We've done that through the vacancy savings, through creativity in some of the recreation savings programs, especially with special events where we've created partnerships with the private sector, the leases, the insurance program savings for additional, sizable savings on health insurance coverage and a number of other insurance components. The outside agency reduetion~, consulting fee reductions, uniform costs reduction and reductiun~ to take home police vehicles. We are trying to identify a dollar amount of savings.° Within various programs, the Council will have the option over the next month to fund something at the level it is today, or some lesser amount. What's remaining is $l .85 to $2.39M. That's a lot of money to continue to carve out of the organization. The only way we're going to be able to do that will be with bodies and programs -service modil~catjons or eliminations; the separation incentive programs, reorganization and restruct~iring; layoffs in regard to capacity issues; beginning tomorrow we are meeting with every department again and looking at their internal recommended cuts. We are looking at a 10°10 cut. Not every department will be able to do that. Across the organization, we've already done a 30°10 reduction, and other departments have additional capacity to cut but there will be impacts on services. The final piece is some number f~~r mandatory furlough. I would like thr Council to start thinking about tomorrow and how we take this crisis and turn it into something positive for our organization. I think this Council's already demonstrated strong leadership and strong vision through the strategic plan and through the economic roadmap -two visionary documents. One of the things we have to do in moving forward is to engage in a dialog amongst yourselves, the community and employees about what needs to be added into the strategic plan. As you begin to talk about the types of services that we provide as an organization, ask some critical questions. What are the services, the programs that are needed in Marana? It doesn't necessarily mean the Town does it, but we may identify certain types of things that need to be done, and maybe the town can help facilitate the partnership. Maybe the town can help create a new 501 (C) (3) that spins off and starts to solve acommunity-wide issue. So we can to spend some time on what the services are that the town needs, and from that what services the town should provide. This is where we get into the policy discussion. What is our government and what is it going to provide to our citizens? Within our Parks and Recreation program, we've spent a large amount of money building infrastructure -parks, trails, bike lanes added for connectivity. We also have invested a lot in programs, so moving forward, do we provide the infrastructure and encourage partnerships that will do some of the social service programming, or do we reverse the Regular Co~incCil~l~f~e~ting ~p i~ba~ott~~Page l~'o`f~g' It's not possible to pay for everything at the level 4 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes people want. But organizations that select an area and do it very well, they tend to be the ones that succeed for the long term. That's the framework we would want the Council to engage in. Then we must look at providing services at the highest quality -maximize the dollar and have the best value for our citizens. Finally, our strategic plan needs to reflect everything that we're doing and if anyone has a new idea or future Councils have new ideas, they should take that strategic plan and add something -how will that be paid for or what do we remove to add that new idea. He then highlighted the key budget dates of March 11-17 will be our departmental budget review to go line by line their recommendations but engaging in dialog of how we come up with creative solutions to our challenges. March 30 will be the next Council study session, focusing primarily on revenue projects and solidifying the revenue number, and we will also bring the draft fee schedule changes and some of the cost recovery components. You will not have to make a decision on the fee piece at that time. You can give direction to modify, investigate further change, and that will be brought back at a later Council meeting. April 13 will be the study session in which we present the balanced budget. That will entail feedback from tonight and previous meetings and the work we do over the next month. It will take what revenue we have and the recommended cut s and lay that our before you on the 13`f'. That will then set into motion a series of things leading u~ to June 2 -the tentative budget adoption. That sets the spending cap. On June 15 , if all goes well, then we would adopt the final budget. That brings us back to the broad strategies that I've laid out and I' Il take any questions. Council Member Comerford thanked Gilbert and his staff. She stated that she knows how hard this has been and how much work the entire town has put into cost savings and reductions. This is very, very serious. I had concerns about this six months ago, and I knew that this was going to be serious. I was really sad that I wasn't here on February 16th for that first budget meeting, because I'm disappointed in our Council. I'm disappointed in some of the actions that were taken that night and some of the lack of knowledge and some of the refusal to learn about certain things. I wasn't here. I could count on one hand the amount of meetings that I've missed in my term, but it deeply upsets me that people on this Council didn't realize there's already been almost 29-30% in reductions. And I'm just talking from reading the minutes. That they didn't realize that employees had already turned in their vehicles, their phones, and etcetera were turned in. That people on this Council didn't even know that there's a utility tax that's already been collected. This is serious. The refusal to even look or if the public is not even interested in more tax. revenue -that's fine with me. I totally can stand behind that. But I think that it's something that we need to be knowledgeable about and it's at least something we should have looked at and brought to the public. Now, like the state, it's too late to even look at that issue. The fact that we just turned it over to staff and said `you do it, and we'll look at your recommendations' and we're willing for people to not even step forward because a lot of these decisions that need to be made are policy decisions. And you look at our strategic plan, and that's all policy, folks. A lot of what we need to do incorporates that strategic plan. And looking at running our town a lot differently than we have in the past, and that all involves policy. So I'm willing to sit down with staff. I know I'm only one of seven, and anything you can help me learn about to make the tough decisions - I want to be there. I want to be part of the solution. I don't want to just nod my head when you're all said and done. I'm offering that service Regular C u°cr~RAeetin~ sAp~tsg~~~ ~pg>~e~~~~yg but the one thing that's genuine about the Town of 5 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes Marana is its citizens and how we can rally through. Just visiting with the Senior program and some of the suggestions they made and the willingness to come through to me shows that. And quite frankly the month ahead of us is going to be really difficult. Now, Roxanne, I know you weren't at that February 16`h meeting either, so I just wanted to acknowledge that. And I'm not really picking on anybody because everybody works hard, but I just think that times are changing and that everybody needs to sit back and take a look at how different things are going to be from now on. They're not going to be the same, so let's do what Gilbert said. Take that opportunity to use it to explore areas that we've not explored before. We'll be the new Star Trek. And we're going to come up with some real clever ways to deal with this, and there's going to be some people that are not going to be happy along the process. But $4M, and you've already cut 30%, is a lot. So we have a lot to do, and I'm proud of you all, but I want to warn everybody to buckle your seatbelts, because it's not going to be as operated before. Mayor Honea commented that this has been -these are pretty tough times. This is the worst financial position that our state's ever been in. And we get about 25% of our money from the state. They're bankrupt. This year they were a billion and a half dollars short, so they borrowed a half billion. They sold a half a billion dollars worth of state buildings for one time money for this year, and they rolled a half a billion over into next year's budget. Basically, what that means is next year instead of being maybe two and a half of three billion short, they're going to be four billion short in a $8B budget. The state is currently trying to get into our pocket again. They have taken -and when I say `our' I'm talking cities and towns, not just Marana -the lottery money is gone. Put in numbers, I think that is $150K or $140K for the Town of Marana. They're looking at the transaction privilege sales tax. Right now we're getting about 26% of that -cities and towns are -and they're trying to cut that a couple more percent. That will cost the Town of Marana another $120K. They are trying to figure our ways to take even more of the state revenue sharing. The state's in worse trouble than we are, and we have a lot of serious problems. Actually, our staff's done a very good job, and I think our Council in general for the last couple of years - I think we're in as good or better shape than all of our sister cities and towns in Pima County, but we're still in pretty bad shape. We're going to have to raise fees at least double. Some programs maybe triple. I can tell you that even tripling the cost in some programs will only generate about 25% of the money. We're going to have hours of reduction. We're going to lose some programs. I'm going to be real honest with you. There's just no way around it. We're going to lose some people. This is not because we're horrible, bad people or anything. This is just reality. This is where we are. We're trying to do some restructuring. We're trying to change some workloads. We had a summit about a month ago with the school district and the health center and the'"'food bank and the fire district, and Pima College. Everybody's in the same boat, and virtually everybody gets money from the state. And the state is in such bad shape that potentially June or July they could be issuing IOUs. If they don't take our money and give us an IOU we still don't have the money. Times are really rough. I've been doing this for 21 years. I've never seen it like this. I've been through a couple of ups and downs in the economy. But we will survive. We have great leadership. I think Mr. Davidson and Ms. Thalasitis and their staff have done a wonderful job. It's really, really touch. I can tell you people stay awake at night. I can talk to Gilbert at 10 or 10:30 at night and he's still here in the office trying to figure out an angle, trying to figure out how to save a buck, how to get a dollar, how to keep Regular Cour~c~l~~ ~n~-~~rz0'1Ve Faye"15°~f utter is, we're not going to be able to keep everything 6 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes going. We all take our job very seriously -every member of this Council, and we're going to work really hard. We will get through it, but we're going to be a little bit leaner when we get through this process. Do we have a motion? Council Member McGorray commented that she started her day going to Walgreen's in the morning. The lady behind the counter used to work for an engineering firm. Her husband was an engineer. He's been unemployed for over a year. She has taken a meager salary at Walgreen's as a cashier. They are barely making it. This is so widespread. So every decision we make from this dais, we have to consider all the people in the avenue that will hurt the least for the majority of the people, so please be understanding on some of our decisions. Thank you. Mr. Davidson: Mr. Mayor, one final thing. So this list is how we are going to proceed. I will certainly try to outreach and as much education as I can possihly provide to each of you as individuals. If you have questions or want to know about a particular thing call me. I want to make sure that we're getting information out the community, but this list is what's going to guide us forward, and it's 1 through 10. So we're not'gc~ing to ignore excess capacity. That will be a part of the budget. That means positions will be identified for layoff or some combination of salary impact. I just want to make sure moving forward when you see this again it will be the overall budget that's going tube put together on April 13. April 13 is when you will have basically a balanced budget. Council Member Comerford: My question is this, Gilbert. You say you're talking of bringing it back April 13. Are we going to have numbers at that point? Mr. Davidson: Yes. Council Member Comerford: At that point we're going to be able to see that this program costs $SOOK and this is the reduction. Mr. Davidson: It'll have the reduction; it'll have the impact to staff. We'll also have the knowns to SIP, so we'll have that as an option. So whatever the furlough impact is, or how we factor that in, that will be include. Council Member Comerford: So on April 13`~ we'll be getting into the meat of the numbers and what we do with those numbers at that point -this is the direction we want you to go in at this point? Mr. Davidson: Right. Motion to approve. moved h ~• Council Member McGorray, second by Vice Mayor Kai. Mayor Honea read the motion. I direct the town manager to prepare the FY 2011 balanced operating budget using the strategies and directions as discussed. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Motion to go into executive session on items E 2 and E3 moved by Council Member Post, second by Council Member McGorray. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. Council left the dais at 6:58 p.m. Council returned to the dais at 8:08 p.m. E 1: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter Regular Counscil'Nle~~n~h~p~il~, 70'f0'-Page 16 of 45 7 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes E 2: Executive session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3) for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys regarding the nature of legislative immunity in relation to personnel matters E 3: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008-001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition of Marana wastewater collection and treatment to the Town of Marana FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn moved by Council Member Comerford, second by Council Member Post. Motion carried unanimously 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:09 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on March 9, 2010. I fw-ther certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 17 of 45 8 March 9, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes ~~~~~ ~;1 ~ `'~. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 11555 W. Civic Center Drive, Marana, Arizona 85653 Council Chambers, March 16, 2010, at or after 7:00 PM Ed Honea, Mayor Herb Kai, Vice Mayor Russell Clanagan, Council Member Patti Comerford, Council Member Carol McGorray, Council Member Jon Post, Council Member Roxanne Ziegler, Council Member REGULAR COUNCILMEETII~G CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL'. Mayor Honea called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Town Clerl~ Bronson read the roll call. All Council Member were present. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/INVOCATION/MOMENT OF SILENCE Led by Mayor Honea. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion to approve moved by'Cou~rcil Member McGorray, second by Council Member Ziegler. Motion carried unanitr~ouslv.. CALL TO THE PUBLIC' Steve Storzer spoke against the proposed annexation of the landfill, and asked Council to give it further consideration before approving the annexation. PROCLAMATIONS MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Council Member Clanagan reported briefly on his recent 10-day trip to the Panama Canal. Council Member Ziegler asked everyone to keep Barbara Johnson in their prayers and with good thoughts this week. She will be in surgery this Friday. Council Member McGorray concurred with Council Member Ziegler's remarks regarding Barbara Johnson. Council Member Comerford reminded everyone that this coming Saturday is Founders' Day - an important day for Marana. She asked that everyone come out and celebrate all of the events. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 18 of 45 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes Mayor Honea reported that he went to Mayor's Innovation Night at the community center. A young person from a school in each of the Pima County cities/towns won an award. Loren Wood won for Marana. She lives in Continental Ranch. She did a study on the mineral content of tap water versus bottled water. She and her parents were there. He also went to the CCIM Forecast last week at Ventana. CCIM is composed of the real estate brokers in the community. The forecast is that there will more empty lease space, more empty apartments, less retail next year. Most of the folks there didn't paint a rosy picture for the next fiscal year. He also attended the Mayors bi-monthly meeting in Pinal County today -mayors from Casa Grande, Florence and Maricopa. Every city and town in the state is dealing with the same thing we are. A lot of town staff went to the OLLIE classes at Heritage Highlands. It's an adult education program through the UA. MANAGER'S REPORT: SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS Mr. Davidson reported on some of the details of Founders' Day. 1t will be at Ora Mae Harn Park starting at 9:00 a.m. through 4:00 p.m. The parade will be the kickoff at around 9:00 a.m. At 11:00 a.m. all of the booths, park, food and vendors will be open for business. There will be a number of exciting things going on including an opportunity to catch fish out of the swimming pool. As part of the process to redo the swimming pool for resurfacing, we're using it one last time for a fishing pond. Council Member McGorray reminded everyone that there will be wristbands for $10 to use the inflatables this year. In past years, those have been free, but with tough economic times, it was decided that $10 was appropriate for children's events. Council Member Comerford noted that the fishing pond was completely funded by grants. It didn't cost the town anything. Mr. Davidson reported that the Fish and Game provided a state grant. PRESENTATIONS CONSENT AGENDA Motion to approve moved by Council Member /klcGorray, second by mice Mayor Kai. Motion carried uf~rrnimously. C L• Resolution No. 2010-27: Relat ing to the Police Department; approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute the first amendment to the intergovernmental agreementbetween the Town of Marana, Pima County and other participating jurisdictions regarding the Pima Regional Special Weapons and Tactics (S.W.A.T.) Team C 2: Resolution No.2010-28: Relating to Community Development; authorizing the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety under the Highway Safety Program (23 U.S.C. Section 402) to fund speed detection equipment and the Marana Police Department's participation on the Southern Arizona DUI Taskforce C 3: Resolution No. 2010-29: Relating to Personnel; approving and adopting an amendment to the Town's Personnel Policies and Procedures, revising Chapter 8 - Termination of Employment, Section 8-1-6 "Layoff and Recall" C 4: Resolution No. 2010-30: Relating to Real Property; approving and authorizing a license agreement with Pacheco Farm Management for the continued use of fields which Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 19 of 45 2 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes have been partially dedicated to the Town of Marana as rights-of--way within the future development area surrounding Gladden Farms II C 5: Minutes of the March 2, 2010 regular council meeting LIQUOR LICENSES Motion to approve both applications moved by Council Member Post, second by Council Member Ziegler. Motion carried unanimously. L 1: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding a Person Transfer and Location Transfer of a Series 6 (Bar) liquor license application submitted by Wayne Lee Hallquist on behalf of Molinitos, located at 3675 W. Ina Road L 2: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license applications submitted by the Arizona ASA -Tucson on behalf of Mike Jacobs Sports Park, 6901 N. Casa Grande Highway for fundraisers to purchase youth team equipment BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION A 1: PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance No. 2010.05: Relating to Development; approving a rezoning creating. the Honea Heights III Specific Plan Presented by Lisa Shafer and T. Van Hook. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Bill Schisler addressed Council. as a resident of Honea Heights with several comments. He agrees that affordable housing is a necessity in Marana. He's concerned about whether this is the right spot. He also noted several issues involving Honea Heights in the past several years. He wanted. to know how the sewer would be pumped up from the project when the sewer system in Honea Heights is not yet complete. He also noted that there would be increased traffic onroads that are not in that good a shape. He's also leery about flooding in that area, where he's seen flooding several times during his life. He noted that the project area was initially planned to be a park, and Honea Heights still needs a park. If there is a park within the project, he is concerned about whether people in Honea Heights would have easy access to it. He thought the park could be better placed for all residents. David Morales addressed Council with concerns that this development would be built in a retention pond designed for Honea Heights. He asked Council to consider whether this was their intention. T. Van Hook addressed Council with some of the detail on the funding for the project, identifying a number of funding sources. There is $170K in CDGB funding through Pima County to complete the platting and engineering required to move this project forward. In 2008, the federal home loan bank in San Francisco for $700K agreed to cover either pre-development, development costs, onsite or offsite services. In addition, we have HOME dollars, a federal program for $250K per year under two funding cycles. Those HOME funds have some restrictions. Last year the Pima County Board of Supervisors voted to award the project an additional $600K with general obligation bond funding with some restrictions. That makes $1.2M for the development of infrastructure Regular Cou ciT f~ee'ting~Apn a201Dr'Page ~~ otr$~uired to do the project. March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes Council Member Ziegler asked about Mr. Schisler's and Mr. Morales' comments regarding bank protection. She wanted to know what happened to the park idea and was it supposed to be there? Ms. Van Hook responded that it was her understanding that the original intent was to build housing and a park in that area. Before she came to the town, preliminary work was already underway to prepare the property to build some homes using HOME dollars. The Drachman Institute had already initiated a study to see if there was a better way to utilize it for more affordable housing and to integrate the housing project with the park. Keith Brann addressed Council on the flood questions raised. The project in question is in the Lower Santa Cruz levee which means the ground on the landward side is lower than the water surface elevation during a flood. The Lower Santa Cruz levee as designed and built by Pima County Flood Control is an accredited levee and was accredited even in the last floodplain mapping. It does contain three feet of freeboard above the calculated water surface elevation and.. the 100 year storm. The levee itself actually has enough height to survive a 500 year storm. It just: won't do it with the freeboard. He explained freeboard as when you have,the height of the water -that's how much extra height of levee you have. So during a 100 year storm, the calculated height of the levee should be three feet below the top. Ina 500 year storm, it willbe closer to the top but it will not overtop the levee, and that's how thatis designed at this time. So when the levee was built, the area in question where tltis project occurs is a low area. It was some of the floodplain fringe of the river. When the levee was built, it would have created a ponded area, so they had to put. in this bleeder pipe which has a flap gate, but the area itself is not a retention basin. But because the levee blocked off the flow from being able to return to the river, they had to put the bleed pipe in. That bleed pipe will be used for the drainage of this project and it will aet more as a metering device to let the water out of any basin that they build. In general, most of Honea Heights drains toward Moore Road, not to the project area. Council Member Ziegler then asked about money. She noted that HoneaHeights has been in a bit of an uproar for many years, citing correspondence between the town manager and Mr. Huckleberry. On sewer and water, a piece of correspondence says that thenew project intends to connect to the new Honea Heights Colonia system that is currently being constructed throughout the existing Honea Heights neighborhood: ` Mr. Huckelberry shut this down. We have to figure out a way to make Honea Heights whole first. And secondly, she asked whether the town would actually get the $600K from Pima County general bonds? Ms. Van Hook responded that there are two options. One is that the specific plan funding will have to be broached one contract at a time as those came forward. We can only move forward with the funding with each stage of the. project. The Board of Supervisors has voted to award us those funds. We are, with a couple of other agencies, waiting for contracts from Pima County on those, but there are no indications that they do not intend to offer us that funding. I can only move forward on faith and only encumber funds that we have in hand and have a contract for. Mayor Honea added that the project area is not a retention basin, and that area has never flooded. It did scour in the 1983 flood when there were flood waters in Honea Heights. Scoured means that the water was eating away the bank and caving it in, but there was no standing water. There's never been any standing water on this property. And with the Honea Heights lay of the land, the highest land is right against this project and it drains to the north instead of the south, and there's not even any runoff from Honea Heights in this project either. The only way that any water would get into this project is if it came in through Gladden Farms and. that area to run down the levee on the inside of Regular Counc ~~e tingItApni~~t~,~~t~l9ec~ ota~in and it never flooded before the levee. Council 4 March 16, 201.0 Council Meeting Minutes Member McGorray commented on access to the trail along the Santa Cruz and asked whether the Honea Heights neighbors and the kids who live in this new project are going to have access to the trail without there being a wall or something they have to go around in order to get to the parks in Gladden Farms? Is there anything that would prohibit them from just walking or riding a bike to that trail once this is built? Ms. Van Hook responded that there is no wall on the diagram. The houses that face Sandy Street front Sandy Street. She also noted that this is just a concept plan. In the specific plan, this is part of a redevelopment project of the neighborhood. The neighborhoods integrate and connect at each access point as the streets come down. And houses open onto existing neighborhoods. There are no walls between the two, and trails in between the houses connect as much as possible. As far as the Santa Cruz shared use path that runs up toward the top, what you're seeing are two of the three parcels that-the town owns in this area. We have specifically left the parcel closest to the trailhead there -there will be some adjustments for streets and other things -but we've left that parcel undeveloped so that we could integrate the neighborhood in with the Heritage Park and the adjacent farm and allow access when development of the parks and parking areas, they will integrate seamlessly up to the Santa Cruz River path. Council Member McGorray asked if the current neighbors at Honea Heights could walk from their homes through the back to the shared use path. Ms. Van Hook responded affirmatively. noting that the project is trying to facilitate as many access points as possible. Council Member Post asked what happens next after the zoning, platting, etc. Will this go to bid for a builder? Is it a for- profit builder? Ms. Van Hook responded .that there are a couple of steps after the platting process. Simultaneously, we will send an RFP for qualified developers for a development partnership to build the houses. There will be specific requirements laid out in the specific plan and any other type of agreement that require building of both market rate and affordable units of a simultaneous Mature by percentage and we'll require the building partner to comply with all of the regulations tied to the affordable housing dollars in this project. Council Member PosYasked what the target price will be. Ms. Van Hook replied that there has been a pro forma based on houses that would sell in a market rate market startinginthe $178K range. Council Member Post noted that a house could''be purchased for $120K elsewhere, so where's the affordability? Ms. Van Hook concurred and stated that she was giving Council the base done on the pro forma - a pro forma based on the available units. Then the developer will bring the building partner into the project and identify for us based on the market rate units will be and what their anticipated costs will be far that. Council Member Post asked what the time frame will be for the project -right now financing is more of a problem for homebuyers than finding a cheap home. Ms. Van Hook replied that in Pima County and in this area, we still have some serious problems of affordability of houses -and not just affordability but attainability. Folks qualify for these houses that may qualify for others, but they don't have a subsidy in place. They don't have the 20% that FHA is requiring as down payment, and therefore, the housing is not attainable. The subsidy that we put into these properties is held for a term and count as that down payment, so the financing mechanism to the purchaser looks a little different. Part two is that we'd like to move forward and get some infrastructure and see what the private and nonprofit builders that are interested in partnering with us have to do, but we have 127 active names on our waiting list for this project - at least 20 of those check in on a regular basis. We're seeing a need and we're still giving tours of the property to local builders -some small, some large -but there is still interest in the community, even with what's happening with existing infrastructure. Th~~u~lder dc~~s ~Q~ hive ~~ ~~~ financing charges while they're not holding the land Regular Counci ee ing - Apn age March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes through the entitlement process. They're not holding the land through the building process. The lot is conveyed at time of closing. So while we have an agreement with the builder, it's not anticipated that the builder will be buying the lot from us and building the house. They'll be identifying a purchaser, going into a contract, building a house, and then we'll be conveying the land simultaneously at the time of closing. Council Member Post asked if we are holding ourselves to the same standards that we would with a private developer as far as streets and traffic and ingress and egress? Ms. Van Hook stated she anticipated that we are holding ourselves to a higher standard because this project will serve as an example to the community on how we can do affordable housing in a proper manner and that we can hold ourselves to a standard that creates a viable community and integrates affordable and market rate housing in a way that's positive throughout the community. Council Member Post asked if Ms. Van Hook envisioned any street modification to the existing Honea Heights streets? Ms. Van Hook responded that a traffic study was completed and also interns sat at intersections to do traffic counts which were forwarded to the town traffic engineer with a traffic plan as required under the specific plan. These were deemed acceptable. Council Member Post asked Mr. Braun to follow up. The reason there are no additional traffic improvements on Honea Heights' exiting streets is that the number of trips to be generatedby this development when compared with the number ofaccess points to existing Honea Heights is just too many locations where people can come and go so there is no real concentration of traffic from this project. Some will go to Sanders, some will go to Moore, but the number of options for those people is a lot, so we're not looking at any capacity changes inside Honea Heights. Council Member Post asked how the sewer would be connected. Would the height of the project be raised or pump the sewer? Mr. Braun replied that there will be some fill browght into this site. It is a low area, but from his preliminary review of the projections, it is intended to take the sewer out to Sanders Road and then up Sanders to the Sanders/Moore intersection where they intend connect to the sewer at that point, and that this should work. Council Member Post if it would be cost-effective to bring in that much fill dirt? Mr. Braun responded that he didn't think there were numbers for the actual cost of import or scrape directly from the site itself. Ms. Van Hook noted that when the cost analysis was done, it was estimated the cost of hauling dirt at two feet times 10 acres, so we have estimated the cost of bringing in fill if required. We hope not to have to do that, but based on some rough estimates, that's what fill was budgeted for. Council Member McGorray asked for a ball park figure for the customer purchasing a project, what would they pay for a home? Ms. Van Hook replied that it's anticipated to be in t11e range of $50-SSK per house subsidy. The amount of subsidy depends on the income of the family that moves in and a lot of other factors, so we would look at a family of four making at 85% of the area median income and paying just under 30% of their household income on the mortgage, taxes, insurance and a list of utilities as prescribed by HUD -gas, electric and there are a few others. Paying roughly 30% at 85% of area median income. The mortgage would be somewhere in the $100K- $118K range with a $1,000 down payment. It maxes out at $118K-$120K. Council Member Clanagan asked if that was on a subsidized unit. Ms. Van Hook replied yes. But not all of the units in this development will be subsidized -about 40% of the units will be subsidized. Council Member Clanagan asked how these numbers will work if you can buy a comparable house for a lot less. What is the incentive for a person to pay more in the neighborhood with subsidized housing than going across the street in a standalone home that is unsubsidized. Ms. Van Hook responded that there are a couple Regular Co~nGTl~e~ing n~P ~li~~tl~ad e~g~4pf this project that would appeal to a certain type of 6 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes purchaser. Not every purchaser, but a certain type of person who's looking for a mixed income neighborhood or a smaller lot size. There will be certain water conservation measures taken in each home and in the neighborhood. There will be certain energy efficiencies required; recycling; a minimum of solar hot water on each house - so it's a different type of neighborhood - a different choice. Again, it's going to depend on what the market will bear on how quickly the phases of this project build out and what builders come in as building partners. Vice Mayor Kai asked Ms. Van Hook to explain the fill that will be brought in for the 93 house pads. Ms. Van Hook replied that she doesn't have the exact figures at this time. A large portion of the property is at the same level as Sandy Street. Vice Mayor Kai said that if we could get the house sites up to the same level as Sandy it might work, but he has concerns that it's so low. Ms. Van Hook said the main parcel -the largest parcel is at or above the height of Sandy Street. Council Member Ziegler expressed favor for affordable housing although she doesn't think $178K is affordable, but if you're subsidizing with incentives, you might get there. She's also concerned about the number of houses that would be subsidized? Ms. Van Hook replied that at this point 40 houses have been identified - 36.2% of the project. Council Member Ziegler asked about the dirt and whether any will be leveraged out of the Barnett Channel or will we pay for it? Ms. Van Hook said she hopes not to buy dirt for this project. Ms. Van Hook said that to secure the funding they had to make. some broad assumptions based on very rough numbers, and she went to CIP in 2008 and asked them for worst case scenarios, and that's what we based our total cost of the project on. Council Member Post asked if some houses are for sale for $180K and then you have some houses that people get in the door for $120K -are you going to stipulate when they put that house back on the market and how long? Ms. Van Hook responded that that would depend on the funding source for each individual lot. She gave an example of a $20K subsidy if that's all-the family requires to meet the guidelines. That may be forgiven over a 15-year'period. if it's a $SOK subsidy that maybe over a 30- or 35-year period, so it just depends on how scales and charts are produced. Before entering into any contracts with the building,partner, we will come back to Council for policy direction. Council MemberPost said that this is not necessarily a subsidy as a second mortgage that's notpaid buttorgiven later on. Ms. Van Hook replied that that was right. They are silent seconds that are forgivable and come due if certain conditions are met, i.e. if the family fails to live there as the primary resident; if the house were sold. There's a variety of triggers that would, require repayment of the subsidy to the town. Council Member Post. So these don't back on the market after a year or two at the $120K range; they come back on the market at more approximately of the original price, is that correct? Ms. Van Hook replied that is correct in general. If Habitat for Humanity or another like building partner may come in, they have their own restrictions. If another low income family were to purchase the house and the subsidy stay in the house, then it would be retained with the house. Those are contractual obligations, but there is a subordinate deed to the house, and a promissory note for the amount of the subsidy. Again, it depends on how much is leveraged to the individual. Ms. Shafer added a comment to Council Member Post's question on the road section. In the staff report it states they're proposing a 32-foot wide street section which would require at platting to go through Planning Commission and ask for the Commission to approve that which is substandard to our subdivision street standard right now which is 46 f~~ee~~t.kkThat couldaa~~change, although that is what they're proposing. Council Member Regular CouPn~~Meefinga ~pn~~~'I'171~Page 2~°o~a`~" make that a private street that belongs to the 7 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes homeowners association - is that the same case here, or will the town maintain that street? Ms. Shafer responded that the town would be maintaining that street. At this time that is the proposal. Ms. Van Hook noted that it gets a little tricky because we own the street, so we own the property already. When we develop the street, we automatically own it because we own it now. Conveying property to an HOA would be a gift of public funds. Council Member Post if there are funds available for maintaining the streets in the future. Ms. Van Hook replied that she is looking at a variety of funding opportunities to do that. In the pro forma $25 per month was added for that to meet the HUD standards. Normally we don't maintain the parks and streets if we don't own them, and the town will own these, so we are looking at what mechanisms will be available to us to help support those. Council Member Post stated he was willing to go forward as we work through the issues. Council Member McGorray asked if the garages. would'be single or double and behind the homes in the narrow streets with no parking. Where do you put the cars of the visitors? Ms. Van Hook responded that they are two-car garages per the town's residential design standards. There are designated parking areas for visitors. Motion by Council Member Post to adopt Ordinance No. 201Q OS contincte to do good work and keep this rreoving forward and answering the difficult questions. Second by Council Member McGorray. Motion caYried unanimously. Council Member Comerford commented that Ms. Van Hook :has been working on this for four years to secure funds and all the efforts that goes into working on a project like this. Hopefully, this project will turn out the way everyone wants it to. She thanked Ms. Van Hook for her hard work. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACT1ON D 1: Legislative/Intergovernn~ental Report: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies Presentation by Steve Huffman who noted that the Legislature concluded their seventh special session today. They were tasked with trying to balance the current fiscal year and next fiscal year's budget. As of today, we have mostly a balanced budget for this fiscal year and the next fiscal year. Mostly, because what they passed was basically borrowing for this fiscal year, some cuts for next fiscal year, but all that could change dramatically based on the results of the May 18 special election. If that election were to fail, the Legislature will have to come in and figure out another billion dollars worth of cuts to make in order to balance next year's budget. A couple of key things out of this session - the one bit of good news is the session started out with the Legislature started out with a proposed $20M cut to cities and towns. It was an odd proposal to shift responsibility for juvenile corrections from the state to the counties and then shifting $20M of city and town money from us to the counties in order to offset the costs that the counties were going to have to pick up for juvenile corrections. We were able to get that amended out of the bill. For us that would have amounted to about $110K to $120K a year in revenue sharing. The one bit of bad news is the Legislature has officially completely terminated Regular Couhcei11i11eetAins lAp~~,~d~~o~ g o~~~ch were lottery funds that were targeted for 8 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes transportation and transit programs with local governments. They didn't just temporarily eliminate them -they permanently eliminated them. We still are actively working -there is about four weeks left of hearing bills in the second regularly session. I was working on a bill in Phoenix today that would completely restructure the prime contracting which is construction sales tax money that goes into cities and towns and counties that would have a significant impact on communities across our state. For example, Phoenix was at that meeting saying that that one change could cost them between $50-60M a year. I'm working with Erik to try to quantify what the impact of that would be on us. We had a good meeting with the chair of the Ways and Means committee today to try to explain the impact of some of these bills that are still floating around on cities and towns, and hopefully will be successful on clearing the decks on some of these really troubling pieces of legislation before the session ends. One other bit of news - it seems to be the pattern now -not only are voters going to be asked on May 18 to vote on a one cent sales tax increase but now they will be asked to eliminate a fairly significant education program called First Things First on the November ballot, so they'll be asking voters to help balance the budget in May and again in November. Council Member Ziegler asked about First Things First. Mr. Huffman stated that they (Legislature) basically referred this to the November ballot asking the voters whether to eliminate this program. Council Member Ziegler asked if First Things First tried to give money to the state to balance their budget. Mr. Huffman replied affirmatively. Council Member Ziegler emphasized that they (First Things First) have a lot of money. EXECUTIVE SESSIONS Motion to go into executive session on E 4 moved by Council Member Post, second by Vice Mayor %aw~ Motion carried unanimausl~._ Council left the dais at 8:04 p.m. Council returned to the dais at 8:21 p.m. E 1: Executive Session pursuantto A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation fer legaladvice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this agenda. E 2;; Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal ads icc ~~ ith the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the T<~~~ a Manager and staff concerning possible acquisition of certain water infrastructure-aud accounts and water rights and/or resources E 3: Executive Sessiotrpursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008-001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition of Marana wastewater collection and treatment to the Town of Marana E 4: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03 (A)(4) and (7) to consider the Town's position and instruct its representatives regarding negotiations for the purchase of propert»y rights needed for the Twin Peaks interchange project, CIP number 2001-44, Regular Counu~n eTi grttApn~ ~,~Z~~ ~°~~~'t~~nerally identified as Pima County Assessor's parcel 9 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes numbers 221-04-OOSA, OOSC, OOSD and OOSF and a portion ofthe property generally identified as Pima County Assessor's parcel numbers 226-08-0160, 0170 and 0180 presently owned by TEP and L&C I-10 respectively and to instruct the Town's attorneys in settlement negotiations and condemnation proceedings relating to the same property rights Cedric Hay asked Council approval as discussed in executive session on Assessor's Parce1221-04-OOSA, property presently owned by Tucson Electric Power Company, I would ask that approval of a settlement in the amount of $274,316.64. Motion to approve moved by Council Member Comerford, second by Council Member McGorray. Motion carried unanimously. In regard to Assessor's parcel numbers 226-08-0160, 0170 and 0180 property presently owned by L&CI-10 Corporation as discussed in executive session, I would move for approval of a settlement in the amount of $298,647.32. Motion to approve moved by Council Member Comerford, second by Council Member McGorray. Motion carried unanimously. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn moved by Council Member Ziegler, second by Council Member McGorray. Motion carried unanimouslh. The meeting was adjourned at 8:22 p.m. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that-the foregoing. are the true and correct minutes of the Marana Town Council meeting held on March 16, 2010. I fiirther certify that a quorum was present. Jocelyn C. Bronson, Town Clerk Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 27 of 45 10 March 16, 2010 Council Meeting Minutes ~.. ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Apri16, 2010, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item L 1 From: Jocelyn C. Bronson ,Town Clerk Strategic Plan Focus Area: Community Building Subject: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Harley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I- 10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser Discussion: This application is for a special event liquor license submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Hanley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I-10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. The applicant for this special event liquor license has submitted a special event permit application as well. A special event liquor license is a temporary, non-transferable, on-sale retail privileges liquor license that allows a charitable, civic, fraternal, political or religious organization to sell and serve spirituous liquor for consumption only on the premises where the spirituous liquor is sold and only for the period authorized on the license. Qualifying organizations will be granted a special event license for no more than 10 days in a calendar year. Events must be held on consecutive days and at the same location or additional licenses will be required. The license is automatically terminated upon closing of the last day of the event or the expiration of the license, whichever occurs first. The qualified organization must receive at least 25 percent of the gross revenues of the special events. Six applications are being submitted to cover each of the time periods requested which are chronological but not consecutive. Pursuant to state law, a person desiring a special event liquor license must request a special event application from the Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (DLLC). The applicant then must file the application with the town for events occurring within the town's limits. The town may then recommend approval or disapproval of the special event liquor license. If the special event liquor license application is approved by the Town Council, and the event meet the requirements for granting the license, the director of the DLLC will issue the special event liquor license to the qualifying organization. If the application is disapproved by the Town Council, the DLLC will normally not consider the application. Attached is the application for the special event to held on Apri124th Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 28 of 45 ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: ~ MDA SE Liquor App.pdf Special Event Liquor License Application Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this special event liquor license application. Suggested Motion: OPTION 1: I move to approve the special event liquor license application submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Harley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I-10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. OPTION 2: I move to disapprove the special event liquor license application submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Harley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I-10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 29 of 45 State of Arizona Department: of Liqupr Licenses alld Control 800 W. W~shirtgtt~n, 5th Floor Phoenix, A~ 8580 vvww.alzligtaorgov (602)542-514]. APPLICATIQN FpR SPECIAL E1/I=N7 LIC~NS~ F~ _ $25.00 per day for 1-10 day events only A service fee of $28.00 will be charged for ell dishonored checks (A.R.S.F 446852) NOTE: THlS Dt~CUMIvNT Mt15T BE FULLY CQMPL#;TED OR !TWILL RE RETURNED. PLEASE AI_LpW 10 BU51NE5S DAYS FdR APPROVAL '"~Applicativn must be approved by local government before submission to ~T~>JC t7S~ p~~,y Department of t.iquar Licenses and Control. (Section #2p) z~ac~rrs>; ~ 1 _ Name of Organization: MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY AS3C?CIATION of Sl?U7riERN ARIZONA 2. Non-Profifill.R.S. Tax Exempt !Number: 13.1ssss5z 3. 'Cho arganizatiar- is a: (r~heck ane box only) p Charitable ~ Fraternal (must have regular membership and in existence far over 5 years} ^ Givic ^ Political Party, Ballot Measure, ar Campaign Committee [~ Religious 4. What is the purpose of this event? CHARITABLE FUND-RAISING J. LQCat1Qf1 Of the event: 7355 N I-10 E BOUND FRONTAGE F2D MARANA PIMA 85743 Address of physical location (Not P.D. Box) City County Zip Applicant must be a memb®r of the arEalifvinu arsianization and authorized by an Officer director ar Cftairoersan of ha Or nrzatron named in Question #1. Si nature re aired in sec ' #1$ 6. Applicant: 7R2YNA OAIUIELLC - Last First Middle Date of Birth 7. Applicant's Mailing Address: 310 s. wILLIAMS RD #222 TUCSON AZ 85711 Street City Statc Zip 8. f~hone Numl,ers: (sza ) 7st-~3g (szo ) 'Y95-9a3a (szo )_ Site Qwner # Applicant's Business # Applicant's Home # 9. Llate(s) & Hours of Event: {Remember: you cannot sell slcoh~ before 10:00 a.m. on Sunday} Date Day of Weep Hours from A_M./P_M. To A.M./P.M. pay ~ : 04/24/2010 SATU RAY 11 am Day 2: Day 3: Day 4: Day 5: bay 6: bay 7: Day 8: bay 9: bay 10: ~~y~d~g~y,cil Meeti~~y ~~, ~~~ng 5I1CClR1 RCC4Iri1'riQ(lRtlOriSr PICRSe Call (602) 542-4027 7pm 10. Has the apptic-ant been convicted of a felony in the past five years, ar had a liquor license reuoked? YES 0 NO {attach explanation if yes) 11. Thy organization has been issued a special event license for ° deys this year, including this event (not to exceed 1 Q days per year), 12. Is the organization using the services of a promoter or other person to manage the event? ©YES Q NO If yes, attach a copy of the agreement. 13. List alt people and organizations who will receive the proceeds. Account for 100% of the proctreds. THE ORGANiZATIt7N APPLYING MUST 12ECENE 2,5% Ot= THE GROSS REVENUES OF THE SPI~CIAI. EVENT LIQUOR SALES. Name Muscular Dystrophy A~ociation of Southern Arizona 10096 PerraMaga AddfeBS 370 S. Williams Blvd Suite X222 7uc&on, AZ 85711 Name F~rCentage Addre (Attach ~dditronal sheet if necessary) 14. Knowledge of Arizona State Liquor Laws Title ~ is impot'#ant to prevent liquor law violations, If you have arty questions regarding the law or this applioation, please contact the Arizona State department of Liquor Licenses and Control for assistance. NQTE: ALL ALCt~HOLIC BEVERAGE SALES MUST BE t=OR CONSUMPTION AT THE EVENT SITE ONLY. "Nc~ ALCOHOLIC l3EVERAGES SHALL LF~VE SPECIAL EVENT PREMISES." 15. V1~tat security and contra! measures will you take to prevent violations of state liquor laws at this event? (List type and number of secutiiylpolice persnrlnei and type of fencing ar control barriers if applicable} # Police ~ Penang # Security personnel p Barriers MDA end HOG volunteers will monitor atld secure the roped-off Brea where beer is sold and coneumetl t6. Is there an existing tiquar license at the location where the sper~ial event is peing held? ^ YES ~] NCM If yes, does the existing business agree to suspend their liquor license during the time period, and in the area in which the special event license will be in use? [] YES [a NO (ATTACH COPY ~F ACR@EMENTj ( ) Name of euslness phone umber t7. Yottr licensed premises is that area in which you are ;authorized to se8, dispense, ar serve spirituous liquors under the provisions of your license. The fallowing page is to be used to prepare a diagfam of your special even# licensed premises. please show dimensions, serving areas, fencing, barricades or other can#rol measures and security posi#ions. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 31 of 45 SPECIAL E1/ENT LICENSER PREIVlISES DIAGRAM (This diagram must be compiefed with Phis application) Special went Diagram: (Show dimensions, serving areas, and label type of enclosure and security positions) 1~lOTE: Show nearest~cross streets, highway, or road ii location doesn't.have an address. . N ~. ~~~w~ w~ti~- ate- ~..~.~.. ~ s ~..`L 6s~ ~; ~ ~. +~~oe.. ~.~- Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 32 of 45 THIS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY AN OFFICER DIRECTOR OR CHAIRPERSON OF T HE ORGANIZATION NAMED IN QUESTION #1 r 18. I ©anielle Trzyna declare that I am an Officer/Director/CEiairoerson appoi i (Print full name) ap licant listed in Question 6, to apply on behaff of the foregoing organization for a Special Event Liquor License. ~~ '' ~ ~z ar'~° X District Director szo 795-34 At C (~ = (Signature (Title/Position) (Date) .(Phone ~ y ~~rn State of Arizona COUn Of Pima ~ ~, ~ 70 te The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me his C7 m r ' ~~~~ ' Mond Year ~ ~ ap/ ,3 My Commission expires on: ~~~ iv Z N r-A, "'I ~ rR _ (Date) {Si at f NOTARY PUBLIC} w a "< TH IS SECTION TO BE COMPLETED ONLY BY THE APPLICANT NAMED IN QUESTION #6 t ~ 19. !, ~..Ja;~~`s~ ~ ~Z-y`~Q declare that I am the APPLICANT filing this app[icati n as (Print full name) listed in Question 6. I have read the application and the contents and all statements are true, correct and com ~ of p~ M ~~ State of ,2b/1 Count r y X The foregoing instrumen# was acknowledged before me thi ,,~ ~ (Signature) b © ~ TJ o = Day ~ Month Ye rH D ~ ~ ~~/ ~ My commission expires on: ~2 G. ~ a x ~ ~ , Date Si nature o NOTARY PUBLIC ~ You must obtain local government approval City or County.MUST recommend event and com~l The local governing bodv may require additional applications to be completed and submittec in advance of the event. Additional licensing fees may also be required before approval may be g O A D r- a r- ~Ci-Dm ~~tt -_ -_ -~ A n~~m r LOCAL GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL SECTION 20. I, hereby recommend this special event application {Government Official) (Title) on behalf of (City, Town or County) (Signature of OFFICIAL) FOR DLLC DEPARTMENT USE ONLY Department Comment Section: {Employee) {Date) APPROVED -- DIS D -- BY: Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 33 of 45 ~~., ~~~~ ~~~~ Y.YMxA 3AO NiN~H4 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Apri16, 2010, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item A 1 From: Kevin Kish, AICP ,Development Services General Manager Strategic Plan Focus Area: Commerce Subject: PUBLIC HEARING: Relating to Annexation; public hearing to discuss and consider an application by the property owners to annex approximately 1,200 acres of land located predominantly north of Avra Valley Road, approximately one-mile east of Trico Road and southwest of Silverbell Road Discussion: The Town of Marana is processing a petition to annex approximately 1,200 acres of land located predominantly north of Avra Valley Road, approximately one-mile east of Trico Road and southwest of Silverbell Road within a portion of Sections 7 and 8 of Township 12 South, Range 11 East and Sections 1, 12 and 13 of Township 12 South, Range 10 East. This annexation includes approximately 1.5 miles of Avra Valley Road. The majority property owners have expressed interest in annexing their three parcels and a 0.13 acre parcel owned by Pima County into the Town of Marana. This annexation is with the intention of processing a rezoning on the larger 590 acre parcel owned by Herb Kai to change the zoning to a Specific Plan in order to accommodate a landfill. There are no current plans to change the zoning on the remaining parcels. The proposed annexation includes approximately 1.5 miles of Avra Valley Road, including the Avra Valley Road bridge over the eastern branch of the Brawley Wash. An analysis of the bridge structure is currently taking place. Town staff will better understand the condition of the bridge structure before any proposed annexation ordinance is brought back to Council for consideration. The 0.13-acre Pima County-owned parcel is located on the north side of Avra Valley Road adjacent to the bridge structure. Access to the planned landfill site is proposed to be provided via a new private road which would connect to the portion of Avra Valley Road within the proposed annexation area. The proposed area of annexation is contiguous to the Town's corporate limits and is currently within the Town's planning area as defined within the adopted Town of Marana General Plan. The Future Land Use Map within the General Plan designates the subject property as Rural Density Residential (RDR). The RDR designation is characterized by single-family detached homes on very large properties in a density range of 0.1-0.5 residences per acre. Additionally, it allows for neighborhood commercial development. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 34 of 45 The property is currently zoned by Pima County as RH (Rural Homestead), which is a residential zone with a minimum lot size of 180,000 square feet. In order to establish Town of Marana zoning that equates to existing Pima County zoning without allowing densities greater than those permitted under the current zoning, the proposed annexation area zoning will translate to Town of Marana RD-180 (Single-family Residential 180,000 square feet minimum lot size). A blank petition was filed with the Pima County Recorder's office on March 16, 2010. This public hearing is mandated by state law (A.R.S. § 9-471(A)(3)), which requires the Town to hold a public hearing on the annexation not less than twenty nor more than thirty days after the filing of the blank petition. Financial Impact: Financial impact information will be provided when a proposed annexation ordinance is brought to the council for consideration. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: ~ Final_Legal Exhibit_A pdf.pdf Legal Description ~ Location map.Staff Location Map regional. view.pdf Staff Recommendation: No action required-Public Hearing Suggested Motion: No motion required. Type: Backup Material Backup Material Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 35 of 45 ~~ ... ~ All that certain real propert}~ situate in the bounty of Pima, State o~f Arizona, located in Sections 7 and 18 of Township 12 South, Range 11 East, and Sections 1, 'f2 and 93 of Township 12 South, Range 10 East Gila and Salt Rimer Meridian; .,~ , { _ ~;;~ is '~~; ~ F ~r ~.~~ $~; ~ - ~ ~_ ~~ - - e~ .~...~ ~~ ,,- - ~._ , a° ~~; >' ~ 1,-rr ~ r- - ,--°~ -- ,~ 't.. ~ -.. a:~ t, 4! ,4 ~~~~`;? It Yom'`::... t..__~u 1 u...F11 ~ 4 + I ~ . '~-` ~- ~~ ~ , ~~~ - t i *,~-A.~.. _... _ _ ~-.~~-- .. ~: ~~ t ! _--1 r ~ - -_ ~.~__ ~~ I ~~ f 'fir S ,~ i ~ ~, 6. ~ "~ ~~ . ~ ~ + 9, x~ t . ., ~ _, ~F-` L i ~~ _~ .._...... - i ~.,.~ z~ 3 ~y~E~ F, ~..~ _- ~ ~~ 3 , ~-~-- _ _.~ -_ ~--~--- j ~ E ~~~ 1 .~ ' - ~ ~~ ~ %~ ~, ,-;r a E ` f ~~~ <. rsY d t ~ j , ~"~.,~,..n.~..,..,~ ...~..,~ ~....,..,......~.».,~_.a_ MORE PARTICULAR[~Y DESCRIBED AS EC}LLC}WS~ 3~inn€ at tfte northeast corner of the south half of said Section 7, marked by ~-inch diameter open pipe; ~ - ~~~~~ from said POINT OF BEGINNING, southerly along the east line of the south half of said Section 7, ~~' ' - ~ . ~~'~ i ~_ to the southeast corner thereof; ~~~~ leaving said southeast corner, southerly along the east line of the northeast quarter of said Section 18, .. ~s~~~' ~ ~_` ~ . ~u f~~i to a point on the south right-of-v~ay line of AURA VALLEY ROAD, described in Book 6 of Road Maps at f~age 53 thereof, records of said Pima County, marked by an aluminum capped rebar gearing regi$tration number RLS 26932; ~~~ w ~: I~fareh 9. 2Q10 Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 36 of 45 €~~ leaving said east line westerly along the south right-of-vvay line of said AVRA VALLEY ROAD, `_~= ~~' ~`~~ _~, ,~~ ; s z~ to the northeast corner of the widening of said right-of-way, described in ~: ~ __ Docket 5517 at Page 1036 thereof, records of said Pima County, ion the east line at government Lot 1, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; l ~ ~c~ leaving said northeast corner, southerly along the east line of said Lat 1 ;4~ ~~.~_~_~~ ~~~ t0 the southeast corner of said recorded widening, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; `FeQ~~, leaving said southeast corner; westerly along the south line of said recorded widening, ~ 39° ~~' ~~" ~~~~; ~~~? ~~.~1 t~~t to a point of curve, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; °hn~ leaving said point of curve, Westerly along the arc of a tangent curve to the felt, having a radius of 1367.2?6 feet and a central angle of l ~~ ~~ - ? =~c~ to the southwest corner of said recorded widening on the west line of said Lot'!, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; '~~~~~r;e leaving southwest earner, southerly along the west line of said Lot 1, common with the east line of the southeast quarter of said Section 12, S dun s ~ "?~ ' ~_ ~~.~~.;~ ~~~~ to the southeast corner thereof, marked by an a 3-inch diameter capped pipe; T l~ .~~a~,~ leaving the southeast corner of said Sec#ion 12, westerly along the south line of the southeast quarter thereof ~ ~ ~~`_~ ~~~. =~ ~' ,~. P` to a paint on the south right-of-way line of said AVRA VALLEY Rt~AD, marked by an aluminum~capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; ~l~n~ leaving said south line, westerly along the south right-of-way line of said AVRA VALLEY ROAD on the arc of anon-tangent curve to the right, from which said point, the radius point thereof bears northwesterly, -- - _ ~` o _ ~. ~ ,l ~1~~.23 ~-.~~ distant, through a central angle of ~,~~ ~~~ ~~ , ~f3 ~`~' r'~~t to a point of tangency, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; ~'lhence leaving said paint of tangency, westerly along the south line of said AVRA VALLEY ROAD, `~ _~~~1 ~"~ ~~~ ' ~r~, ~ ~ u ue to a point thereon, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; ;~~n r4~ leaving said south right-af-way line. northerly and perpendicular 3 ~ ~w`' " ~ = ' _ _ ~~_u°~ to a point on the north right-of--way fine of said AVRA VALLEY R~?AD; marked by a #~k rebar with registration tag RLS 31025; hr~c leaving said north right-cif-way line, northerly, t~ ° 2~' ~~`~, ~ ~~~? ~ w~~ tt~ pt~int on the south line of said Section 1, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; ~~:r~:°~ westerly along the south Tina of said Section 1, ~, ~ _~~ ~°~ ~ ,~`~~ ~~~~. Q ~ fsei to the southwest corner thereof, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; n~ leaving said southwest corner, northerly along the west line of the southwest quarter of said Section 1, ,~! i= ~ 2~~° ~~ ~ . ~~~~_ ~ ~ te~f to the northwest earner thereof (west quarter corner), marked by a General Land t3ffice brass capped pipe; _v~~~ leaving said west quarter corner, northerly along the west line of the northwest quarter of said Section 1, ~~ ,~~~. ~ ;'r~ ~~~ t~~ to the southwest corner of Government Lot 4, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 7599; :sae of 3 March 9, 20`10 Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 37 of 45 °'~: leaving said southwest corner, easterly along the south line of said Government Lot 1; ~~ ~~~` ~-~ ~:=" ~, ~_ ~ ~?.~~ t~>=~t to the southeast corner thereof, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932: "hs~n.°,=w leaving said southeast corner, northerly along the east tine of said Govemment Lot 1 ~ ~~~~ ~ 3 ~ ~~~`, ~~'.~`~ ~~~~ t© the northeast corner thereof, marked by an aluminurrl capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; Then leaving said northeast Corner, easterly along the north line of said Section 1, P~ ~ ~' >3' l ~?~F ~ e~~ .'~ ~~~~ to the northeast comer thereofi, marked by a General Land Qf~ice brass capped pipe; T~rt~ leaving said northeast corner, southerly along the east tine of said Section 1, ~ i~~° ~~~ Cti ~ := , 1 '>'_ ~' ,r.~~ to the southeast corner thereof on the west line of Gavernment Lot 1 of said Section 7, marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 29873; T~o~ leaving said southeast corner, southerly along the east lino of the northeast quarter of said Section "12, common with the west line of said Lot 1 and Government Lot 2 of said Section 7, ~ 3Ch' `: &` 2~" ~; ~%~~°~~.~~ ~~~1 to the southwest corner of said Lot 2 west quarter corner of sa~f Suction 7), marked by an aluminum capped rebar bearing registration number RLS 26932; "~ hence leaving said west quarter cornar, easterly along the north line of the south half ofi said Section 7, i~ a~° ~~' ~ ~"' ~, ~3~u_ ~7 t~a~ to the POINT OF BEGINNING of Exhibit A herein described; ontin4~tg 1.20Q.82 ACRES of land {more or (ass) j Sib}pct t~ and together with ail matters of public record ACS £~$ ~5~;~3-r"tf9 ~"a €t~-~~;: Tl~c beartn~s shaven on this description are based tin Ge«detic North usinti data provided by the N`atinnal GeodekiC Survey at stations: ~Fl~, Ce~iter, and N'N$~_ Dattimr: N,~B 83. Resulkin~ measured scale. ti~ctor: 0.99994~?3 "[~hc calls and resulkant acr~,age sho~~n on khis description are based nn the Aa-izana Mate Plane coordinate system, central zone; measured an grid a~.. 3 of 3 ~`~~_~: March 9, 2010 fir.^=~:~_: 4309 HE-1 P.O. Box 12612 -Tucson, kZ 85732 Phone (52©) 512-{7666 Fax (520} 512-1666 Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 38 of 45 Kai-Aura Valley Road Annexation ~~~~~~ CASE ANX0912-001 W MOORE RD cn ~, ~~ ~~ o ~ ~~,,,~ 2 ~FR~~F z F9,Q ~~~'O - ~l!S i~ ~ . r'f _/ ~ f ~ ~ , Marana Air ort p ~~ ~ /._ ~' W AVRA VAL-L'EY•RD '.'~ ~ ~~ 8 ~ ~ r ,,~ ~ O r a ,;d ~ ~ J Q 1 z UV TWIN PEA KS RD RegUeSt o 2soo sooo n. An Annexation of approximately 1,200 acres located predominantly on the north side of Avra Valley Road and southwesterly of Silverbell Road. Data Disclaimer: The Town of Marana provides this map information 'As Is' at the re4uest of the user with the understanding that is not guaranteed to be accurate, coalrraect or complete arn~d conclusions drawn from such information are the responsibility of the user. In no event shall The Town of Marana become liable to users of these d K2ou~arY~oun~~ nnee~inny I~ssr9r~irp~~t~~di~at ep~io~ia~idental or consequential damages, including but not limited to time, money or goodwill, arising from the Planning Landscape Architecture Information Technology Real Estafe Economics LETTER Attn: Jocelyn Bronson Firm: Town of Marana Address The following items are transmitted by: Date: April 6, 2010 Job No: DKL-01 From: Linda Morales/Jack Neubeck Project: Marana Regional Landfill ^ Mail ^ Express mail ®Messenger ^ Pickup ^ Print company ^ Other for: ^ Your Request ^ Your files ^ Your Review ®Your Information Description Quantity Planning Memo from The Planning Center 1 Memo from Cornerstone re Landfill Permittin Requirements 1 Memo from Cornerstone re Durham comparison 1 This was delivered to councilmembers this afternoon. THEPLANNINGCFNTER OF TRANSMITTAL a 110 s church sfe b320 fucaon az 85701 0 520.b23.b14b f 520.b22.1950 w azplanningcenter.com Planning Landscape Architecture TAE PLANNINGC~NI'E~ Information Technology Real Estate Economics MEMORANDUM Date: April 6, 2010 Job No: DKL-01 To: Marana Mayor & Council From: Linda Morales Project: Marana Regional Landfill On behalf of DKL Holdings and the Marana Regional Landfill consulting team, I would like to respond to some of the issues that have been raised. It has been said that the normal planning process has been rushed or even subverted. This is simply not the case. • Months of engineering and planning analysis were completed prior to filing for annexation and the Specific Plan. • No accelerated processing has been requested or provided. • All customary and regulatory time frames have been followed and exceeded. • All required and requested notice areas have been exceeded. • All requests for additional time have been respected. • The Marana General Plan allows for concurrent processing of a General Plan amendment along with a Specific Plan. This is a process that has been done many times with Specific Plans throughout Marana - it is NOT a special exception for this project. • Statute and regulation provides for the orderly submission of planning and engineering studies. • Durham took 18 months due to processing inefficiency, and among other reasons, proximity to state parks, and lack of infrastructure/access to the site-NOT due to more extensive site selection or public involvement. It has also been suggested that insufficient engineering and floodplain information has been presented for review. In fact: • All engineering reports have exceeded requirements for that stage of the entitlement process. r 'vb' .-~ ;'7f' .. - .. Page 2 P R4<-0 ~ /04~ G 4 04~ • Drainage study methodology has been and will continue to be coordinated with Keith Brann of Marana Engineering and Suzanne Shields of the Pima County Regional Flood Control District. • The Specific Plan approval process alone does not permit a Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF). • The annexation and Specific Plan if approved only allow for submittal of a Solid Waste Facility Plan (SWFP) to ADEQ. This plan must be approved before ADEQ will issue Master Facility Plan approval to allow for the construction of a MSWLF. • All requirements of a year-long permitting process must be satisfied in order to receive the numerous permits required for a MSWLF. Cornerstone Environmental has compiled a list of the studies and applications that must be filed prior to approval of the landfill. am attaching this memo. • Drainage and flood control analysis must ultimately satisfy the Town, County, State, and Federal authorities in order to receive permits. • We have committed to design the flood protection for the East Branch of the Brawley Wash to exceed the 500-year design storm. Concerns have been expressed over water quality and the aquifer. protection. • The EPA, ADEQ, Pima County and City of Tucson all have concluded that properly permitted MSWLFs are not a threat to aquifers. • Virtually all MSWLF in Arizona are located in alluvial basins above important aquifers. • The proposed location has no unique or unusual characteristics and is equal to or superior to other sites with respect to the aquifer. • Elevating water tables in the proposed area are neither unique nor constraining. • No liquid or hazardous waste can or will be accepted. • The design and permitting of this facility will exceed those of all current or proposed facilities. • Tangerine landfill is at the end of its life and no commercially viable alternatives exist. • Transfer stations provide an expensive temporary solution at best. Additionally, there have been concerns expressed over the project's potential impact to property values of existing neighborhoods. • Quality of life and property values are not adversely influenced in the area of modern MSWLFs based on licensed appraisers' analysis and experience near numerous other facilities including Tangerine, Los Reales, Glendale and others. There have also been some concerns expressed about a lack of development conditions to be imposed by the Town of Marana. Although the proposed list of conditions at first glance may T~ I~IAfVNlN6C;~~`diF"' Page 3 PRFC-0 ~ /04hV9 G ~ 04fV~ appear to be short, it should be acknowledged that the Town does not typically include a large list of conditions for Specific Plan approvals. There are two main reasons for this: 1) The Town staff requires that many items be written directly into the Specific Plan document, rather than producing a long list of conditions. This is for ease of use in the future, so that developers do not have to reference two separate sets of requirements. Examples of the types of items covered by the specific plan include riparian restoration, berming, landscaping and transportation requirements. 2) The proposed Development Agreement that will accompany the Specific Plan includes many items that might otherwise be reflected as conditions of zoning. The following is a list of the types of items covered by the proposed Development Agreement: Definitions Restriction to Municipal Solid Waste-no liquid or hazardous waste. Litter Control Fencing Operating life, Closure Reports and plan Site plan Financial assurances Environmental mitigation insurance Open to the public during normal work hours. Designation of Truck Routes and no Rail Hauling ADEQ and other governmental entity permitting processes Creation of Burrowing Owl Management Area (BOMA) Participation in Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Restoration and dedication of East Branch of the Brawley Wash Host fees Roadway improvements Free public access days Neighborhood container program Town voucher program Neighboring well monitoring program T~ i E PIAN!JlNCCi: i`* : ~~ !^ CORNERSTONE linriraamental Group, LLG ~~~~ ~ ~~ Date.: April 6, 2010 To: Linda Morales, The Planning Center cc: From: Garth R. Bowers, P.E.~"~ Subject; Landfill Permitting Requirements Project No.: 090250 ~j~ 5 ~ „^ ~i. c ~ 9~s®1ti~ . ~:,~~~ ...tip ,.:.a; ,~` ~~ ~~~; ~ r ~:t ~r ~~-1 ,, :~,~,, As discussed previously, there are a large number of permits and other approvals. that are necessary in order to construct and operate a Municipal Solid. Waste Landfill (MSWLF) in Arizona in addition to obtaining proper zoning authorization for a 14ISWLF facility an a particular parcel. The permits/approvals required include: I . Solid Waste Facility Plan Approval (ADEQ) includes demonstrations for: - Endangered Species Clearance - Archeology Clearance - Wetlands Clearance - Floodplain Design - Seismic Evaluation - Unstable Areas Clearance - Airport Proximity - FAA/Airport Notifications - Zoning Approval - Slope Stability - Leachate Generation/LCRS Design - Liner Design - Starmwatcr Management Design (C?n-site and Qff--site) - Final Cover Design - Landfill Gas Design - Hydrogeologic Evaluation - Groundwater Monitoring Program - Operational Plan 2. Title V Air Permit (PDEQ) 3. Groundwater Industrial Use Permit (ADWR) 4. Aquifer Protection Permit (if Evaporation Ponds or Injection Wells (Drywells) are needed)(ADEQ) 5. 404 Permit. (USAGE/ADEQ) r Apri16, 2010 Page 2 6. Floodplain Use Permit (TOM) 7. Financial Assurance Demonstration (ADEQ) 8. General Aquifer Protection Permit for any Septic Tanks (PDEQ) 9. Arizona Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (AZPDES) Multi-Sector General Permit with a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for Construction Activities and for Landfill Operations (ADEQ) 10. Drilling Permits for Monitoring Wells (ADWR) 11. Grading Permit (TOM) 12. Building Permits for onsite structures (TOM) 13. Development Plan (TOM) 14. Right of Way Permit for work in Avra Valley Road Right of Way (TOM/PDOT) 15. Land Use Restrictive Covenants (ADEQ/Pima County Recorder) 16. Any Permits for Road Development (TOM) If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call or a-mail. CaProjects~ivlamna LFQvlemo Re Permit List FINAL 04-06-IO Last printed 4/6/2010 10:42:36 AM ~~CORNERSTONE Enrironmenkal Groap, LLC Memorandum Date: April 6, 2010 To: Brian Varney, Town of Marana CC: From: Garth R. Bowers, P.E, .~•+~ Subject: Marana Regional Landfill Project No.: 090250 ~.:~ t. :~ ~~-~ ~' ; ,, ~ ~, ., i , . f ~ .;~~- y . 1 V`1e ,~,~. A l?Xr~ 9~~1» On March 3, 2010, Chuck Huckelberny, Pima County Administrator, sent a memorandum to Ursula Kramer, Director of the Pima County Environmental Quality Department, and Arlan Colton, Planning Official with the Pima County Development Services Department, asking them to assemble information for a discussion item on the agenda of the Pima County Board of Supervisors for their April 6, .2010 meeting. The information requested included an analysis of the site selection standards utilized by Pima County and the City of Tucson in their 1992193 landfill siting study and a comparative analysis of `the proposed Marana Regional Landfill (MRCP) compared to the. proposed .Durham Regional Landfill {DRLF), located in Pinal County. Cornerstone was asked by the developer of the proposed MRLF to independently review the 1992193 landfill siting study and the proposals for thetwo proposed regional landfill .sites (MRCP and DRLF). The fallowing memorandum outlines the observations we have made based on these reviews. 1.992/93 Landfill Siting Study In the early 1990s, Pima County and the City of Tucson recognized that the then-current solid waste disposal facilities in the eastern Pima County area had limited site life and jointly evaluated the potential of developing a new regional landfill facility in eastern Pima County to provide. solid waste disposal capacity for City and County residents for the foreseeable future. A report entitled Alternative Locations ,fora Regional aYaste Disposal and Management Center, Site Selection. Summary Report, Phare III, prepared by the staff of the Pima County Wastewater Management Department, Solid Waste Division and the City of Tucson Operations Department, Sanitation Division and dated October 6, 1992 has been posted on the home page of the ~~-1~ ~::.~ir1z:~.~~~r web site and provides a discussion of the process used in the landfill siting study. This report provides a summary of solid waste disposal operations in Pima County, outlines the process used to select potential new regional landfill sites for evaluation, and provides a detailed analysis of three sites which were selected in early 1.992 for further analysis. Apri16, 2010 Page 2 Initial Screening Criteria The October 6, 1992 report indicates that Phase I of the siting study was completed in July 1991 and reviewed the entire area of Eastern Pima County against a number of screening criteria. This process was completed before the current US EPA Municipal Solid Waste Landfill rules (40 CFR Part 258, commonly referred to as "RCRA Subtitle D regulations") were promulgated in October 1991. and contain a number of screening criteria which are different than those in the current 40 CFR §258/RCRA Subtitle D location restriction regulations which have been adopted by reference by the State of Arizona. The screening criteria used in Phase I of the siting study eliminated any site which was located in an area that meets one of the following criteria. (Discussion of each of the criteria based on current 40 CFR X258 standards is provided in italicized text.): • Incorporated Areas -Since there is no prohibition in federal, state, or local rules from siting a landfill in an incorporated area, it is assumed that this criterion was established by the study team to limit the location of the landfill to unincorporated Pima County. • Parks, Forests, and Indian Reservations -While the 40 CFR X258 location restriction criteria do not specifically prohibit location of a landfill in these areas, this appears to be a reasonable screening criterion and none of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the 111RLF, or the DRLF) are located in such an area. All Land within a 100-year Floodplain -The 40 CFR X258 criteria allow development of a landfill in a 100 year Floodplain if it can be demonstrated that the facility will not restrict the flow of the 100 year flood, reduce the temporary storage capacity of the floodplain, or result in washout of solid waste. This demonstration is performed as part of the permitting process for the landfill with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), which is performed after the zoning process with the applicable municipality is completed. It should also be noted that neither the 40 CFR ,¢258 location restriction criteria or, apparently, the criteria used in the Phase I siting study restrict this evaluation only to FEMA-mapped IOO year flood plains. It is likely that all of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the MRLF, or the DRLF) would have areas subject to flooding in a 100 year event and proper surface water diversion design, including demonstration of compliance with- the requirements of 40 CFR X258.11, would be required during the permitting process for any of the sites. All Land within One Mile of a Major Watercourse -Current State of Arizona statutes prohibit ADEQ from issuing a permit for a new landfill within one-half mile of a Floodplain of a watercourse with a IOO year flood discharge of 25, 000 cubic feet per second or greater. This criterion is enforced as part of the permitting process for the landfill with ADEQ, which is performed after the zoning process with the applicable municipality is completed. C:~Projects\Marana LFUvlemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-0610 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM April 6, 2010 Page 3 Land with Grandfathered Irrigation Water Rights -There is no prohibition in 40 CFR §258 with respect to grandfathered irrigation water rights; however Arizona statutes (ARS X49-772) prohibit ADEQ from issuing a permit for a new landfill if the site still has appurtenant grandfathered irrigation rights. However, such rights can be abandoned by the owner of such rights prior to issuance of the ADEQ approval and therefore, should not be utilized as a hard screening criterion of site suitability. • All Land within 10,000 Feet of an Airport Runway -This criterion was essentially codified in 40 CFR X258 as well. None of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the MRLF, or the DRLF), are located within 10, 000 feet of an airport runway. All Areas within One Mile of Active Wells in Tucson Water Well Fields -This criterion is not included in the 40 CFR~258 location restriction criteria. However, none of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the 11~tLF, or the DRLF) are located within 1 mile of a Tucson Water Well Field. There is one isolated Tucson Water well located approximately 3000 feet from the 111ItLF site; however this well is not part of a larger well field and is located in across-gradient direction from the landfill. Tucson Water is aware of this situation and has not objected to the location of the MItLF. A memorandum from Jeff B. Biggs, Director, Tucson Water Department and Andrew H. Quigley, Director, City of Tucson Environmental Services Department to Richard Miranda, City of Tucson Deputy City Manager indicates that, "a well designed, operated, and maintained municipal solid waste landfill does not, per se, represent a threat to a ground water supply. " Mountain Areas and Areas with Rock Outcrops -This criterion is not included in the 40 CFR X258 location restriction criteria. However, due to increase in required construction costs to develop such areas this appears to be a reasonable screening criterion. None of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the 11gtLF, or the DRLF) are located in such an area. • All Areas with More Than 10 Persons per Section -This criterion is not included in the 40 CFR X258 location restriction criteria. However, none of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the MRLF, or the DRLF) are located in such an area. All Areas within One Mile of an Area with More Than 50 Persons per Section -This criterion is not included in the 40 CFR X258 location restriction criteria. The population of the. Silverbell West subdivision, portions of which are within 3000 feet of the MRLF facility may exceed this density per section. However, the average population density of the area. within 1 mile of the proposed MRLFfacility is less than SO people per square mile. C:~ProjectsUvlarana LF~Iviemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-10 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM Apri16, 2010 Page 4 In summary, the screening criteria established for the Phase I siting study in the early 1990's have significant differences with the location restrictions that are currently in effect under 40 CFR §258 and may have unnecessarily eliminated sites in eastern Pima County which would be suitable for regional landfill facilities under the current regulations. Additional Observations Regarding Screened Sites The October 6, 1992 report goes on to provide a detailed analysis of three of the sites which were identified as finalist site locations in January 1992 (identified as MNS, ARP, and RTS). Two alternatives for the ARP site were developed, adjacent to each other and south of the existing Los Reales Landfill. Some of the information presented of note included: Discussion of the improvements in liner design that would be provided by the "stringent new regulatory requirements that take effect in October 1993" (these are the design requirements listed in 40 CFR §258). This discussion indicates that the performance of the Subtitle D liner systems, in addition to surface water management requirements and groundwater monitoring, would be superior to the design of older landfill facilities that they would be replacing. All of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the MRLF, or the DRLF) are proposed to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR §258. • The October 6, 1992 report indicates that air and soil gasses will be monitored at the proposed facility and if significant amounts of methane are detected, gas control systems will be installed. The current EPA New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) regulations will require landfills to do this monitoring and install control systems based on specific regulatory limits. • The average haul distance for waste haulers using the proposed sites ranged from 19.8 miles for one of the ARP site alternatives to 21.3 miles for the RTS site. While the methodology used to calculate this haul distance is not provided in detail in the report, the typical haul distance for users of the MRLF is anticipated to be in a similar range to the distances proposed for the sites in the October 6, 1992. The typical haul distance for users of the DRLF site will be much longer (the one way travel distance from Tangerine Road and I-10 to the DRLF site is 25 miles alone in addition to any travel distance required to get to Tangerine Road and I-10). • The October 6, 1992 report indicates that there area "series of active domestic wells associated with homes" located approximately 1 mile southwest of the MNS site but that "ground :water from below the site does not flow toward these wells". .This appears to be analogous to the .groundwater situation at the MRLF site in which there is one Tucson Water well in an isolated system located approximately 3000 feet in a cross-gradient direction from. the proposed landfill footprint. • The October 6, 1992 report also .indicates that there are 14 drinking water wells located in a residential neighborhood approximately 1 mile west of the proposed ARP C:~Projects~Mamaa LFHvfemo Re PimaCo Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-]0 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM Apri16, 2010 Page 5 site in a downgradient direction. This indicates that there are more downgradient wells in closer proximity to the proposed ARP site than there are to the proposed MRLF facility. The report indicates that "no impacts are expected to occur to these wells because the environmental protection features of the landfill will be designed and constructed to prevent discharge of pollutants to the ground water". All of the landfill locations being discussed (either the sites selected for further analysis in the October 6, 1992 report, the MRLF, or the DRLF) are proposed to have similar environmental protection features and would therefore be similarly protective of ground water. • The October 6, 1992 report indicates that the velocity of ground water below the three finalist sites ranged from 10 ft/yr at the ARP and RTS sites to an order of magnitude higher (i.e., approximately 100 ft/yr) at the MNS site. It also indicated that the depth to water at each of these sites ranged from 220 feet at the ARP site to 350 feet at the RTS site. It concluded that all three sites were at least "suitable" from the standpoint of hydrogeological conditions. The MNS site was considered only "suitable" due to the presence of potential liability issues due to existing groundwater contamination from historic mine-related activities in the vicinity. The other sites were all listed as "well suited". The groundwater velocity in the vicinity of the proposed MRLF site (20 ft/year per a memorandum from Jeff Biggs, Director of Tucson Water Department and Andrew Quigley, Director of City of Tucson Environmental Services to Richard Miranda, Deputy City Manager) is in the range listed for these sites. The depth to water at the proposed MRLF site (290 feet per ADWR records for the on-site water supply well #55-618390) is also within the range listed for these sites. All three of the sites discussed in the October 6, 1992 site appear to be naturally vegetated, although potentially utilized for cattle grazing. The vegetation status of the DRLF site appears to be similar. In contrast, the MRLF site has mostly been previously used for cultivated agriculture (primarily cotton farming) and therefore, most of the site has been previously cleared of vegetation. Therefore, development of the MRLF site will require a smaller loss of native desert vegetation area. • Similarly, all three sites discussed in the October 6, 1992 site appear to have some archaeological sites/artifacts. The DRLF site analysis report appears to indicate that a an initial data search, consisting of a review of previous studies in the area, indicated that there may be a number of small archeological sites within 1 mile of the DRLF site, but that a detailed field investigation would be required to document the archaeological sites within the landfill area, recover data, and mitigate as necessary. Conversely, the MRLF site has been field surveyed and only isolated scatters of very small potsherds were found within the landfill footprint area (as expected due to the previous agricultural use of the property). The only. identified site is located outside of the proposed landfill footprint in an open space set aside area. • The October 6, 1992 study included a lengthy discussion of bird/aircraft collision hazard information, including a meeting with FAA and TAA officials, and ultimately C:~Projects~farana LFQvlemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-]0 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM Apri16, 2010 Page 6 concluded that the "potential of a bird/aircraft collision hazard developing as a result of the operation of a landfill at the ARP sites [the sites closest to an airport] is extremely low, approaching non-existent." Similar bird habitat and operational practices to those assumed for the ARP site would be utilized at the MRLF facility. It should be noted that the northwest corner of the proposed ARP facility (T16S, R14E, Section 3) is far closer to the end of Runway 11L/29R at Tucson International Airport than the MRLF site would be to the end of Runway 12/30 at Marana Regional Airport In addition, the ARP site would be directly underneath the final approach/departure flight path for the primary runways at Tucson International Airport, while the MRLF site is on the opposite side of the airport from the traffic pattern for both runways at the Marana Regional Airport. ~ The October 6, 1992 study also evaluated the potential use of former mining areas for siting of a regional landfill. During the public meetings in the siting study, public comments requested consideration for siting the landfill in a former mining area including a mine pit or tailings pile. The study concluded that there were a number of factors that constrained location of a landfill in a mining area including: o Potential liability for environmental degradation caused by past mining practices o Long term potential to continue or resume mining at the site o Land ownership, leases, and mineral rights owned by the mining corporations o Lack of specific .economic savings and significant potential for increased development costs Comparative Analysis of the DRLF and MRLF Proposed Facilities: Mr. Huckelberry's memorandum to Ms. Kramer and Mr. Colton also requested that a comparative analysis be made between the proposed DRLF and MRLF facilities. Technical factors that were listed to be included in this analysis included (discussion of each of the criteria listed is provided in italicized text): Depth to Groundwater -Based on ADWR records for the on-site water supply well at the MRLF site, the depth to groundwater is approximately 290 feet. The depth to groundwater listed in the Site Analysis report for the DRLF is "approximately 300 feet" based on a USGS well "drilled near the- site ". Therefore the depth to water appears to be similar at both sites. Proximity to Airports -Although the DRLF is further from the nearest airport location, both of the sites comply with the location restriction requirements of 40 CFR X258 and applicable FAA requirements. C:~Projects~Marana LFQVfemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs.DRLF_FINAL_04-06-10 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM Apri16, 2010 Page 7 Proximity to Surrounding Private Property Owners -Most of the property surrounding the 11~ZLF site is owned by government agencies (Arizona State Land Department or City of Tucson). One parcel on the south side of the site is owned by the brother of the current landfill property owner. There is also an undeveloped 40- acre privately owned parcel at the northwest corner of the 111RLF site. The DRLF is also primarily surrounded by parcels owned by government agencies (ABED and BL1l~, with aprivately-owned parcel at its southwest corner. Both are located in rural areas, although there are more residences within a two mile radius of the MRLF. • Adjacency to Major Watercourses or Floodplain Involvement -Both parcels will receive flows from off-site upstream watersheds and require flood diversion or mitigation. It is likely that both will require Floodplain use permits to address engineered modifications to existing Floodplain areas (either FEMA-defined floodplains or locally regulated Floodplains). The 100 year Flowrate on the East Branch of the Brawley Wash, adjacent to the MRLF site is larger than the flowrates on the washes crossing the DRLF site. However, the main channel of the East Branch of the Brawley Wash is well defined and outside the proposed landfill footprint (i.e., will not require the main channel to be relocated). The washes crossing the DRLF site are less well defined and are in an area that is characterized by channel flow splits and channel shifting over time. Anticipated Depth Below Ground Surface of Waste, as Well as Ultimate Height of the Facilities -The DRLF site analysis report indicates that the proposed depth of the DRLF site will be SO feet but does not indicate how the floor of the landfill will be graded, therefore, it is unknown whether the SO feet is a maximum depth or an average. The "Landfill Detailed Site Plan " drawing in the site analysis report appears to indicate that the leachate collection pipelines will be oriented east-west with a run length of approximately 5000 feet. Even if a high point is established in the center of the floor of the landfill and these pipes are minimally sloped at 1 %, there would need to be a variation of at least 2S feet between the high point and low point of these leachate drainage lines. The average excavation depth at the MRLF site is approximately 4S feet, with a maximum depth of 90 feet at the low point of the leachate collection system. In both cases the base of the landfill is more than 100 feet above the groundwater surface and is not anticipated to have any effect on groundwater conditions. The top grading. of the DRLF site is also not shown in the site analysis report; however, it indicates that the "maximum height of Durham Regional Landfill is 90' at closure. " The proposed maximum height of the 1l~LF facility is approximately 195 feet above adjacent grade on the south side of the site (approximately elevation 1980 feet above mean sea level), which is similar to or lower than the design height of other regional landfill facilities in Arizona (including Los Reales Landfill (Tucson)(approximately 200 feet), ..Cactus Landfill (Pinal County)(approximately 300 feet), Silver Bar Mine Landfill (Pinal County)(approximately 350 feet) and C:~Projects~Marana LFQvlemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-10 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM Apri16, 2010 Page 8 Butterfield Station Landfill (Maricopa County)(approximately 270 feet) and represents an efficient use of the landfill property area for long term waste disposal. It should also be noted that the October 6, 1992 study indicated that "one large regional site is preferable to the existing system of several smaller public landfills operated separately. " In order to provide a long term life for a regional facility, it requires a larger volume for the single regional landfill than the individual landfill volume of the prior system of scattered small landfills. Providing this larger volume requires either a larger landfill footprint or a greater landfill height. Therefore, given the same landfill design life and anticipated annual waste volume, reducing the landfill height requires more land area to be taken for the landfill waste disposal use. Adequacy of and/or Requirements to Improve Facility Access Infrastructure, Including Highways Leading to the Facility -The DRLF site is located in a currently undeveloped area and, therefore, will require significant access improvements including development of a roadway and potentially, improvements to an existing Interstate 10 traff c interchange (at the Red Rock exit). The site analysis report indicates that the improvements will be publicly owned. Therefore, it appears that the local government agency will be responsible for maintaining a roadway nearly exclusively utilized by traffic going to and from the DRLF facility. Conversely, the 111RLF is located in an area with existing transportation infrastructure. An existing farm road will be improved and maintained as a private roadway to provide access from the MRLF site to the public roadway network at Avra Valley Road.. A traffic analysis has been performed by others under contract with the ELF developer, which has indicated that the existing Avra Valley Road has available capacity to accept the projected landfill traff c and the landfill traff c will be a minor component of the overall traffic on the public roadways. Therefore, the local government agencies will responsible for maintenance of roadways that are utilized by a wide range of users, while the MRLF will be responsible for maintaining the roadway exclusively used by landfill traffic. The 11~ZLF developer has also committed to funding certain improvements on the public roadways to mitigate projected or perceived impacts of the additional traffic generated by the landfill. It should be noted that the criteria listed to include in the site comparative analysis did not include discussion of factors that would be generally favorable to the MRLF site including: • Required travel distance to bring waste to the facility from Pima County • Potential need for construction of additional off-site transfer facilities • Available site life/capacity • Existing utility availability C:~Pmjects~Marana LFHviemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-]0 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM April 6, 2010 Page 9 • Native vegetation/habitat removal. requirements • Proximity to State Parks C:~Pmjects~Marana LFVvlemo Re Pima Co Comparison MRLF vs DRLF_FINAL_04-06-10 Last printed 4/6/2010 10:41:09 AM My name is Annie Shellberg 10650 N Longview Ave Marana AZ 85653 Mayor, Council, staff and fellow community members. At the planning and Zoning commission Mtg they made the comment that "we aren't approving the landfill we are only approving an annexation". The problem is, the annexation is tied to the use. If it is a simple land-use change then I object; you are changing Rural Homestead to heavy industrial. If it's not a specific plan change for a landfill then it is a significant land use change to heavy industrial. Avra Valley Road is not in good enough condition at this time to accommodate 25 to 35 eighty thousand pound transfer station trucks on a daily basis, in addition to trash haulers and private citizens. The improvements can not be exclusive to the exit and entrance of the facility. Improvements are needed from operation, all the way to the Avra Valley Road on ramp and I10. This path would require the input and participation of ADOT, Pima County and the Town of Marana. The Marana Councils' disdain for Pima County was loud and clear at the January study session when you spent over an hour talking about your distrust and dislike of the Board of Supervisors and roughly 20 minutes on the agenda item of 911 response and communication coordination between county and state first responders. You have seen the condition of Avra Valley Road tonight, we both know first hand that development agreements aren't worth the paper they are written on if no one monitors them (As in the case of New West Materials, currently Vulcan Materials). No government body is flush with cash to improve infrastructure and all Arizona roads are in various stages of disrepair and getting worse. You cannot responsibly approve this annexation and zoning change without answering more questions than you have. Not everything is going to be the responsibility of ADOT, ADEQ and others; it all starts with you! This landfill will not ultimately cover it's costs to our community. I have attached various documents on cost per lane mile for improvements and I trust you will realize that distance is significant when you look at the roads and distance this will affect. Thank you for your time. the Town Manager to apply for funding from the Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizona to fund planning and design for water distribution line replacement in the Marana Estates neighborhood (T VanHook) C 2: Resolution No. 2010-34: Relating to Town Facilities; authorizing the town manager or the town manager's designee to take all actions on behalf of the town that are necessary or prudent to facilitate the provision of public utilities to lands, structures, or facilities owned by the Town of Marana, including without limitation the execution of an electrical right-of-way easement across the Dove Mountain trailhead parking lot (Frank Cassidy) C 3: Minutes of the March 9, 2010 special council meeting and March 16, 2010 regular council meeting LIQUOR LICENSES L 1: Relating to Liquor Licenses; recommendation to the state liquor board regarding the special event liquor license application submitted by the Muscular Dystrophy Association of Southern Arizona on behalf of Harley-Davidson of Tucson, 7355 N. I-10 East Bound Frontage Road for a charitable fundraiser BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES COUNCIL ACTION A l: PUBLIC HEARING: Relating to Annexation; public hearing to discuss and consider an application by the property owners to annex approximately 1,200 acres of land located predominantly north of Avra Valley Road, approximately one-mile east of Trico Road and southwest of Silverbell Road (Kevin Kish, AICP) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION D 1: Legislative/Inter~overnmental Report: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies (Steve Huffman) EXECUTIVE SESSIONS E l: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.03 (A)(3), Council may ask for discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town Attorney concerning any matter listed on this agenda. E 2: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and. instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning possible acquisition of certain water infrastructure and accounts and water rights and/or resources E 3: Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3),(4) and (7), discussion or consultation for legal advice with the Town's attorneys and discussion and to consider its position and instruct the Town Manager and staff concerning (1) the lawsuit entitled Town of Marana v. Pima County/Pima County v. Marana (consolidated), Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV2008-001131, (2) pending legal issues, settlement discussions and contract negotiations relating to the transition Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 3 of 45 Updated as of: 01119/10 Generic Cost Per Mile Models Disclaimer: These models are generic in nature, and not based on actual construction projects. They are for reference purposes only, and are not intended to predict or support future estimates. Models Cost Per Mile OTHER Two Directional 12' Shared Use Path $175,461.90 Rails to Trails project 12' width $162,515.68 Sidewalk construction 5' one side 4 inch depth $119,568.32 Mid-Block Crossing $89,594.11 RURAL New Construction Undivided 2 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders 51.713.007,;;5 New Construction Undivided 3 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders Center Turn Lane 52,08=1.642.09 New Construction Undivided 4 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders 52,59-1.023.15 New Construction 4 Lane Divided Rural Road with 2' Paved Shoulders Inside and 5' Paved 53,430.208.91 Shoulders Outside New Construction Divided Rural 4 Lane Interstate ~.vith Paved Shoulders 10' Outside and 4' Inside S4,206.791.'2 New Construction Undivided 5 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders Center Turn Lane $3,053,299.86 New Construction 6 Lane Divided Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders Inside and Out $4,257,380.89 New Construction Divided Rural 6 Lane Interstate with 10' Paved Shoulders Inside and Out $5,045,319.55 New Construction Extra Cost for 1 Single Additional Lane on Rural Arterial 5449.0°8.12 New Construction Extra Cost for 1 Single Additional Lane nn a Rural Interstate 5510,888.69 Milling and Resurfacing 2 Lane Rural Road wish 5' Paved Shoulders 5416,137.91 Milling and Resurfacing 3 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders and Center Turn Lane 5582,570.41 Milling and Resurfacing 4 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders $965,447.05 Mill + Resurface 4 Lane Divided P,ural Arterial with 5' Outside Shoulders and 2' Inside $1,011,679.65 Mill + P.esurface 4 Lane Divided Rural Interstate with Paved Shoulders 10' Outside and 4' Inside $1,184,562.76 Milling and Resurfacing 5 Lane Rural Road with 5' Paved Shoulders and Center Turn Lane 51,170,152.69 Mill + Resurface 6 Lane Divided Rural Arterial with 5' Paved Shoulders Inside and Out S1,440.620.96 Mill + Resurface 6 Lane Divided Rural Interstate with 10' Paved Shoulders Inside and Out y1,692,398.35 ~.1ill + Resurface 1 Additional Lane Rural Interstate $261,821.54 Milt + Resurface 1 Additional Lane Rural Arterial $221,330.76 Widen Existing 2 Lane Arterial to 4 Lanes Undivided' Add 1 Lane to Each Side' 5' Paved $1,945,635.59 Shoulders Widen Existing 2 Lane Arterial to 4 Lane Divided Resurface Existing 2 Lanes 5' Paved 52.293,691.25 Shoulders Inside + Out Widen Existing 4 Lane Divided Arterial to 6 Lane Divided Resurface Existing 4 Lanes' 5' Paved $2,136,024.16 Shoulders Inside + Out Widen 4 Lane Interstate to 6 Lanes In Median 'Mill + Resurface Existing' 10' Paved Shoulders $3,372,226.04 Inside + Out Widen 4 Lane Interstate to 6 Lanes Ouisice ~ Mill + Resurface Existing 10' Shoulders Outside $3,115,265.61 Widen Existing 4' Inside Shoulders fo 10' Widen Existing 6 Lane Divided Arterial to 8 Lane Divided Resurface Existing 4 Lanes 5' Paved $2,402,021.51 Shoulders Inside + Out Wicen 6 Lane Interstate to 8 Lanes in Median ~ Mill + Resurface Existing 10' Paved Shoulders $3,822,331.59 Inside and Out Widen Divided Rural 4-Lane for Right Turn Lane 300' $166,502.25 SUBURBAN New Construction Suburban 4 Lane with Paved Shoulders Outside and Curb Median S3 438.053.59 Widen Exisitu~g Rural Facility to the Inside with Addition of Closed Drainage System and Median 52,554,644.75 Barrier Wall Widen 4 Lane Suburban Roadway with 6-5' Paved Shoulder and Convert to C+G Out Stripe for $2,121,780.15 Bike Lane Add 2 Lanes with C+G Out to Existing 4 Lane Urban or Suburban Roadway vdith C+G Out 52,204,;,37.06 URBAN New Construction 2 Lane Undivided Urban Arterial with 4' bike Lanes $3:818,886.34 New Construction 3 Lane Undivided Urban Arterial with Center Lane and 4' Bike Lanes $4,287,411.07 New Construction Undivided Urban Arterial with 4' Bike Lanes $4,650,414.03 New Construction 4 Lane Urban Road with 22' Median and 4' Bike Lanes $5,608,897.45 U~idated as of: 01/19/10 Generic Cost Per Mile Models Disclaimer: These models are generic in nature, and not based on actual construction projects. They are for reference purposes only, and are not intended to predict or support future estimates. Models Cost Per Mile URBAN New Construction 4 Lane Divided Urban Interstate Closed 22' Median with Barrier Wall 10' $8,598,289.48 Shoulders Inside + Out New Construction 5 Lane Undivided Urban Arterial with Center Turn Lane and 4' Bike Lanes 55,312.066.00 Nei°~i Construction 6 Lane Urban Road with 22' Median and 4' Eike Lanes S6.336.655.63 New Construction Divided Urban 6 Lane Interstate with 22' Closed Median with Barrier UVaii 10' S9,5~13,509.41 Shoulders Inside + Out New Construction Extra Cost for Additional Lane on Urban Arterial $515,867.67 New Construction Extra Cost for Additional Lane on Urban Interstate ~ $555.002.41 Mill + Resurface 2 Lane Urban Road with d' Bike Lanes 5481.922.04 Mii1 + Resurface 3 Lane Urban Road wits CenterTurn Lane and 4' Bike Lanes '" S6G~3,561.35 ~.1ill + Resurface 4 LaneUndivided Urban Roadway with 4' Eihe Lanes 5954,920.65 Mill + Resurface =~ Lane Divided Urban Roadway with 4' Bike Lanes $965,050.62 Mill + P,esurface 5 Lanc Urban Road~,vav ;^iith Ccnt_~r Turn Lane and 4' Bike Lanes $1,143,408.13 Mill + Resurface 6 Lane Divided Urban Arterial with 4' Bike Lanes 51,514,689.09 Mill + Resurface 1 Additional Lane Urban Arterial `$20Q 731.01 Add 2 Lanes to Existing 2 Lane Undivided Arterial 1 Lane Each Side with 4' Bike Lanes S3,646.379,66 Widen 2 Lane Urban Arterial to 4 Lane Divided with 22' Median + 4' Bike Lanes $4,230,437.93 Add 2 Lanes to Existing 3 Lane Undivided Arterial 1 Lane Each Side with Center Tum Lane and 4' $3,830,330.97 Bike Lanes Wlden 4 Lane Urban Divided Arterial to 6 Lane Urban Divided with 22' Median and4' Bike Lanes 83.93£3.157.=15 Widen 4 Lane Urban Interstate with Closed Median to 6 Lanes Outside ~ Mill + Resurface Existing SG 323291.46 10' Shoulders Outside Widen G Lane Urban Divided Arterial to 8 Lane Urban Divided with 4' Bihe Lanes $4,231,522.74 Widen 6 Lane Urban Interstate with Closed Median to 8 Lanes Outside ~ ivlill + Resurface Existing' $6,809,415.57 10' Shoulders Qutside flexible, like the peanut butter in Way's analogy. Placing asphalt rubber mixes differs slightly from the norm. Pneumatic rollers cannot be used, because rubber rollers pick up rubber in the asphalt. Steel-wheeled machines handle all compaction. "You also try to work the material at :'slightly higher temperatures than conventional asphalt," says Mark Belshe, a vice president with PNF Construction Inc. of Tempe. "You should use the breakdown roller before the temperature drops below 275 degrees Fahrenheit. That's similar to conventional asphalt, but it is important to realize that asphalt rubber is less forgiving than conventional asphalt. So you have to be a little more organized. The technique is essentially the same, there is just less margin for error." Wider uses for asphalt rubber? Industry observers say many contractors and material suppliers view asphalt rubber with a degree of suspicion. State DOTS have not been persuaded that the material will work as advertised. Many contractors and material suppliers Ynay be more comfortable with conventional asphalt. While asphalt rubber overlays appear to be long-lasting, the new material does carry a cost premium. DOTS trying to stretch thin budgets often hesitate to risk raising their up-front material investment in ~~~,~ hopes of getting alonger-lasting ~ road. Recently, FNF persuaded New ~~ Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department to undertake a test of asphalt robber. Last year, the state awarded FNF a contract to overlay 112 lane miles of US 54 between Alamogordo and El Paso. The contract called for conventional asphalt. FNF, however, wanted to demonstrate asphalt rubber's performance to New Mexico's DOT officials. "We thought if we could make the economics work, they might try it," says Belshe. Ford Motor Co. had been looking for ways to dispose of 6.5 million Bridgestone/Firestone tires recalled from Ford Explorers in 2001. When FNF approached Ford, the auto maker offered to donate the tires to support an asphalt rubber overlay demonstration. Under the ensuing agreement, Ford donated the tires and paid the cost of processing the asphalt rubber. As a result, New Mexico got its first asphalt rubber road surface for the cost of a conventional job. New Mexico is now monitoring the performance of the finished road. Whether or not the New Mexico job bears fruit, cost will likely remain a barrier to the wholesale use of asphalt rubber by DOTS. "We look at asphalt rubber as another tool in the toolkit for pavement design," says Belshe. "ASTM-type asphalt rubber binder brings something to the table that other products don't. At the same time, you can't justify using it all the time. You have to fit applications to needs." Belshe does note that some jobs will call for asphalt rubber despite the material's higher costs. "Suppose you have a road in fatigue failure with alligator cracking," he says. "A 1.5-inch asphalt rubber overlay might hold that road together for another five to seven years, while the alternative is a total rehab. The cost difference is substantial. The rehab might cost $200,000 or more per lane mile. An asphalt rubber overlay could cost $60,000 per lane mile." Any major rehabilitation project would require an engineering evaluation to determine the appropriate treatment. The higher first cost of asphalt rubber mixes will likely limit wider use of the material for the time being -unless, of course, the driving public starts making nois® about wanting quieter roads. Michael Fickes is a free-lance writer for HMAT. Hot Privately Funded In c ange e elo met rote s Introduction The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) has established a handbook for the private development community as a uniform protocol for requesting new traffic interchanges (TI) or modifications to existing interchanges. The policy requires that private entities proposing the change adequately assess and mitigate impacts of their development on the state highway transportation system. Applicants shall be required to conduct the appropriate level of technical and environmental analysis/studies, public outreach, community involvement, and government relations as determined by ADOT. The objective of this policy is to manage access, ensure responsible long term planning, ensure optimal operations given future traffic conditions, and reduce the possibility of future failure and required retrofit, as well as associated expenditures of ADOT-owned transportation facilities. If you have not yet contacted the District Engineer relevant to your request, this should be your first step. District Engineers and contact information are available on the District Map. Privately Funded Interchange Development Process Requirements Handbook The Privately Funded Interchange Development Process Requirements Handbook provides the instructions you will need to complete the process, as well as ADOT contact information and requirements by Section. Required Privately Funded TI Forms We look forward to building partnerships, fostering multi-agency collaborations, and strengthening relationships between ADOT, developers, and the community. This process is an example of agency level implementation of Governor Napolitano's Growth and Infrastructure Initiative, requiring developers and other relevant entities to evaluate impacts of development on the state system early in the planning process. Highway Encroachment Application CCP Public Involvement Program Report ADOT Sections included in the Privately Funded TI Process Communication and Community Partnerships Statewide Project Management Valley Project Management Utility and Railroad Engineering Section Traffic Engineering Roadway Engineering Right of Way Group Materials Group Pavement Design Section Environmental Planning Group Bridge Group We look forward to building partnerships, fostering multi-agency collaborations, and strengthening relationships between ADOT, developers, and the community. This process is an example of agency level implementation of Governor Napolitano's Growth and Infrastructure Initiative, requiring developers and other relevant entities to evaluate impacts of development on the state system early in the planning process. riv c t I c C~ Capyright Arizana Department of Transpartation. All Rights Reserved DEVELOPMf NT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF MARANA AND NEW WEST MATERIALS '•'~f r~ ~ - ~{~r k=;~ ~ r ~ ,~ . ~~.. ~ ~~ ~~~ y~, . CABLE OF CONTENTS Page REC ITALS 2 AGR EEMENT 3 1. Development of Property 3 1.1. Development in Accordance with the MDC and Zoning 3 1.2. Zoning Conditions 3 1.3 Property 3 2. Business License Fee 3 2.1. Fee Assessments 3 2.2. Timing and Method of Payment 3 2.3. Audit Provisions 4 2.4. Amendment and Repeal 4 3. Park, Trail, Recreation and Open Space Requirements 4 3.1. Trail Dedication 4 3.2. Completion of Trail Improvements 5 3.3. Indemnification 5 4. Cooperation and Alternative Dispute Resolution 5 4.1. Appointment of Representatives 5 4.2. Default: Remedies 5 5. Notices and Filings 6 6. General Terms and Conditions 6 6.1. Terms 6 6.2. Waiver 7 6.3. Attorneys' Fees 7 6.4. Counterparts 7 •6.5. Headings and Recitals 7 6.6. Exhibits 7 - 6.7. Further Acts 7 6.8. Future Effect 7 6.9. No Partnership and Third Parties 8 6.10. Other Instruments 8 •6.1'1. Imposition of Duty By Law 8 6.12. Entire Agreement 8 6.13. Amendment 8 6.14. Good Standing: Authority 8 6.15. Severability 8 6.16. Governing Law/Arbitration 8 6.17. Recordation 9 • 6.18. No Representations 9 6.19. Approval 9 6.20. Force Majeure 9 1 -```v, c~ s ~. V' U :.' J ~"' ~~^. .3 U. t'.S V ; .r.L~ v "~ ~-' 'v .~-+. •~-+ L ~? c CC7 fl .~ J \~ J y~ 0 t`~^ C;$ Lr -~ :~ 3 ~- 4J ,~~. .--~ ~ .~-. ~ '. e ~~ ~~ f~ ~ n v .~ ~.v ~n~~ ~, Q ~~ r J sue' =~ "~ J P~ f ..'' .S 3z r ~, ~. ' J rti r J ,~ ~ ~ .~.~ +~ ~ ~ -C r~ J I v ~ s ~ _r ~ ^~-^" U ~+ w U J .^". +. O `.: ''' =~~-, ~..+ ~ ~' 3 c =~ ~ ~ >, ~ ;~, ~ r ~~ L, f ' ~ zZ. fi ~~ ~ ,~ ~. ~„ w s ... J } U ~ ~~ c ~ ~+ r j ~ t+ V ~ ~ ~ ~ © J L +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a `~ J L !!: ~ ~ b-0 '~ '"' ~ ~' r C ,.J ~ *+" J..A ~, ~.~m,y..~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ;.,, ~ ++ J ~* U V y ^.J ~~• ~ ~ J ~'c~ ~ ~ Sri ~" ~ J _ J ~ i. cr, ~ :~ ~. _ v o~~_,~~c ~-~ ~., ~~ ~~3 _. >, ~ = c ~~~ v~ ': , ~> ~"~ ~~. ~. ~~~~~o~ > c.. ~ ra , F-~ W c, ~NH N t''; ~~ V'r v 1 ~~ W ~ ~' a ~ ~ ~ `' ~ j} ~ ~ ^fi ~O \v ~ y. ~~~... ~ W Q ~ ~ ~~1 L^i Y~~M w Q ~I ~I ~ i~, ~,3 .~~ ~. r-~ ~ _.s :: ~~ ~e ~~Ll. j s i.~ ~ k, ~ ~~~ ~~~ tr ,~ _, ~ . ~ ~~t ~. ~. _~~~ 1 4 ~ V ~ Z _~~ -' ~ ~ ~ ~~ UZ f ~~ t~j ~ <~~a ~_-= ~" ; I 4 -~\ V 4~ ~' ~~ ~~.. _,~~ "~..~ ~~~~ e~ `- ,1 } c ~ ~' c _ 'l, ~ r'.n ' ~ ~ J ~ u ~ J ti J r ?e ~ ", "~ _ .~ ,~ v ~ _ 1 v ~ ~ ~ J ..~ """ 'J. tr; :+.a _~ .~+ r J G3 J -~ G. ~ .~ r ::. • -: J S^ J -~ ~ C O ~ ~ ~.r ' .' .. ~ ' ? ' l. ^i ~ J ". J ~ ,~.j ~ ~, ~ ~ ,~ f . -~., :J "~"' J ' :~ U 3 . ~ ~ J ~., ' ~ r ~ ~: ~ a, s V `>, :~ :. ~ ~, , .,, ~. Z cf. ~ .v '~ ~' " r -' L *' : .s G v ..q ~ v S-n .~ ^ s '. ~ ~ ~ 'a.~. .~+ `~ v.3 ~ ~ ~li ~ .U .., N ~ a_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G • v ~ ... J S.. :r N ~5 " ~ ~ J '~ J u } U J ~ ~ J J v~ ~, ~ "'I ~, ' • ~ Y~ ~ ~ J ~ r /'~ ZJ-y ~.a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~-~ ^ =~ ~ ^ ~ J ~ ~ ""` ~ ;~ L O J ~~ :"' C r...a w ~ C~1 C' ~,~' J ~l. r~ !-~ r.. .~ ~ .-. J -~-- .. ~-~ A ~ ~ '~~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~° ~ ~3! ~ V1 C/.1 Q {~... ~. w 4 M .~ ' ~ .~ ~ W ~ ... V z -~.s11 ~..1 r !-~ 3 V ~ I ~f ~ V ~~ ~iI `v~y ... 1G~ 7 S.i ~,J ^•J C.i -~- S ~--a W i , U d t ~-~}._ ~=._. ``;'~~. .4 ~_ ~ W ~ '~ ~ L -; ~ { -~ ~, _ ~': ' , ~; f ` ~ g t ::~ ~~ ~, u~. =i :r , .~ ~ ,~ ~ _, ~ ~ ' ~i - .~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~' - ~ ~- ~ { ~., , , .~ ~ w °~~'~' ~~ p _ ~~ } ~5 _i ~~ ~i ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~° ~~ ~~ ` _~ ".~ ~ ,• i 1 J 3 c~ 4 4 t Q .a_~ ~, ~_ ~~ ~ ` `~, ~,~ t`~~- ~° ,~~ I ~_: ~ ~ ~ M~ ~ ~ n_ ~ 3 .~~ ~ - f ~~ ~~' i '` ~ ..... ~ 1 r .. ( ,~ f ~.~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -:~;~ ~ ~_ ;: { .. ~~ ,~- ~.~ ,~ .... ~° --si ~ ~ t. ~~. s n 2 - ;~ - ~ ~J ~ ~ -.. r.i ^~ .~ f r c f /~\ .~ :ti z w c.. C ~( `~ I i ~~ ~~ ~~ `~ i I s~ .O i ;~~i ~ i ~ y~i ~~ ~ ~ ~, ~.,~l~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ . - ti ~ ~ ``~ .~ {~ °4 ~~ ~~ -~ r~ ~ t 1~ ~j o {y~ ~s ~ _ { ) ~~' ~ S.~ C"1 kk ~~ --~ ._~ r ~~ ~~'~ ~~ ~ k r~~ ~ ~ -- ~~ '~ ~ ? _. ~ e ~- ., ~ .. ~~ ~~:. ~. ~- ~ E ~ ~-~ ~ ~ Y~ ~ , w j i ~'G (, t k ~ ~ i t ~~~ j ~a ^+ # _ v,} °.--`{ ~~ ._~ ~ C i `~5... .~ t "`^~ ~ _ _y . `,. ~~ . , ~~ ~ 7~ ~~~-- ~ . 3 __ .~ r ~ ~~~ ~~\ ~ ~ ~., ~~.; ~ I ~" Y ..~ j `~, ~`~ `,~- ~~{ k ,..-~.,,~ `,~-1 ~ k 3 ~ r ~`~~ '.. ~~. Y ~ ~~ Et r ~; W t ~ttte t r `~ f ~ `~ ~( 4 ~~ ~"~ _~ '" -- ~ _ ,~ ~. t }1~ ,~~ `?, -' :.~..= i ~[ i r = ~` ~~ Y; ~_ j ~. ~ Y. . ~~ ~: ~ ~~~ __; `~ '' ~~., °``I ;~"t.~F a ~ ~ ~~ ~ 7 ~ k N ~ ,~, --- ` ~ ~~ r ~~: ~, ~. ~ ~ {~ ~., w a z .~ w z ,~, ~ ~- ~~ { ~ £, ~ a~ ti ~ ~ u, ~ s=, w s. ~ ~ ~ ° '~ • ~ o ~ ~ •~ o N . a~ [~ j, ~ ~ ~, o ~ U 4r `n W es ~ ~ L: . ~ . ~ N o `~ a ~ ~~ o ~ ~ .~ .a ~ ~ o 0 ~> ~ 0 ~~ 3 0 a. 4. o ~ wa°,N ~' ~ ~•~ ~ ~ a as Wv~ o~ U ~ ~~.~ a,~o ~. c~ " ~ ~~ ~ •~ a~ ~ ~ b p, 4, 0 ~o 0 ,~ ~~0 ~ 0 .a Z ... '--, ~ o ~ ~~ .~ ~v o°'o-o~ r o o ''' ~ a~ U '_' ~ '_' W ~, ~ ~ E"'' O Q y U ~ • ~ ,-fl bA ~ O y p f" v~ ,~ '~ ¢, b ;, ~ ice.. ~ ~ Q .~ U ~ U 30•~ ~~'~ ~o~ ~'" N ~ ~ ~ "" '~ ~ ~ ~ v i a~ ~v"~ ~~~ u. ¢, .~ ~. .., ~ U b U ~ bq ~ ~ p., ~ ~ . v, .~ ' ~ b -o ~ ~a o a° a~ N ~ ~• ~ , E-~dW a ~N ~ ~ , ~ '~,~ N ~.~ O ~NMd~' V~l~ R, 3xo w inn p ~' 1 U is ~ a N \\ J d 1 w ~ ~ Z a l c ~ vim d. ~ ~ ~~ .~ `.. W (~ `~ w ° 9, H ~ ,, A cam: ,J _~ M s ~- ,~ O /O it 7 2 ~ I ~ s .r 1 ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~r s ~ ,v ~ ~ N ;,a-- ~L ~ ~ -~ I-~ ~ Q `a ~ Q o o ~ ~ r M ~ ~~ ~, t O ~~ °~ o ~. ~, ~ o 'C ~~ ~ N ~ F'" ,~' ~ ice. U O s"..' +U'' O ~ W U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ p 0.. N u. b o~ ° .~ .~ °~ ~ ~, ~, .~-, ..U~ .., U ,.G ~„" o ° ~ ~~ ;~ •~o .-, O O •+ ~ > ~ -~ ~ "" o °~, v~ 3 °o ~ • a, 4, ~, on w ° ~ .~ W v~ U ~ ~ °A o Q 'CS c~ ~ o '~ ~ ..d .~ ~ O U ~ . ~ Ri Rr ~ ~ .N.. N Q U .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ° ~ ~ ,~ >, • ~ a~ ~ v ~ ~ ~a o •.. ,~ -o ~ o a°n o c}, ° U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ b4 "' ~ W ~ ~ ti ° ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ O U ~ ° i.. ~ .~ o ~ ~ ~ }„ ~ O ,., t~ O p ~ i., N bA ~ N ~ ~, ~~, 4-+ . ,-~ U ~ ~ ~ "C7 ~ , ~ y U O ~ 3 0 '~ ~ O ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ a v~ N ,., 'b o~~ ~~~.~~~ ~ U O ~ ^~ ~ ,-~ ~, •~,oo a,Q ~~.~o~,~ U dob ~ o ~ ~ ~ o ~~ a~ x ~ ~ O ~--~NMd' v'~~ ~ t3~ x o 3 W ~ ~- A J- (~ o~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ N` _t \~ V I _ ~~ W a y ~ 1 .~ ^^~~~- J~ V w s S z `° ei ~ W~ ~ ~ cz'- A 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ``~ J ~'~'~a ~ ~! ~1 N `~ °~ ~~~M U d O b ~ ~ °3 a~ 0 ~~ a~ ' o U •~ ~i 'd U ~" ~ ~ N ~ ~ O ~ ~ O 4-r rn ~ U ~ 3 ~w ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ a.b ~ ~ ~ '_' ~~ .~ c~ ~0 ~ •O N ~ ~ 'd cd ~ ~ N O 0.4. on w ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~ o a i ~ ~ .~ ~ . ~. 'bo ~ ~ ~ a Q .. . ~ ~ ~ ~, ~. . ~ d ~ ~, o ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O '~ bUA~ cd y~ O > ~•~ ~~,0 ~ N bA v 'C ~ -d k , ~ O p ' ~ ~ v~ ~ ` ~ c++d O vNi ~ ' t1, 3 ~~ ° ~ b b•~~ U ' ° ~ ~' .~ N o ~ ~ ~ w ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ .~ U U .., a~ U .., y ,o ~ ~~ ,^_, U U .. ~ .~ ^' b O :., ~ .~ U ~ ~ a~ °~ ~ -~ ~ ~ 'rs . ~ . ~ p •~o ~~. o~~ a i.Q a~ ~d abo ~ ~:~ ~ HdW Cs. ~N ~ a~ ~ a~ ~ .~ O ~ N M ~ V~1 ~ Ll. ~j O r7 x w~ O~ ~ ~° N W F~ ~~ M Z ~ 9 J 1~ ' I- M o. -'~ ,,~^^ V )) ~./ C~ °-~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ G1 ~ W ~ C ~ c~' S ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .__._ ~~ A ~ ~~ ~~~~ 1 O l 03/10/2010 13:27 5206824454 b 0 a 3 ~. y b a ,~ .'~ ss. ~ w i 0 -d •~ N J ~ v ~ O ~ ~ H. ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~' O ~ w ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~'d .~ ~ y ~ ~-~ ~ -fig ~ ~ ° ~ y N ? +~ °' N o J ~i.va pip ~o'.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y .~ ~ p c~ ~ p~ o o ~ .a° as .~ a Wv~ ~ ~ ~°~°~o ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ '~ ~~ .5~ ~°da. a ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~w Q > `'~ '~ w a ro c°~ '6b „ ~ -v a, ° ° ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ •°o ~ ~~ `"~~~oa~o ~ ~z ~~~~"3 ~ o ~~ X4004 ~ ~~ ~-~~m~~~ oo ~ ~~~ b.~~ o~ ~-~ Q p U '+~ ~ 4ai b '~ y~ Gi ~ o~ e4 b r~i $ ~+ w ~ y' O ~ 'C7 ~ ro [ Q, b v, .v' ~QW~ ~~~ ~~ ~ '~~ Q ~NMV~' v~i~O ~ ~ i.'+ axo RAMIREZ AUTO CARRIER PAGE 01101 a~ A ~ ~ M _ or r ~ ~ `~ N ~` ~J a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ , ~ ~ -~ -~ ~ A ~ 0 ~ ,f M M F ~ ~ s 3 t~ rl In ~ ~ l~ C/a ~ y Q ~ ~ (C,IC\ ..~ G7' ~., ~~ S ,~ ~ M ~ ~ > .~~ o o -• ~ ..- ~ ~ N z ~, ~ ~ ~ Q J ` ` 0 p. ~ c~ ~„ ~ M l1~ jl ~ . ~~ ~ o~ i ~~i (n~ V, Q~ ,,r P ~ '~ , o ~ - ~ M M v I 1~ ~ ~~ ~~~ b:i/ lb/ lblb l:i: 'L f 51bb~i14454 I~AM1ktL riU I U L~Kk1tK f F;Cit b1J a1 ap~p O q ~ tZ. O h 'O Q. aU il. ~ ~ U ~ ~~ '~ a~ F~ ~, ~' ~ ~• ~ ~; o ~ ~° ~ ~ U ~ vi W ~ ce ~ ~ .~ ~ .~ ~ c. ~ ~ Q `~ ° ..~ ~ -~ g ~ ~ O N vii ~ F+ Q" ~ ~. v~ ~ ~ 0 5 a ~,., ~, ~, ~, ~ o.o .~ ~ ~ ~~ .~ _~ -d ~ ~, o ~ ~~ a~ ~~'~i~3 ~ ~w W ~~E Q y `.~ •~ c~, a, .ti o Vic ~ ~' m ~~ °: ~ y ~ oc ~ o ;~ t* ~.. p w ~a ~ ~ '~ 3 '¢ w° on 0 0v; ~,,, ~ ~ ~ C ao a N • ~ 'Lj ~ G"r V y ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ U a~ c`~ '~'' u ^. ~~~~ ~~, S], ~ ~ .O ~ ... ~ ~a,~ a~ Q~~o~ ~' ~ ~ .D p ~ N c+i of v1 ~O axo ,' O.i ~ ~ N 'J ~ A~ ~ ~ F y 3 ~ 4 r w , A h ~~ °3 0 o ~~ a~ ~. o ~ ~ O N a v O ~ ~'' O ~ ~ ~., ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ d ,,., W ~ ~ V ,~ ,~ o ~ a ° ~ a o~ •~ ~w w ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ° U ~ -°° ~ •~s ° ° ~ W O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ 0 O •~ ~ 0 o b,o w ° ~ ~ vs °-c ~•~' ~ ~ °o • `~ a ao W v, °~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ' "' ~ Q 'O ~ a ~ ' ~ ~ O ,~ ,c O c X04 a, ~ v ~ ~.~ a~ ~, ` c3 ~b~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ w ~ w=~ o w W a'o o° .sd°'~E, .° h ~ 'a° ~ ~ ~ ~' •~ o i C d ~ ~ ° L . . `~ o ° o ~ .~ ~-~ ~~ ~~,¢o ~ co °'~10 ~3W O ~•. y ~-' ~ O ~~. ~ N ~ ~ Ri W x E.., o ~ ~ v ~ o ~ ~ o° c ~ ~~ (~ a ^~ C N V ' ~ ~' ~ O C/1 O pp E ~ ~~ 'O ~ °'• o A, 30. 3 ~~ ~ ~ ~ . v ~ p a~ w ~ ~, G •~ y~ ~ H =~~ o'~ ~~~= ° z O °-~o •~~ ~~~•a ~ ~ .o ~ ~,.., , ~ o ,~ ,c w •~ ~ A N O. ~ «3 N ~. ~ ~; Q "C! C ~, y ~" E-+d W a,~N H ~ ~ ~x~ y ~ O. 3 o x A ~ '~' M p \J) Ll ti C' ~ `~ ~' N ~ ~ a °° .~ _) n }, WF a F a •L a ... ~~ ~~ ~ .~ -. o _ --_~ ~ ~ .D ~ ~ ~ ~~_ ~ ~ ~~M~~~ ~' A ~I ` ~ I~ M ~ l..~ b ~ . •~ -~ ~. ~. 0 • L'. ~ U 'O 'i, ~ yam„ N U ~ ~ r~+ ~ ' ~ W U ~ ~ ~ ~ o a '~ ~b ~ • ~ ~ O O. ._ . v • .~ .a ~ ~ O • O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ N p ,~ ~ ~ N O 0 ~+ ~ 'r"' bA ~ vi W O ~ 0 .C ~ • ~ ~ + ~- ~ ~ ~ ~~ - ~.~ o~~ ~ ~ `~ w '''"~ W ~ ~ -~ . . • ~ ; ~ RS ~ O C~ L Q C~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ O ^'1i • QQ ,, ~ ~ 1 .ti ~ '~ .~ .» ~ '1•~ ~ 0 i.r ~~ ~. m 0 y ~o~ 0 ~ ~z ~, .~ ~, g c ~ a~ ~ ^~ ~ W ~' c~ F.., O ~ y U ~ L~1 ~ .C bA N O ~ O ~"" ~ ,~ 'O G. 'O N bA ~ ~ ~ "p ~ .~ O 3N 3 '~ ~ ~ ~S ~ a ~ • N p~ W ~ yC? C '~ y~ U ~ G" ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ r .+ a"o y ' y~ ~ p . •r 'do3 CL o4 ~ . , ~~, b~~, b.~.~ o ~° ~ E-+QW L1.,~N E~ ~ ~x .~ O '-+ N M d' +n ~0 ~ CL 3x o _. -~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ N _~ a .~ ~,.i x ~~ z l~ A ~ ~ r Y S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m V ~ ..n _ \ '` W 0 N ~ ~ O ` _~ M nl ~ ~ '~v ~ ~s ~ c ~ .~f'1 °3 a~ o -~ ~. x ~. w o o ~ ' 0 N 'a o 'O i. ~ N U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ i. O `~ U ~ 3 ~n W ~ ~ ~ .~ P? a a, . ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ U N ~ O v'1 0 .~ ~ ~ N O a~ 3 0 c a ° U ~ a, b0 '~ ° a°'. A~ Q~ ~ a ~~ ~n o ,~ ,.o O ~ ~ .. • ~' CLr .+''y ~.+ .uj '~ ' U ~ ` ~3 bo d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ^`= ~ r - o o ~ ~ ~ ~ w o ~ ~ ~ w c ~d ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~'ti~ 3^' ~ o c ~ ~ ~ 00 ~~ 3 W ~" c0 U ~ a Qa ~ b0 F'i O ~ C ~ v~ N O ~ , . ~ t~. "C3 ~ . s.. .+ ~ r ~ N pq E U ^CY U ~~ ^d ~ ,~ U O s. 30. 3 ~ ~ N~ ~oN ~" a ~ m N 't3 U N . y p N w ~ yC? C •~ ~ sU" V .+'. +U-~ U O ~ U .~ ~ .~ ~ a...~ ~~3 00 '~ O ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v o, A . ~ °a, w `" -o ~, ~ ~: ~ .c > a Hdw ~ c N a ~N ,~ H ~ +"C.'~ O U ff ~^~+NMd~' ~~ U O . 3 x o w d- O (` e~ N ~W a A ,~ W l~ r O a U ~ ~« ~ r I `b' '~' ~..i z o , o d ~ -~, g A ~ " J ~~ ~~ o -cs a ~ a c~ ~ .~ 0 U ~ Q -d 'C U H a, ~' 4. ~ v N ° ~ i ~° ~ ~ U ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ Z W ."'~ Vl BFI ~ O O ~ ~-~ ~ ~o w ~ ~ b N ~ ~~ 3 p 0 O O ~ ~ W ~ p ~ W ri U ~ ~. ~ ~ a~' ~ a~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, a~ .~ a O > ~ '~ w .dA.'d ~ ~ ~~' wo~~ ~' ^~o~o ~-o ~"d~~~ c °o .., ~ HQ ~ ~ ~.~oo~.o ~. N pp U 'Lf U 'b X 0 0 3 O .~ ~ N ~ ~ O •~ L1. :~~ ~~ a`~i C v ~'~~ ~, .., .~ NA ~ ~a o'bc ~ ~~.~ FdWC1~ ~N~ a~ ~ u V] ~n~~ ~n ~jU .~ p. ~--+ N M d' v1 ~O r~ r~i O W ~ 1 ~ -.~ ~ ~'' ~ N ~ h ~ r a ~ ~ C~° ~ ~ N G W~ `r a ~~ w v. V! Qom" S „x' S ~'f~s 7 " =. 4 d O --~ 7 ~ ~ ~ CJ ~ ~ .~ ~yL ,J ~~ \ ^ ~l " ^^~11 (V ~ S ~ r/` _ L. ~ ~~ `~ .~ ~ a ~ ~ ^ U s Wy ~ ~ V , ~/ z~ ~ - -~ ~ ~ w~ \ ~ p ~ ~,~ ~ „. ,. 03 ~~ ~x ~ o b ~~ ~ ~ U 4" ~ O ~ G a ~+ ^CS o ~ a.~ U N h ~ O O p o ,~ ao Q~ ¢ ~a'• ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ U ~ ~d aw ~' .~ ~z ~b o ~'' ~ o o~~; E.., o ~ O °~ C N ~ cd ~ ~ 3 0 •~ 3 •~ U ~ ~., ~." ~, ~ ~ `° ' ^' O ~~~ ~ ~, Q ~ N •~ ~. ~~ i~ a 3xo 0 ~, 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ o •~ ~ o yU„ N aS ~ ~, U ~. ~ O ~ ~ ti r. •.+ U 0.. y •~ ~~ ~+ C? . ~ U O O ~ p ~ p ~~+ ~ Sir N , ~ ~ O ~~ w°''~ ~~ •~~$~ U ~' p„ o°'i~'~ a ~~ o~~~ .~ .~ ~~ ~ ~.~~ ~~3 d'~~~ w`~ W•~,~vu, '~~ ws~,-vim ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ >, O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O o 'o~'"n ~ "'~ ~ >, ,~' °~' '~ ~ ~ oc ~ o ~~ ~° ~ b ~, d ~o w°o 4'" U ~ N ~ ~ U .~ ~ .,. ~~ 'b ~ ~ ~ ~ CC3 N ~'' .~.. L"+ U U ~ ~ •--, ',~ ~~ ..~ ~~~ ~ ~ .-~ ~ N Q W a ~ ~ H ~ N M '~t V1 ~O '' J A o P~ ~S v ~° N ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ti z v ~ ~ "VVJJ W z ~ :l \ ~ ~ H , AM\ ^Q ', i s, ~~.~ b ~ a~ °~ o a~ ~ ~ o .., b '~ ~ ~ ~ F" j, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U p ~„ ~., O ~ O ~ W b cn vii W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ v~ ~ ~ p ~ .., +~ ~ 4,, t3. ,-, C? . ~ c~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ai > ~~'' -b ~ O ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 0 0 0 ~ ~ w ~'~ ~ d ~, o °' ~,, ao '~ a Ca ~ ~~ o~.~°~ ¢ -d ~ '-' o -~ .. ~ ~3 ¢bo~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ o ~. '~ ~ ~ o ~ o ....~ ~ o ~z ~~~~~~~.. b 0 o c ~ wo ~ ~ W ~' 3 :~~a~;~w~~t E° o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~q~ ~~°~~~~~ 3 'G ~ ed +' v~ ~ -~ .,. ~ ~ O ~ ~, ~ ~ :~ yam., vi ^" O '"" •-+ it -~~~ ~~o~~~•~ .. ~ .., o •~ oA ~~,~ ow,~ a~u. ~,~¢a,.o ~ o a~ ~ •~ ~~ ~ ~j~ ~ Ott. ^' N M ct v~ ~D r7 x O W ^~1 O VO ~~ ~ ~ N~ ~ C/] A ~i H W~ a N O .~ 7 ~ W ~ N z• ~~i ~ ~i ~ ~~~I ~ w• t ,, ., 03 .~ a rx ~ o 'Z7 '~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ O O vii W o `~ o s-. S~, N N. ~ ~ O O p O a~ d~ °~ ~, y °~ ~ ~ o ~ U ~ ~d 0.i `~-~ 0 ~~ ~z ~~ o ~ ~ U O (~ O ~ ''."' O +~., O ~ N ~ i ~ 3 0 •~ ~ o •~ U ~ •~ ~ ~ a ,~ ~ >-, ~° ~ ~ ~a~ •~, o ~ a aQ ~N~ ~ •~ ~x ~. 3x o ~. 0 o ~ ~ '~ ~ o ~. ~ c~3 ~, O ~. ~ ~ U ~ ~' c~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ a e, . ~ ~ ~-, .N .~ U O .~ O ~ ~ ~ o ~ .-. O 'r-+ .Q'' try .~ O 3 O ~*"' O ~ ~ • ~ sue. p cad Q.ao~ a ~~ O V~•~ ,~ 3 d '~ ~ a ~•~~b ~~ w~'n~ o ~, ~ ~ ~~ 0 0 a~ ,~ ~, o ~ o ~.~~ ~o~b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N •~ ~ '~ O N ti 'b O O U O ~ !S, -d ....~ o '~ .r ~, V O ~ ~ ..., O ~~~~~3~ .'., ~~~ o~~ ~ ~~ao~o~ w 'J ~ ~ "' ~l ~ ~- a ~ ~e° `~ c~ ~ ~ N ~~ A W !~ ~~ z C7 .~ W E-~~wa, ~N~ EW.+ ~ N M ~ V1 ~ 2 3 YI t~ ~~^ YJ 4 ~? T . ~ ~' ~" ~~ M M (J L ~~ 3 U w -~ c... W J -~ -_,,, o ~- ____ ~- ~ r~~ ~ O ` ~ .~ ~, °~ o o .~ ~ ~,x ~, ~ ~ U "Cy ~ ~ •~ O [~ V ~ ~" N >, ~ °~' , ~o ~ ~ o W ~ q o~ ~ ~ ~ W o U ~ ~ ~ ~ U ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z o~ ~b . a ~ ~ a ° ~ a .~ '„ ~ w . ~ ~ c a V .~ ,~ ~ ~. ,_.., ~ • ~ °o 0 ~ ~ fJ, ~ > o y . a. ,~, .~ -.ti s U O ~ u, v1 cd ~ N O 3 °o w '> a o o ,~ ~ ~• ~ ,~ ~ om w Q ' ~~ ~~~~ .. o ~ ~ z d~ , • .~ ~ a a ~~ ~ a~ ~ ~3 d'~~~ • . ~ Z U ~ ~ a' ~ ~ o ~ ~ L ~ ~ aw ~ 4. o ~oo ~ 7 W ~ ~ ~ •~~~~~ ~ ~, ~ . d ~ ~.'.,~ ~o ~b ~ ~ W 3 .~ _ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~" O~ ~,oo O O V ' ~ O~ o~~.~b~b W ; '' ~ y ~, O p O U~ Gj ~ C `~ oo ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a , 3 ~ ., b p a~° ° o a '~•~b°~~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ C ~w ~ ~. Z 'ate ss, .~ ~. ~~~~~~a . ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 0 wo • ~'" p ~ ~ ~ cd ~ ""' "' N ~ ~ ~ ~Q ~~, ~ -o ~o ~~ ~~ ~, o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a o ~, ~ .. • ~ ~ N Hdwa N~ ~ ~ .~ O ~ O +'.~ O ~NMd' ~~ o~ a~ N ~~~ ~v A d~ W ~ yv `~ ~ Vv ~. , ~~ ~~ W~ z ~, w~ d~ ~ '~ 1 ~~~~~~~G ~~~~~~1~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ ~ r ~ `~ s T ~ T v b ~' ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~" V ~ ~ ~••~ •~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~J -; ~ ~~ C S ~o ~M N ~ ` !"` ~ ~ 3 ~ . o ~ o o ~ ~ . ~ U b ~ cC ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ W O U ~ ~ ~' ~ c~ ~ ~ o a . a~ ~ ~ti ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ a+ y., ~ ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ . O N + + O ~~ c~ 3 O 0~ • > ~,~ ~•N ~ ~ o ~. °'~ ~ ~ ~. ~ Q ~ ~ ~ o~,~~ .~ > o •~ ~ w u, -d b o ~ d ~ .-, ~ ° ~.~.~ ~°o " o o ~ ~~~ ~~~ ° O ° ~ ~ 3 W w 3 ~ ~ a~ ~ f-~ O ~ ~ U . ~ CA .~ .~ bA O O v~ p s-, v~ .~ ~ t~ 'G '''' ~~ ~ O p ~ O~ y ~ ~ ~ '~ r'i U 0 ~ ~ ~ O TS . ~ •d O '~ ,~, ~ O V • V~ ~; O ~ N ~. ~ U V O ,,., ~~ o ~ ~ ° b o 3 ao n. '~ °~ ~:~Q ~~W a~° ~ ~~~ .fl ~ •~ N M t ~ p x o w ~~ ~ ~ r ~~ ~ ~ c'1 ,~ N ~ . ~ ~' W ~~ A _ , O) ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ d z ~ ~` _ ~, S ~1 lS~ o lY ~' ~ .,. ~~ d V ~a . ~ • J ~ w r~ v --~ ~ v o s o -.~. ~~~ ~ M ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ (~ ~ n ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f o ~ ~ ~ ~ ---r- ~~ ~~ ~`~ o A ~` ~ ~ s3. 0 0 ~ on w ~ ,v ~ F+ N ~ ~ ~ ~/> .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ 'b i .~° `~ d '~ ~ "" o° ,~ ,,~ ~ ~~ w ~~-~ .,0, ~.~ w ~~ O ~ ^. >, o ~ ~ ~~,~ o }' ~ .'J t. U ~ OUA '~ 3 w ~ as ~_ ~n N 3 ~ ~ U .~ ~ ~ i, ~ ~ W cad U }' .,~.~ t-." U U '~ U ~ U ~ ~ ~ F. U ..+ ~ t, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p~.L" ~ ~~ °'~a,~~oa~ ~~~;~ ~dWa..~N~ H~ ~ ~ x .i') OL'1. ,~ N M Vim-. ~ ~ ~ A ~.. ~ x o ~ Y1 r1n S'~ \ 1 z ,~. ... u h sb:e.~ ~ ~rl~ ° a~ 0 ~ ,~ ~ 3 °~~' -a s~, ~ an ~ ~ ~ o b ~ ° H ~, ~ `~ ~ ~. o ~ ~ ~. o '" o ~ °` ~ v ~ 3 w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ . .O°. -~ a ~ a, ~ •~ 4. a~ i .~ ~ o ~ ~~ ~ ~° °~ ~ °~ ~ .. - ~ ~ o > 1 ~, ~ • ~ w.~~ w ss. b ~ ~ ~ °"~ ~ ~ ° ' ~ ? o ~ ~ aw ~ o ~ 0 0 o a~ ~ .~ .~ ~ ^, O N , ~ ~ ~ O U 'C3 ~ ~ 3° ~~~ v w_ ° CQ ~ .~ dq E.., o C ~ ~ , . o ~ ts. ~ N ~ b4 ~ 4-. ~ U *C3 >C O 'd U O 3 0 '~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ° a~i ° o. 3 v ~ N ~ 0 ~, ~ ~ .~ N ~ ~ ~ O U P o~ O r-, U o ~ 'o 3 u. •~ o ~ ~, w •~ ~ ~ 0 .~..~ ~ on ~ ~ o b ~ ~ ~ ' '~o ~ ~~~ ~ ~ °~ q ~ ~ '" • ~dW w ~N H ° ~ ° ~ a~ .~ O _ ~ N M ~ ~ ~ ~. L1. 3xo ~l A ~ ~~ O ~ ~._. a ~ 1`r ~~ N ~ ~. ._ _ `- k ~ ~ A ~ 3 ~ s ~ w ~ ~° ~ ~ ~ ~, ~` g ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~,, ~ ~ a~ ~~ J ~ W ~~ z F A N•, ~~ 1 n~ V , ~~ ~ ~ \ _ ,,\ l.J~ M l ~. ~. ~l ~ s ~ ~ V J rn r_ V ~ . ~ - ~, - o ~i ,~~ ~ ~~ ~I ~ -~I ~o ,N 3 ~ ~ `~ s 5 p _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~--~ M o~ o A ~~ ~ O ° a o •~ ~ ° ~ o ~ ~ ~ a~i ~ o ~ ~ ~. o ~ o ~ ~ vii W U ~ ti ~ ~ ~ ~ is ~, ~ ~ • ~ :~ °o. -d s~ ~ o ~ •~ ~ ~ c p s~..-~ ,..,., ... U qd U 4 ~ ~ O ~ O~ cad O N O W 3 0 ~~ •~~o~ dO U ~ a.ooo'~ ~ ~ U .v O cti ,., O ~ ~ ~ O c~ '~~ _y a ~ ~.•~ ~ • ~ • V ~~ ~" y ~'~.Cb cd U 4a Lta . ~ ~"' C o ~ `~' ' ~ w a -d ~ ~ ~ >' ° ~ ~ ao 00 ~~o~ p ''~ F ~~ ~o~~,~~~b z ~v~~'"~ o ~7 o a~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ w ~ ~ o ~ y pUjD '~ 3 W ~' ~ Fo"' o ~ ~ ~ • ~ CA ~ p ~ y 4 ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ U •.~ o ~ UO.~ ~~ ~ ~ O W ~ , n •o a~ ss. Q a~ ~ d ~ 'b o ~, ~•~~ F-~QWa. N~ F ~ ~ a~ ~ ~~ 0t1. ~NM~ ~~ A ~. ~ ~x o T ~ ~ ~~ r ~ 3 ~Jf I~ ~ u~ ,„~ Z v ~ ~~.1 S ~ ~ r ~ ~`1 r ,.~ I "I i I ~ `may ~~ .:;G ~ v .' f ' ~ ~ ~ l;1 ~~; 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ 4 M M s a ,;~ b °' ~ o 3 ~. ~~ ~x ~, w O 'C ~ O ~0., ~ N ;J ~ ~" ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ 0 ~ 4. °p` `~ U ~ 3 d ~w ~ ~ ~ , ~ e~ o '~ a. . ~ a, .~ ~ ~ ~„ ~ ^, N ~, ,~ U 4, O J ~~ ~ '~~ ° 3 0 W a ao ~~ Q.,~~ ~ A d '~ .~ ;~ $ '~ 'bb 'd z ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ 'a~ ~ a ~~ •~~. ~~~ ~ b a d of w ~ ~ w~ ~ w~b ~ ~ 7 ~ o o L a,o 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ,~ ~ bo ,~ a`~i ~ ~, • ~ ~ d o , '",, ~ ~ ~ °o °~ ~ 0 ~~i0 ~w W 3 O ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~, ~ ~o ~ O V o ~•N '•~ O~ ~~ ~b ~ W °~ ~oo ~ . ~~ a ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~o • o a 30.E ~ ~ ~ o N r O i : ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~' U y O H O ,,,~ ~ V "' O Z ~ a ~ .~'.~ c~ ~ .. "CS V . ts+ ~ bA ~. ~ • ~ ~ c~C ~ O ..~ ~ N W ~oo ' Q ~,~ d ow~ o ~; a~ Q, ~ ¢ • :~ ~ ~ ~ E-~ d W ~ p a c -~f N ~ ~ . a~ ~ a, ~ .O 00. ~ N M ~t ~ ~O O xi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M o ~ ~ ~` ~ ~ ~„ ~ ~ ~ N p° oo ~° CEO M D nth ~`~ 4 -a -,. ~^ ~ ~, VWW~ r \ ~, L a A ~~ f ~ ` H 3 ~ , ~ ,,,, ('' N .~ W z vi N >° - ~ ~' ~~ A f`n ~~ C~ ~ ~ ~ c~ c(7 C: N °3 ~ 0 ~b u. c~ o ~ o b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ as ~ °' •-' ~. ti '~ o .~ ~, ~,., ~-~ ~ ~o ~o ~ ~ ~ ~ , w ~~ Aq ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,~ , , ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ w w a o 0 0 ~' ~ ,~ o o b ~. ti ... ' bo ~ .~ ~ ~ b o ~ 0 i~.i {(a~yifo ~ w~~~.1 ~. ~ ~ (O wa ~ C~ y~cw~ 3w ~ ~Q~ o ~ ~,~~ ~ ~, ° . ~~ ~ L' cV qp , ~w o ~ 'L~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ O ~ 3 N %~ ~ V O y .~~~ U.w..a ~~U ~ ~a ~ ~'~ . b ~ o ~ on ,~ ~" N ~+ ~ p^~ N N .y +~-'~ ~ ~ ~~-+NM~ V~'~~ ~ a O ~: A ,~ 0 N r/1 n li A ~ ~- W ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ V' ~ '~ ~ ~ ' " VO ~Do .-~. 3 ~~ ~, l ~ ~ ~~ ~°~ g N ~i. ^~ s a~~"I~-I MI nl ~1 ~ ~I~`~ ~ ;`~ b ~~ ~~ o b ~.x. ~, ~ ° 'C3 • ~ ~ U o N N E..y >:, ~ ,,. ~ Lam. ~ ~ ~ s.. ~ 44 o ~ i U ~ v, v i W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ a. ~, ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a" • 'N ~ , ~ U 4; O • •--• O cad ;-~ O O •-+ 3 w ° ~' 0 0 io >, o N ° ~ ~•~ ~ ~ o ~v°~ U ~ ~ °A o ~ Q ~ ~~ o~~ .~ ~ .~ O ~ ~ G4 Q+'G U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ a. o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ • on . • „ ,~ . ~, b ~ ~ {~ ~ ~ 4r ~ o ~ ~ C ~ U .-~ y "' .-~ W-+ ~ r 1 ~ ~ ~ y~y~ ~ ~ RS O ~~ Uj ~ .~ O ~ O 3••' ~ s-~ '~ ~ ~~1- • 'd _ N~ U b N ~ ~ f o N U p ~ • ~ ° 3 ~ ti Ts ~ ~ r + ~ v ° ~ p+ ~ ~ ~ ° v ....b o ~ . p N ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ U .~ U U _O ~ N ~ ~ O ~., ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 b aQo ~~ ~~ ~~~ b ~ ~ •~ ~ ~~ ~.~.~ o .~oQ ~,~ ~ owe o ~ ~ ~ ' ~dW a ~cNV ~ o ~ o x ~ .~ O -~+ N M dam" V~'t ~ ~, ff, ~ o x J ~ M ~ ~ s~ ~ ~~ ~~ ti° c>° N ~~ !y ~ ~ W~ a W .~ ~ z~~ ~- F _... d'i A~ ao ~~~bbb /Y ,~ r~r ( ~ ~` ~ J U.-rr `v~ L U ~ ~ , '~ ~ . ~ ~ W vJ~, o ~ i~ ~~ `Y' C~ ~_ z C ~~ L A M ,~ ~I 6 O ~ ~ 0 0 1' ~~ j N ~ U 3 ~, t-~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -o ' ~ ~ ~? o ~ ~ 4, ~ v ~., o ~ o ~ ~" ~ W U °~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o a+ • ~ a, -ts ~ ~ , ~..•-. •-. ,~ ~ N •~ U O O • ~; ~ o ~~, ~ . ° "" 3 0 o a >, oo w ° ~ a~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~~ ~ : ~ ~3 b~ ~ '.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~.,~ ~ ~ a, W . ~ ~ 'd o ~ ` ~ ~ ~ w s~, -d ~ v > ai ~ ~ 0 O ~ ~ Q" O O O ,~ ' iU, ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ' ~ RS ~,~ ~ 'd ~. . O "' ^" ~ ~, ~ ~ O U cd O O .b ~r + U 4 ~~~' ~ ~ ~, ~ W O b04 -, ~ ~ a~ pp ""' ~ W ~ r ~ U ° W ~ b E..., O~' ~ a . A .~ O d ' ~ ~ 4O ~ ~ U ~ 30. b~ o~ ~ 3 ~ o ' ~ ~•~~ ~ °~~ ~ ~ o a~w cc~, ~ .~ ~ °' ° •~, U N U ., N ,~ ~ U .-r ~ UO ~ ~-- o a - • ~ ~ v ~ 0 3 ~ aq 4. ~ ~ ~, o ~ .b ~ ~ o ~ ~~~ .a O ~--~ N M ~ N ~ U ~ x o W s- ~ ~ N~ ~ ~' ~ ~ 0~ N .~ .r l~ A ~ A ~ WW3 a~ ~~ ~ O v 4 1 ~ ~ ~~ 0 ~~ ~~ ~~ ~. W ~ ~~ za Q 3 M ~' Y~ EW., q A~ M z o ~ ~ ~, ~ m ~ ~ M ao ti ~~ ~o ....''~. C l~ '~1,. ~, o ti ~ C ~. v ,,~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~' ,~ _,, ~~ ,CIJ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o~ r~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~•, c~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ -ri a. on a ~ o '~ U ~ O b '~'" N c~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ 3 v~ W ~ a~i ~ a ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ a a v~ O ~ ~ p N O ss, rn 3 p o 5 t3. c~., W v, ,~ °o ,~ ~~ .~-~~~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o o ~ cH ~ W ~ '~ ^~ .~ o ~,, ,tea b 3 Vc° ~"~' ~o~~ w a o 0 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~z ..,.... ,~~ ~~ ao'd~~~ ~ °o ~, ~ O o4 o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c~ 0 ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~~ ~~~~~.~o ~.. O a 3 ° ~ 'b ~ o U b ~ ..y. ~, V N C~ w y "~' O U L~ N ' c~ ~ F-+ ~ W t~1r .-+ N t-{ +~.a Q •--~NMd' ~~O w 3x o v~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ w ~~ vQ N "~C y H3 W ~ ~, ~~ a~ C~7 tf z-~ v~ _~ c' :.J ~~ ~ ~~ d :~ r 1 v 0 ~~ ~-~ 0 O 0 v~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ °3 ~b a~ C U " ~ ~"" ~ H ~ ~ O d' ~ W U ~~ z ~ ~, a a ¢, U .~ -$~' ~ ~' ~ ti~ a ~' o vs o ,~ a a~ w A z ~ ~ ~~ ~ U~ O ~ G7 a o a ~~ z z ~ -~ °~ U 0 ~ ~o ~ -~ o ~o ~ ~ '" c~ ~ s a 3N O .--~ ~ 0 ~~~ a ~~~ % Q O Z .~,~~ o ~ ~, ~, H .~~~ a .~ N, A ~~ ~ ~~~ 3x o ~. 0 ~, ~ o ~ ~ •~ O N ~~~...,,, cC ~ ~ ~ ~. w U° ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ a. ~ •.. a, ~ ~ ~ .~ U W ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 • c ~ 3 c o '> ~ ~'~ N ~ ~, ~ U °~,' ~ •~ o ~,,, w ~ ~ a 0 ~, ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ wss.b ° ~ ~ ~ ~, o 0 ~~~ ' ~ ~~~ ~ ~• ~ ~ ~ ~° ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ o ~~~ ~ ~° 0 °~ ~; ~w~ ~~ ~ g•~ ~~ o a o~~ .~~a~ >,oo w'~ °' a~~ '~ a~i •~ ~ p ~i `~ ~ y ~ y ...r "C .--~ N v~ V W Lr" O ~ ~ ,~ y V ^~ ~ U o ti cd ~ b ~ Q" .~ o ~ ~ .~ .~ ~~~ ~ a, ~ ~ ~~w ~~ ^ o a a~, ~N a ~ ~ o~ V ~ N ~'o ~ ~ ~ ~ S`~ ~ C)o ~ , p a ~g PO Ww ~l a~ ~~ .a v ~~~ _v' .~ z ~) - c ~ a ~ Q H `~ A ~ ~ o cn c~1~l~i ~ 1 ~ ~ N ~ ~ o ~b ~ ~ ~ O O .~ -b •C ~ ~ [-' N ~ N H ~ 4-r ~ ~ ~ r-+ ~ ~ ~ Fw w° o°~ ~ U ~ 3 '~ W ~ cd a~i ~ ,,,, c3 °~ ~ ~w w O, ,~ ,~ ..-. U O .~ °~ ~ g~ ~> a ~, -~ o .~ o ~ a ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~~ ~ a a~ .~ ~ ~ a o~ •~'~ r~,~-d a w ~ ~~ o 0 o a~ o `' ~ ~ ° ~ a~ ~ '~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~o o ~ > ~~ o blC~,Ti ~ a i ~ ~, O p w ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~,; v ~ C N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... U ~ ~ .~ ~ , O O •~ 'd ~ U ~ h O. ~ . U C~ .-+ d" ~ ~ • ss, O. ~ ~. ~ .... ~ U ~ ~ ~ bA •v ~ '~ . ~ ... o b ' ~~ o~o ~ ~ Q ~.~.~ a ~~W a. ~N E~-~ ~~ ~ +'~-' ,p O ~ N M ~ ~ ~ N N ~ ~x o W ~h' AI O ~ ~ N ~,- I w uJ ~ ~~ A a S W 1 _~ ~~~ z ~~ ~~ .~ ~. ~ ° ^p 'f., ~ N o N U H ~ ~ ~ U O ~ '''' O ~ W U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o a , a~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~..-'' -+ • N ~ , ~ U ~, O . +'~ + '~ ~ ~ p ' . U j ~ Q. ~ .. .~ ~ ~ ~ 0 N .O 3 0 ~~~ ~ ~ ~ $ i 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ p, Q ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~,~ w~.~ ~. a o c o ~ ~ ° ~° ~ '~~ ~~ 7 i-i N ~~ V1 O y O I~ ~' ° ° .V ~ (~ rl i _I ~ ~ (,~,.~ W r1 ~ M Y ~i ~ '~ 3 W ~ ~s o ^. ~ ,~ ° ~ ~ ~" ~ ~ ~ F-~ o ~ yo O ~ U O s"' ~ .~ o ~blQ. ~ '~ }' O~ ~ ~ O p ~ ~ ~ ~ N bA ~ ~ T3 y ,O O 3 0'~ ~ ~ ~' o U ~'j s o ~'' ~ N ~ ~ N t; ~, U~ y .~ U N c~ p CJ 40, ~ ~ e,+., ~ U ~ "" s. U U ~ U :~ ~ U ~~ ~~ ..,. N ~ a" ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ y j s~. ~' ~. . ~ ~ ~ ~ 'b ~ 3 an :~ ~o ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ 'v~ O ~ c~ ~ ,~ p ~ .s." ~ ~• ~ Hd W a.`~N ~ ~ ~~~ ~ O ~-+NMd' v1~O ~ S~. " ~, O w ~ ~ a~ N 1~' ~~ ~ ~~ A (_ V ,~ T J \ v m ,q`~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~v~ ~ ~~ ~' •~ 4 w ` ~v ~ v ~~ C...~T r '~( G N ~+ ,` .~ ; '~ ~`~, W J z~ \ ~ ~ ~~ a ~ c~ ~n ~' ~ \~ .-- Cam' 1 ~.--' s ~; ~ -~ \~ ~~ ' ~ ~I A ~ a~ ° 3 °~ a~ ~ ~, u, a: ~ ~ ~ ~ o •~ '~ 's=, ~ tom, o N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4-i ~ ~ + N ~ 3 -i ~ ~ o ~ ~ U b W ~~ ~ ~ ~~. -~ : •~ i CCS ° r , w c, d a ~ n, -d ~ A,~ •.. .~ ~ U ~ O a~ ~ ~ ~ o .~ o ~ .s > ~ ~° .~ o 3 0 ° 0 0 ,,?~ ~ w a i ,~ ~ o~ ~,~ ~ ~ ... ~ ° a~ ~ O'o U °~ ~,~~ a d -cs ~ ' o _y ~i `'D Qr ~ ~ .. ~ U ~ >, a~ ~ 3 . ~ d '~ ~ ~ p. o > . ~ ~ w cs, ..d o ~ a. 0 ~ 0 0 ,~ ~ °~' ~ ° .~° ~ ,.~ ~ cup ~ ~ `~ >, • ~ ro ~, `~ ~ -" '_' c i o ' o W ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w a~ "~.- ~ E ~ °'o ° ~ . o ~ ~ ~ o -~'~~a ~ ~ 30.~ °~~~ ~o~ s~. ~ .~ o ti a~ .. ~ ~, ° v, a ~' o ~~~ ~03 ~ ~:~:~ ~dw a ~N H , ~~~ ~ ~ Oil, ~ N M d' ~ ~O O x A ~ ~ 1y O l~0 ~' 1 a N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '\ 3 ~~ w ~ ~ v ~ ~ _ '~ ~.V ~I ~ W ~.! .A z -~ w ~ M b ~ a~ 3 a~ ~ . ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ° o ~ •~ o ^j '~ ~ H yU., `~ N ~ U O >, ~ ''' O W o ~ °' w U ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~; ~ a ~ ~ ~b •.., w ~ ~ _N , ~ U O N N ~ ~ O ~ ~ , .-. ~ ~+ ~ '~ N O °o. v~ cd 3 p O 4, ... ~ u. 4, o ~ ~ w o ~ b ~.. ~ ~ ~-' +-, .~ O ~ ~ , ~ ~ 00 ~ W rn U ~ ~ cA o ~ ., '~ ,~ ~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ >, ~ ,~ 3 Q 'b ~ ~ s=, ~~ w ~ ~ -d U ~ ~" ~ `~ o ~ ° ' ~Q ~~ °~~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~, ~, o ~ ~ o ~.~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~, 3 W ~ ~ ~' U ~ ~ fl bA H o s- U O ~ y p i"' ~ . +'~ O ~ 'CI Q. ~ 't7 ~"' ~ N A O p ~ N~ ~ O c'~1 pp U 'C3 U "O y .O O 30'~ ~~~ ~o~ ~'' p ~~ ~ ; ~ c~V ~ ~ ~ " s ~ y,y ~ " -' U ¢ ~" 3-r .~-~ ~ U ~S"'. U ~ bJ) ~ ~~°Q a~~ ~~ ~~ o~.~ o~o a~ ~:~ ~ a ~~w a ~N ~ ~x ~ ~.D ~ r-+N Md' NAG O r~i A °~- O (~- N ~ ao A H W H mod' .~ W z H A ~~~~ VI ~ •I \ O ----' ~ ~. ~~ N 1 3 1i1 J ~ i ~. -,d `~ /_ c ~~ °~ o .~ ~, ~' ~ ° ' o ~ U •~ o ~ ~ N E"' j, ~ N ~ U O ~ ~' O 4-~ W U °~' 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ •'., , a~ o a ~ y o ~ ~ ~ ; • ~ 4 U N .~ -O ~, ~ O ~ O ~ N 0 O ~ r~. v~ ~ 3 ~ N $ o O ' S s~, 4., ~ w ~ N ~.. Wv°~ U ~ s~,°'~o ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d .~ >, ~ ~ o~ N ~ ^ >, a o o O ,~ ~ ~ °~• ~° o~ ~~'o ~, d ° o°o -~ ~ ~ , ~ .-~ W r U . y v, ~ O ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ '~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~ ~ ~ U C N pA . U '~3 ~ ? B O O 30•~ ~ N 3 ~ ~~ 'O ~ ~ ~0~ v ~'" .~ ~ ~k ~ 'O "" .~ N ~ O ~ .-' om' ~ v~ N •~ U~ ~ v .`*.. y ". ~ N ~ o •~ ~ ¢~ ~ i.+ ..~.. U :~o ~~~ ~ ~ ~ Ts.~ "" oQ tea, ,~~,~ N~d o ~~ Q•~o ~ ; ~, ~ .~~ ~dw o a ~N ~ N ~ N .~ 0 ~~~~ ~~ •-+NMd' V1~O ~ 0. O xi ~I~~~I~ S W , ~~ c L M ~ 4 .1 _ / ~ V .~-' •--~ J S y t ~ W ...-' ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~ o d ~ ~ ~ \ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G ~- r ~ Q. w o . ~ N ~ ~ ~ o 'C3 ' ~ ~ N 4, ..~ o ~, o ~ o ~ N ~ ~ `~'~ °~ w U °' 3 ~ x ~a a, ~ ~ ~ ~" 'b ~, .~ O ~' ~y is ~' p A ~ N N ~ Li O 'di _ 3 0 ~~ p~ ~q s~, v~ o ~ ~ ~ u'. ~~ c~S rn ¢.~ ~•~ g.~ .~ x a~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ 0 3 ~ ~ o > ~ '~ w s3. -d O ~ ~ 'a"• o 0 0 °~' ~ ° ~° ~ •.. o '~ ~ o ~" F+ ~ dAL+ .b ~ Qtrr' ~ ~ ~ L O ~ . ~ N cr3 .~ ! ~ '~ ,' , ... ~ ... U "'' w ~ N _ E-'O ~ ~ V.~~'~ O ~ yy,~ ~ W O~ O ti y ~ 1J ° ~ ~ 30.E ~~~~o~a~a ~ ~ ~ o i ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~, ~ ~ o ~ ~' ~., ~a~ ,~~~b~3~ ~ ~ ~ ~ aL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-+ ~~~~ ~¢wc~. ~~C" w-~ ~ P H ~ ~, ~ v ~ ~ os.~ ~ N M d- ~n ~ A '~ ~ ~/~ cam, ~ x o ~cs ° a~ °3 ~' 0 ~; ~, ~~ w ~ ° ' ~ ~ o .b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ W U ~ ~ cd ~~ ~S", ~ + .,~., N p ~ •, L~r N ~ ~."d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~'' .~ , ~ U O ~ ~ ~ C O • ~ O ~ ~ ~ p > ~ ~ . . 3 0 ° 0 0 >, ao w ~ ° ~ W v~ U ~ ~ o ~ .~ ~~ wab o 0 0 w~.. o o ~ ~ ~Z ~•~~ ~o,~ .~y o ~ ~ '-' °~ ^-~ '-' W ~' ~ ~ as o ~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ al ~ CA E•••~ o ~ o ° ., ,~ . ~ °~ o ~ _ i..i ~ o .-i 4-r ~ ~ ... U '..' ~ 30. ~ ~~ ~ 3 b ~ ~ ~ U ~ V y"' ~ ' "" ~" ~ V . '~a ~ ° v~ C j ^' 4: ~~ O ~' v ~ ~ N Q _ a~ ° ~1 0 ~ ~~ • ~ a" ~dW o ~ o a ~cv ~ ~ ~~, , ° x a~ ,D O ~ N M '~ ~ ~ ff. O ~i ~~'' O~ a~ N .~ ~-° ~' r ~ ~o ~~ v 0 ~/.! c~ 4 N ~~ A w ~ '~ '~ ~ ~ i Cz7 V ~~ J~ ~ ~ fi ^~ s ~~ .~ w~ ~ z •~ 4 H ~. \ a A ~ N ~^(~ ~- 1 ~ Ol ~ ( V ~ ~ N ~ `~ r ... ~0 ~s ,~ ~ 2 U ~ v ~ ~ -+.. qI ~I ~ `~ -~ N ~ 0 -_ ti 1'`- G ~~ 0 ~~ °~ o ~, u. ~ o ~ ~ ° o -b '~ ~ N U F" ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O w ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ a~ o ~ a, a, .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ U O a~ ~ ~ ~ o • ~ ,~ ~ ~ '~ > ~ .-, o ~~ .-~ ~~ ~ ~ N O 3 0 0 > 0 0 >, ao w ~ ~ ~ ~ d~ o ~ U ~ ~ o a. ~ Q 'C3 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ b 0 ~~ O U c ~ ~ a~ O ~' w . O ~ (~ ~ 'b U ~ ~" cd ~ o ~ i; > ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ., is. o ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~,,, ~, ~ off' .°fl ~ ~: ~ ~' N z ~N~ o ~, ~o o 0 V N ~ ~ W ~ ~ a~ s ~ b ~ ~' U o ~ O ~' . ,,, ~ U N s . N bA 44 • U "C! ~ ° ' . ~ .b iG O p 30.E 3 ~~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ o ~ ~"' ~. ~ cn N N ~ ~ ~ t. b .'" -d U N ~ U ++ .. .~ ~ p y W ~ ~ " ~+ 4 U yU, N ~ O ~ N " ",/ ~ ~ ~ ..~ O a~a o, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ... ° -rs ~. 3 ° bn v a~° ~ ~ ~-o '-' .~ ~°o ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ' N ~+ Q N~ Q ~ 0 ~ 'C p N ~:~:Y Hdw a. ~N ~ ~x~ ~ O ~~~~ ~~ ~ N M d' V1 ~O ~ ~ 3 O x W ~ ~ ^~ ~'1 A~ ~ ~ ~" N `~° AO ~n ~ jo ,,1p ~ Op OL ~_ iJJ ~ 0 \" ~ v~ 1~ ~ ~ }~ A ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ ~ r V ~ ~ E, ~ ~ 2 W ~ ~ ~ .~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ .~ ~.. r. -.~ c~ /fir ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a .~_ ~ ' t"~ ~. ~~ ~ ~ J z y w o ' D 0 ~ ~ Q 4. o 0 0 ~ ~ -d 5 i , ~ T a ~ ~+-~ ~ ~ o ° '~ J -d ' ~ ~' ~o Gj U ~ 3 :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° a .~ N ~ o~ ~ ~-'w 4., ~ Q., ,~ ,_, ~ V O J ~~ cad ~~ O cd N ,~ iy ~ ,~ r.+ In .-+ J °~. v~ 3 $ ~ '~ y o o ~, ao w ~ ~ !~ 4 .~ ~ ' ~ C; ~ 0 cd ~~° U ~d0o ~ ~~ ~3 Q'o~a a ~.." ~ ~ ~.~b ~ .-~ >, o ~ -.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w W F., o o ~ ~~ W~ o~ ~ ctt N ~ N ~ ~ ~ N •~ O pa., 3 0 3 'b ~ ~ V ~ ~ s~ ~ ~ ~, W ~ a. Q ~ o ~ ~ ~. o•~~ a~ ~ o ~,~ OLD. ~NMd~' ~~ ~', O W ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ a N ~ a _. ~ ~~i ~I ~~ a u ~ o~ U \^ J b„p J .~ ~. - ~. 3 ~, , z `~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~` © ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ {`~ (((1 V~J M `J n 4 .p ~, . 3 ~ ~. (~ ~ 1~ (~~ J -,~) `' °~ ~~ o a ~ ~+-• ~ o ~ ~~ b ~~ ~ .Q a ~ o ~ °~ W ~ o ~ ~ o ~ b ~ ~ 3 ~, w V ~ ~ ~ .'~ ~ Z ° ~ Q" ~!~~~y1 a ~„ ~" ~ ~ `'-y o ~ ... ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ o 3 0 a o ,~°~'~ ~;~,~ ~ a ao W v, ~~ ~~~ ~ o w Q ~ ~ ~ `~ a ~ ~ w~ ~ b o> w ao .°°,~ ~~° -° d ~o ~~_N ~°o~' ° ° ~, ~ ~ ~W ~ 3 ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w a x ~o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~'~ b _ . ~ a 30•~ ~~~ ~o ~ a ~ A N D ~~~ U b U .~ 0 y ~ ~ ~ • ^~ 'G ~ y ~ ~ p N ~ chi ya? ~ • ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ z ; a,°~"~. .~~~ ~~3 0,0 ~ ~ ~ w fs+ ~° a~ a. Q ~ ~ ~ Q ~~~ s~, 'b o ~ a~ ~ v ~ a~ .fl ~ ~ N M t ~ D ~. 3 O x 94 .~ I~ A ~I ° ~ ~I ,~ N ~~ ~~ ~°~ A W r~ v~ .~ O ~~~ iw W ~ 1 f z w '~. A v ~_' ~ fV~ m ~_ ~I 1~ M ~ ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~~ .~ ~I I ~ ~; ~j R T ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~, ;r'~ ~.. 9. ~3 ~ ~ ,, r ...~,- c ~ ~ a ~ a o ~ ~ ~' ~ C, •` ,~ o ~ ~ S~ .o c~ .~ CCU O C~ M~ ~~ •,~ 4~ ~ '~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ a~ ~ O ~ ~' N ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ....., ~ «3 ~ v ~ .~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ p ~ o ~ ~, o ~ ~, `B O o - ~ ~ 0 O ~ U ~~., N ~ O ~ ,.~ ~ ~ a ' R3 N j ~ '~ c~ 4~ ~ Q' ~ O U ~ ~ ""'' ~ U ' ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ .~ '~ .~ ~ ~+ ~ .~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O U ~"' c~ `~ U ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ 4~ o p o ~ W ~ ~-' ~ I ~ U O ~ ~ ~ U ~ _ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ . . ~, ,~ ~ U ~ ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O O ~~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ .~ ~ ~ U ~ •~ ~ ~ U o ~ ,~ c~ ~ O .~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ,~ 'T~ c~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ,= ~ ~ ~ o 4~ r--, ~ ~ '~ O ~ ,~ ~ ~U~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E-~a~.~W ~ ~ ~-• r-+ N M 4J ~ . ~ c~ ~ ~ woo ^~ U c~ ~ 4J '~ O ~ ~,, • ~ O ~ o ~ 0 0 ~ ~ `~ `~ 4~ ~, ~•~p ~ ~ ~ "-~ ~Ti ~ ~ U U ~~ O ,~ ~ .~ ~ U ,--, ~ ~ `~ °o 0 ~ f~ .~ ,~ U U ~ ~ ~ ~ O v~ '-~ U p ~ '~ ~ ~ O O U N ~ ~ ~ o ~t- ~~; ~~ i~ rJ o 4 ~ ~ w r ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ !r ~ Lj ~ ~ V' 1n I~ ~ I ~ I ^ i _ N ~( I I I ~ I I ~, I~ I r A W z c~ .~ L Sir ~. z H A .> M F .~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~Q N N W C d `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q~ ~ 3 ~ ~ i~ ~~, V ~ ~ w -. W 3 .~ ~ ~ ~ ~. d ~ 7 2 ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~~ ._ ~~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: t ,~ ~ J ~~. C~ _.. Z o~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~- s J ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ s ~~ ~ ~ `` ~~ ~ o ~ ~-, ~ ~ K N ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~'~I~ I ~ kl I ~I bl al ~ I~ ~~ ~ I I ~1 T C r 3 u h Oo 3 J ~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~ ~ ~ n h !u /~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ e ~ N ~ w N ~. C ' .3~ ,~ r ~' ~0 ~ ~ 4 3 ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~"~ • ~-• o .~ w ~ U ~ ~ --- ~ "' ~ H o ~ ~ s.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~b~ ~~o° ~ ~o ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~ o,~H i ~°~ ~ oop~ 4,NH~ ~~° 04? N +-' c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ «i Q. ~ W ~ a~ ~~ > o ~ .~ Q_ oQ,~o ~ o'~~o ~ ~~-~ o ~ o ~ ~ U ~ ~ -~ ~~~-~ ;: ~ ~ ~ ~ a o~~ ~ 3 °~., ~ ° ~ ~ Q,- ~ ~ O !_ M ~ ~ p ~ n `~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ cA .~ ~ N a ~ p ~ ~ ~ •~ c c~ ~. ~ -~ ~ ~ Q ~~'~ ~ ~.~ 3 g ~ A ~ r~ ~ ~ ~~ .~ 3 ~ ~ r- ~.4~ w0 0 ~~'~ ter., ~~~o~ ~'~~ ~w p~~~w ~~~~ .~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .N ~ ~ v .~ W a~ _~ l`~ M ~, t l~ e -~- ~ y F- ~ ` ;~ 3 _ o U N r 3 ~ O ~ ,~ O ~.: \/ ~ 3 ~ .~ _ _ ~ _ ~., a~ ~, ~ ~ v .° -~ .fl bn ~ a~ _~ ~-+ ~ O N cC3 "~ ~ "CS ~ . ~ ., y ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ W as ~ ~ ~ ~~' -3:' ~_ ~. . _4 ~ . ~~~ ~ ~; 4. ~ a~ o ~ o ~, ~ ti ~~ s~, ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ° b '~; ~ ~ o N ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ° w rWi1 ° s °~ U ~ ~ 3 w `~ ~ U b b ~ ~ • ~ ~: Z ~ a a, a ~, ~ ~, ~ ~ ~-" ~ .~ o ~~ . ~ ~o o '~ ~ ~ W °o, v~ , 3 $ ~ 'S 0 0 >, on w ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ` ~.~ ~ ~ o °' ~ a ao ~ ~~ ~~.~ U ~~ . ~, A Q Q -cs ~ ~ Q ~ ~ °o ~ ~ ~ ~~ 3 d't'~ ~ d ~ ~`~ ~~ ~ ~° a w ~ ~ ~ A;o 00 ~~o~'"~o a ~ ~ ° ' '~ .~ ~ ~ d ~ o o ~~~~ ~" ~~,~~~N ~ W H ° ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ x ~o~ • o~~~~~,~ ~ . on ~ ~ ~ o p,, 3 0 ' ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ s o ~ 'b L " ~'" ~r ~ N *k ~ ~ , v a~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ . vi E"y " U ~ o ~ ~ ~ U ~ Z' ~, ~' ~" > ~ ' . ~; ca ~ ~ U ~ y O ~ ~ bA H , t7 ~ a, .. ~ ~ . ~'ob `~~T' ~ o ~ TS pW. ~ a ~ ~ a o '~ o ~ , ~ . ~ y ~ ~ ~ '~,r N VJ ~ ~ O /1 /'\ /1 r1 /'~ /'\ .-. N M ~ V1 ~ IL x o ~ A O a N A w ~ w' ~. S1C ~ ~, a~ A, z~ ~ ~,.~ ~, ~ ~a a '~ ~ ~ 1 y-- l ~~ ~ v ~- ~ ~ ~ ~~ b ~R' ,--5 ~ ~ o ~ ~ v ~~ ~ ~ a g 9C `a ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~ V ~ Q~ ~. h ~ \ \ p ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ N ~ N ~ M ~ ~' ~ t1 S s 2 v I~ 1 _~t .:, ,, ~~, M a (f C~s' e ~ n S ;~ i ~~ .J N 3 • li O r ~ 'C3 ¢,tx '3'~ O F-" U ~ ~ O W Q, Ts a ~" ~ ~ +'~.+ vOi A. C/~ 0 0 O ,~ a~ A "0 ~ ~, °' o ~ U ~d aw ~, o ~~ ~ ~ 4, ~., o ~ ~"„~ U 3 ° Ho r, o ~°~, N pp p ~ O .--~ U ~ ~~~ a~i ~' `° .fib ~ ~ s, ~ p. Q N ~ ~+ O ~ N a~i ~ °~, x o O O o •~ ~ O ~.. ~ A ~ ~, crG 4~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ a a, ~ ~ • ~ ~.. Qy , ~ V O .~ ao ~ ~ ~ ~ h O 3 O y'' .-, o ,., ~' ~ w N ~' ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ O ~ U ~ ~, ~'~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ 0 U nr ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~3 ~zs~~ ~~ W ~ ~b ~~ w,~av~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ +~ .~>, o~~~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ o °' y "" ~ ^ '~ o a~ve,~2r ~, o ~ on ~" 3 w ~ ~ ~~~~w~ i ~~•~~~o~ o~'~~'~s~,b A O p ~„ N y O U ,.~ ~ •., i{ O OU ~ vOi ~ ~+ N .~ Q. ''~ ~ '3 ~ 0 ~ v1 L; U .,., r., a• ~ ~ ~ ~ O .. Cl. ~~0~~3.~ b ~ ~ ~ .,N., .bA ~-• c~ .-~ O N ..O O ~ ,O ~ c~ ~'" o ~ .~ ~a ~~~„ E-~~wa ~N~ ~--~ N M ~t V1 ~p A N A W dH' r~+ b z A M 4 r d ,L4 ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ `~ ~ . ~ `~ ~~ p~ V ~ ~ ~ S 1 M ~~ ~ i i i ~ A i' ~ s J / ~ J p~ ~ , d , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `` ~ o ~ `~ `YJ ~ ~ O O r -~ o a~ ° ~ a~ Q. ,~ a , N ti a ~ ~ ~ o N "~} '~' N N ~ ~ o ~ ~ 0 4-, W o ~ o b ~, U ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ o~ •~ ~ a ~ ~ o a ~,, ,_., a~ a ~ . ~ -fl o 0 0 U ~~ ~ 'moo .. ~ ' ~ N ~ ~ °o ~ a o o ~~ ~°~~ ~ ... ° ~ A d'b ~ o ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w '~ ,~ ~ o~ . •~ ~ w ss.~ o ~ W a o 0 0~~• ~ ~ °~ ' ~ ~~ bb~' `~ ~,•~ v d ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °o " ° ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ° ~ ~ a ~~„ w a~ ~ C4 ~~ i bn W ~,o ~ ~ , .~ ~" ~~~ o ~ ~ r-+ N ~ ~ o~ ~ U ~ ~ • ~ iVC' ~ ~ U O N ~ ~~~ ~ N '. "d ~ ~ aS ~ O .~ ~ ~ a~ o ~ ~•~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ o z o ~ ~, .~ b~~ ~~~~~ ~~o~b~ a. ~ F ~ ~ ~ . ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .-. • N N ~ ~ . Q ~ ~ o ~ . Q ~ .. ' a o ~ ~~Wa, ~c~v H ~ ~ . ~ ~ a~ ~rC O .~NM~ ~ ~ ~. LD. ~x o M O ~ V ~ ~ ~ ,r• N v~ d~ W ~~ ~~ C~ o`' a U'~ 3 cY .~ Lz7 .`~ ~v b ~ ~ v g S z ~ ~ -~ M ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ W ~ y ~ A ~ ""M ~ ~ M 1 (~' `~ 4 ., . ,r._... t . ~.,,,,~ .x.,_ _ .,., <. ,....... ~ ~, °3 o ° ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~. O ~ ~ ~ U U 3 V ~ w ~ ~ •~ ~ o a ~, 4-r a ¢, ^„ a~ • ~ ~ o n, 'b O S~ C/~ 3 p 4r ~ a o o ,~, 04 w aoi vi ~ a °~~ ~ ~ ~,~~ ~ W v, '" A d,v ~.., °o ~ •~ ~ ~' ~ ~ 3 d`b~~ -.a ~ ~ ~~ w~~b ~ o~ •~ p w,.~b coi C7 a o o ~ a~i o'o a o ,~ ~, ,~ d ~. ~-...., ~ o ~, o ....~ Z ~zv ~~b~d o o°n ~ ~~ U (S~ RS W E°o ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o ~ rWi~ ~N ~' ~~ i•~ ~ o ~ bA "C ~ ~ o '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ p. p,r ~ N ~ 'b ~ ~ U U . Q ~~ y•~'b °~i ~ cn z P.a ~ o c~ ~'~C ~ ~ bq 'C3 ~ ~ ~ N O ~ .~ ~ ~ E~+ •y o Q ~ ~ ,.o o ~ ~ ~•~~ ~dwa ~N~ ~~~ ~'+ O r ~; A ~I U ~ ,~ o~ a G• ~ . N 1 ' ~ , s ~ ~__ ~-""J W v ( f ~ Q -` • r-~S ~ ~~ a mod' • Cz.7 e ,. r `~ ~ `~? ~ ~~ ~ ~ j ~ r- ~ '~ c~~ ~ 1 _~ -~ ~ ~ r ' ~ ~ ~, \"~ ~ i G ~ i ~, ` '•'1 ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ --f•-~ - v v _! ~ ~ ~_. c `~' r '~ ~... y~ ~ _> -~'''' ~ y \~ ~ ~:~ H r: , q ~ ~ ; <: ~. _ ~ A `~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ D o a~ ~ ~ o b ~ ~ o a~ o ~.~ ~ .o N ~ N ~ o ~ ~ o d ~W ~ ~ o ~ is, c, ;~ ,-~ u. ~ r? .~ ~ o ~ •~ c 0 ~ ~:~ ~ ' ~~ U °p., v~ ~ °o ~ '~ 0 o a~ o ',~ d O o N .~ ~ ~ ~ c~ ., ~ '° w Q ~ ~ .~ o ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ U ~ ~ • d., ~ b '~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~~ ;~~3w~'~ ~" ~o ° o ~ ~~b i.b ~ ~~~ a ~~~~'~° a, 30.E ~~~ o°~'a' 3 'v o v o ... 0 p N 4~ ~ ~ ~''~-+ •.~. ~ yam., V c,., ~.s L, ..., W ~ ~S"i+ A N ~ ~ ¢" "tea p ~~~ ~~ OLl, ~--~NMd' ~~O 3x o A ~ ~ ~~!? O ~ ~ q N ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ J A ~: llv W ~ `~ ~ 7 ~ I I ~~ "T ~ ~ ~ .~ ~-~ ~~~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ O ~ ~ :µ r, ~ Z ~ ~ ~ (~ O O ~ o- ~ ~ .~ ~ O ` \ ^- ~i ~~~' j - , d ~ ~~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ 7 ~ d ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a 3 ~ ` ~' ~ ~ w~ ~ ~ ` ~ a ~ ~- ' - Q v ~ - ~- ~ > ~. ~ ~-- ,~ 0 ~~ ~~J ~~ N o °~s. ~ o °~ o Q, 0 ~ ~ a ~ 3 0 -~ ~~ o U ~ f" ~ p . O ~ O 'Cf v~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ o W rsa , ~ O s o. ~ ..., ~ ~, w, ~ b ~ .~ •~ p O . ,... ~ ~. ~. ~ o .,:, ~~ ~ o ~ •o ~ ~ ~-' v~ ~ ~ o ~ o - ~ ~° o U `" ~ ~~o ~ •~ v o "~ "° ~ ~ ~ ' .~ 3 z' ~ n, ~ r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w o o >, ` ~ ~ ' w ,.~ -cs ~ U ,a? o, c~ c~ o ~ a~ ~ o ~.~ "' o ~, ~o.~ o -rs ~ ~ ~ b 3¢ o o ~ ~ z ~~~ aW ~ ~ O p ~ ~n ~ ~ ¢. 'C3 ~i-+ ~ X O V to U .b N .~ p ~ N ~ "C3 .~ ^d O ~ ~ ~ N .~~ •3 °•a.~ . ~~ 4 o a, ~ ° o •~ ~ ~ ~ . '~ ~ •3 ~ o¢n .o ~ ~a a~ + o ~ ~ ~~ .° ~.. v ~ ~ • ~ o . ~ ~ ~~ -~o a~ ~4. o ~ a hQ W O a ~N E~--~ ~ f], ~ ~-' --~ N M et ~ ~ 3~ 1 w ~ m ~ Oo o ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ N ~ ~b I I v I ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ l ~ A~ V (^ v 1 w~ ~ 2 ~~ ~ q ~ ~ r L .a Q W d z~ A~ i ~ C , o ~ ~ ~, .` ~1 1 r ~ gn ~ ~y v w - ~ ~, ~ , ~ ~ `I ~I °' x ~ ~, o ~, o c, a. ~ 0 o a ~ w ~ o` ° ' ~ ~ o U ~ ~ ~ a ~° ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~° ~ ~ H U ~ ~ ti ~ •:-~ '^'~ ~ Z o W A, °~ ;`~ d o -~s _~ '~ ~ ~, U ~ -v ~ •~ o 0 x ~ ~~ ~? -d v' o U °~,..~ 3 °o ~ 'y 0 f3. ..+ ~ bA W ~ a ao U ~ ~,~~ a ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~_ ~ .~~ ~~~a. ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 0 W~W a ~ o c,~ ~ ~ ~,~ a ~ ~ ~.~ a; ~ o ~ o ~ ~~w~.-. ,., o ~ o ~ z a~ d~iD '-' 3 W ~ `~ W H ~ i ~:~~'~ o~ 0 ~ N ~ ~ .~ 'b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'' v o N~ `~' ~~ 3 o¢n ~ ..o ~ ~ ~ o~.°.r,o ~ o a ~<Cww ~NE'-' ~~ .~ ~A ~~~~ ~,~ A `~ M `~ '~ c~ ~ ~;~ s a~ ~ 3~ ~ N O° V~; ~ c~0 AI ' v ~ , ~ ~ ~ • ' ^' I A ~ V G ~ w --~ ~ ~ 3 ~~ h~ A ~~ H z t 'mV ~I', ~`o ~~ ~~ i i r ~ v f 1 ~ I~ ,~ a y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ 's, ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ " ~ llll`~~A, c~ C a o a o W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ 4 7 ~ ~ ~ A~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ a~ ° ~ ~. ~~ ~, ~ ° ' 3 ' ~ ~ ~ o N C U ~ ~ ~ iU.+ ~" y.~ ~ O r-+ ~ N ~ Sr O o ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ o `~ a a~ ~+ "CS ~." r"~ + y ~., ~ "" - ~ w ~~ y ~o ,O U ~' cci ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~~, ~ Ls, ~ ,~ ~ ~O ~ ~ ~ •~ ~~. p W V1 Q ~ U ~ 'ts ~ ~ o~ ai ~ ` ~ a; ~3 •,. b~ ~ ~ ~ s~. ~ ~ ~ ~" . ~ as o ~ ~ ? ~. o f-' ~ ~ y U ~ ~ .~ O y o 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ,.~ ~ t; '... 3 0 .3 ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~. v ~ ~ '~ ' ~ 'ts ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ U U •~ U U •~a~ U ... ~ o ~,~ U .--, ~ ~~ o ~ ~ U L: U ~ ~ bU b~ ~~o ~. ~ •~ '~ oQ ~~, ~~.~ ~ ~ o~~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~dw a ~N ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ OCR. ~-+ N M d' V'~ ~D O x / ' W A N~ A H z z w F t~ ~' ~. ~' (~, ~ A' - ~ ~; ~ N ~ M i ~~ ~ d ~~ - \ v ` \ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ \7 ~~ ~I ~~I ~I ~ `J ~ ,~ v ~ ~ ~ `~ t I ' '~;. ~,'~c,ma. ,.. 4»x•-.a.,is,>4r.«x.~ .. .. .-.-.,-,~.,,~....._ .. -'~+-a!..,t.cc.:x..,....+...,;...,.r...-o+.Q-r~a,a.,.- , i a~ o a~ ~ 0 U r O . v, "O Q. pq aw ~ o C ' °~ . U o ^ ~ N E " ~ s ,, aS N sU, U O ~ ~ O ~ ~ U ~ 3 w ~ ~, a .~ O., .,.-. ,~ ...., U O a~ i ~~ .~ ~ ~ o ~o ~ ,o > ° ' p„N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ , 0 0 ~ bn ~ w ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ •~ sue, p ~ W v~ U ~ ~ °° o c~ Q ~ dv `~ ~ ~ ~ , o ,~ '° o U ~ ~ _y ~i „ (~ a.+ + i '" ~ U ~„ a. _ a. o 0 o ,x °~' ~ ° ..°° ~ ° ~• ~.~ a~ ~ °o .~ ° -v ~ ~ ° ~ .-. ~' ~ W ~ ~ E'" O ~ ~. y U ~ .~ AO O U O ~ O ~ N ~ ~ Q, 'G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O . 1 30.E ~ ° ~' ~ ~ o ~ a p y w ~ ya? U : ~ •~ ~ U U~ v .~ ~ U , .. U~ O o >, ~ ~ 0 3 ~ -v >, 4.. ~ ° o ,~ -d .~~~y,,, .~ S], ~ ~ ~ v n cC N .-.~ ~ N ~ S~. Q N e d ~ ^C o y ~~ F-~d wa ~N ~ ~ ~ +A''A O ~NM'~fi V~~o N ~ ~. O A ~ 't O ~~ N ~ V ~ W sn > i~ A F ~ ~ ~ ~ ry J ~ l ~ ~ v a l V ~\ ~ \` 3 ~ ;~ ~o ~ ~ ~ j ~ C ~ S~ S F ^ .~ ~ ... ~ . ~~ ~~ r ~ _ z~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ Q A ~ ~ _'~ ` ~' '7" ~ f~~ i` M, M .~ A ~„ ~ ~3 ~ ~~ ~~ u,c~ o .~ N b '~ ~ N ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +~ }; ~. ~ o ~ ~ ~° o ~ U °v' w ~ ~ ~ ' a~i ~ ~ , ~ ~; Cjj -4,_ c ~' is a~ ;~ ~ ~ `~ o. v ~ .~ Q. ~ .~ ~ ~ o A ~ d ~N ~ ~3 ~ o .~ 0 0 >, ago w ~, N F O ,y ~ • ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ lm w~ rn ~ ~ .o ~ .°o `~ ~ 03 ¢~v~~ a; ... ~ ~ ~ ~ a, o ~ •~ '~ w a'v c°, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ a4. ~ c ~ ~ o o ~ V ~~ °~~~~ ~~~ Fy o L7 _ o ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ¢ o ~ ca 0 0 ~ an~ ~w N~ H o a~ ~~~ o ~ 0 o N ~ 'd Q.'v on o 30 3 ~ o ~ v''-' ~.~ ~ o, o~.~ ~~ i U ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ W p.a~ ,~~~~~3~ ~ ~ a~u. ~,~¢a,.bo~, ~ 'o ~ ~, -o ~ a o N ~ a ~•~ ~ F¢wa ~N~ a~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ OLD. •-+ N M ~t N ~ 1~ 3x o ~~ ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ a a; ~. o ~o LL ~ U ~ , ° N U a~ H ~:, ~ °~' a W ~ o rs ~ ~ ~. U o ~ vii W o b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ z ~, ,~ . ~ ,~ a ~, ~ .~ ~ ~ •~ ° a ° i ,.fl ~ ,~ o o ,,, ~ ~ ,o w ° ° N> o ~. ~ .~~; ~ ~ ~~ ~ °~ 3 0 > vs o ,~ ~ •~, ~ ;~ $ ~ ~~ ~ ° ~ a ¢ ~ °.~ ~ '~ ° ~' 3 ~~ ~ c~ a i r.. .~ ~ ~ ..„ `~> `~~ wu.~ o C U ~ o" ~s ~ o ~ `~ '" C7 4. ~ ~ ° .~° ~ •. ^, ,~ o b ~. ~ o ~, ~, a~ ~~~'~ ~' 0 ° ~ N 4~ ti ~~~' ~ y Q ~ b°A , ,F r ~~ ,~~°~~w~ ~ H ° ~ W ,.fl o0 ~ E.., o °' o ~ ~ ~ ~ . o ~' ~, ,~ zs u. ° W ~ ° ~ ~ N ~' i N >, o o h a r'' ~'" ~ '" k C y v 0 0~~° ~, ~~~ ~~~•~~~ ~ z o Q.,°`"~. ~~~ .~~,~~o3 d~,o ~ ~~°~b~ ~~~ .~ ~ ~ ° a, .~~A ~~ao~o a~ ~~• •~~ dWQ+.~N t-~ °~ ° ~ .~ ~ ^-~ N M d' V1 ~D '' " O [ . , ~1 W ~ o~ a~ N I ~I ~~ ~ A~ w~ ~ Q ~e w l~ ~1 L `gyp L 1 V~ V O S~ J\ Q 4 __~ ~; m '1 '~ ~~ `'~ ~ ~ ~ r c. :Y '~' o ~ ~~ ~. M ^~ ° .~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~, ~1 ` ° ~ 17 W ~ 9 ~ \ ~ \ v A. ~ ;z ~ ~~ ~; }. 4 r. "~~ i~ %%: r.. _ :::~.... . _ .., . , ,:~..~:. _ ......_ _ .. ,.. _ w . ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~Q ~Q MQ Q Q o 0 ~ N 4~ G~ r~ i., C ~ O ~ ¢,, E-+ ~ y ~' ~ ~ '^" ~ C~t~", ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ o~ N 3 ~ .~ ~ b ~ ~ v~ ~ ~ ,o ~..~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ' .~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ o .~ ~ ,, ~~ ~ _ o ,~ ~ io, a -~ ~ ~., ~ ~ ~ ~ ..! F n c ., v _~ lt l i~r z '~.+ . -.~ l~ 3 ~~ V .. V ._ '~^5 z ~ z ,. z ~. -~ z CSS z Q Q z ~ ~ ° -ts ~ Gz1~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ o ~ x ~ bD ~ 'd ~f " O N N V + ° H >, ~ ~ I ~ ~ ° ~ ~ o `'"' W o N ~ w o '" 'rl ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ v ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ F U w .~ ..~ ° ' ~ ~ o c i a ° ; ~ E,,, ~ ....1 v, > ,., ,.O ~, O W ~ ~~o~ ~~ ~~ ~ a _ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ A ~ c ~ ~ o '~ , q Q-d ~ . ~~ o~.~•~ a ~ ~ ~ 3 d 'b ~ ~ , . u. z ~~ ~~ ~~~~ W a' ° ° ~ ,.~ ~ ~ ° ~° ~~ ~ ~~ ~, ~o 0 ~~ ~~~~ ° ~ ~ a~ wo ~ 3 W ~ W E° o ~ ~ ~ , ~ Ga ,~ ~ coo x ~o° o~~~~~~ ~.+ N ~ ~ ~' 3°i ~ U ~ O a 30,E 3 ~,~,~~;°'~ '~'~ '~~ ~N .'., ~U~' O o~~ ~~"'•~~~~ ~ 'a~ ~„ o a ~ ~ ~ Z ~ [y u a. ..O > ~ ~ ~ ~ •.-r U U '~ d4 ~ ~ , N t], . ~ y O ~ ~ „C tom., r.. 'd E~ ~ •~O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W a ~ ¢, Q ~, .-, ~, ~ ~~ac'~o~ ~~ :~ ~~ ~dwa ~NE'~-~ ~ ~ ~, ,~ N ~ ~ ~ ~, ~. ~. ~ .~ .~ '-+ N M ~' V1 ~ O r~i N ~ M _~ ~ r. 1 ~ 4 ~ ~- ~ ~ V ~~ ~ `~ c ~ •- ~ G`' _ 3 f ,~ ~ ~ _ ~ ,. ~~ 3~ 1' °~ -~i 0 ~~ ~~ ~" ~~ ~ o c°~~ W o ~ Q.... s. o ... o `~ 0 o ,~ a~ ~ °~' U ~ ~d a~ 0 ~~ 0 o ~ o H o ~ ^~ o ~~~ c~ N bA c3 0 '~ ~ O .-. U ~ ~ ~ ~ ¢. ~" ~• "Ly ~~~ .~ o ~A ~~~ ~ '~ a ~i O b a~ 0 a 0 4., 0 .~ ~ o N U a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ., t~, •~ ~ ~ .~ N ~, ~ ~~,, O , V C O ~~ 0 ~ 04, ° > ~~ wQ ,~ ~.. 'b ~ a~ L j ~ Q., en 'o a ~~V+ .a "C7 ~ ~ ~ .ti .tom ~ ..7 ;~ ~,~ -d w ~ ~ o ~ o o ~ >, ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 a~ ~ 0 o °~ ''~ ^oo ~ o " ..d a~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ° o on ~ ~ w ~ n~ 3 w ~ ~ ~~~ ~w i ~•~ o ~ ~~ o ~ a ~ ~ ~ ,~ W 0 ~ a V ~ V ~ . a~ ~. ~ ~t"r °roa U ~ ~ Q. ..fir ~ ~ ~ + + ' N r ~ ~ ~ y o o c3 ~ ~_ ..-~ "'d ~L ..r V 4 ~ • ^ + "~ ~+ V '3 G d m "~ bA ~ ~ ~~~ , ~~ .~ ~~d o ~ o~o ~. ~ ~dw a ~N ~ ~~~~ ~~ '--~ N M it v'1 ~O W C~ kn ~ A~ ~ U ~ • -~ N ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ `7 ~ M ~ '~ ~ ~o i -, ~ ~ . 3 ~ ~ 1 h I N .~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ ~ M ~ v a ~ ~" ~ ~ C ~ ~ •~, ~ ~. ~ ~ a ~`, W ~ `' .L Z. ~ ~ ~ ~ w l~ ° ~ c~ (~ ~ ~ J ~~: I. ~.. .,,.,~ ~;~,~,~~ .... _ ....:.,.e,:. _,, , .. . ~, 3 ~ . ~. ~ ~ -o ~ ~ ~ o ~ a i ~ ~ ° ~ o a, i ~ 0 o ~ i U ~ ~ ~ v i W ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ c~ o a a~ ~ a -d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cu N ~ ~ • V ~ C ~ ~ ~ y '~ O O ~ > ~ ¢, ~ ai O ~ c~ ~ N O s~. v~ 3 0 0 > a, 4, 0 0 ~ ~ w o ~ o ~ o •~ ~ ~ ... t, Q 'd ~ ~ O v -~ • •-~ o~ ~ p"' ~ ~ ~ ~ v ~y" r3 Q~"i ~f,,,," RS ~ ~ , y~~.. W ~ ~ F. O C .., ~ ~, S3, ':7 a; `*~ ~ o ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~~° Q ~° o ~ ~ ~ ~° ~ o a~ oA 3 W ~' ~ 3 0 ~ ~. ~ ~ a~ ~ w ~ ~, ~ ~4 0 .~ ~ ~, o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ o ap ~ ~o° o ~ ,~'oa v b p ~ . U O ~ C ~ O ~ ~ N ~ o -b ....~ o ~ _ ~ a. v' ~• . ~ e° ~ '~ `~' 3 os'o • ~, o Q ~ a. ~ ~ ..o „ ~ o ~ ..~ ¢'bo ~ ~ ~~ ~ a ~~(~ C~r =;N H ~ . o ~ a~ .fl ~ ~ N M ~' ~I'1 ~O ~ 3x o ~ ~~ ~ M ~ L~ ~ ~ w ~ ~~ ~ •~ ~, `D o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~(~ ~ ~ 'n a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N _ A W H ~ AX ~~ ~,, ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ 3 h° ~ N JJ 01 s N ~ ~• ~, ~i r h d r r ~~ O ~~ ~~ L 1 ~ M - ~`^ M f r ~I ' V ~1 ~ a~ °~ a o -cs a. s~. w w ~ ~ ~ ~ o -b ~ ~ F" ~ ~ ~ w ~ o >, ~ ~ a~ ~. ~ o ~ ~° o°, ~ ~ ~ b ~ W c~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~ a a, ~ o -~ ~ • a~ i .~ o o •~ c • ~, ~O ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ° w '~ , 3 0 o° ~ ~ ~"~b ~ •~ • ~ •~ ~ $ a i ~ ~ U Q d,.d ~ ~... .b s .~° o~~ ~ •~ .-. > ~., ~. • ~ a~ o • ~ ~ ~., ~ .b o ~ d ~ ,~ ° ~' cz: 4.,. ~ O ~ ~ O O ' ..a c'' ° ~ ~ o ~ o ° 4 ou `~ ~ 'b ~ ~ ~ o w , ~ O ~ ~ ~ , ? U .--i N .-r W ~~ ~ O ~-. y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , a? cad E-' o ~ ~oN ~ ~ •~ o~~ ~ '~ o ~~~ ~ ~ . , N U ~ ~ ~ U ~ U . ~ O o •'. 3 i., v~ ~ . -o~ ~ ~ U ~~ f3, ~ • ~ ° ~ •~ 'b ° a~i ~ N p ~ W U cy~ r~ ~ U • •~.~ ~ _~ U . r. N V .•_.nr O S]. `/ F, ..r ~ U ~ U r3 bQ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' 0 ~ ~~, ~ ""' O t~ '~ N ~ s,. Q ,.d~ ~. ~ ~~a o'oo ~ ., a~ ~ ~• ~ ~d-°w a ~N ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ :~ N M ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ a~ .a ~ ~ ~ ~a :~ `~ _ W A' O N ~ l~ ~I I I nl c ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ \\~ ;~. ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ w o ~ 4 ~.`, ~ ~~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s ~,~ 3 ~' ~~ ~ ~ f ._. _ ~ ~ .~ ~~ ^ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ W ~-~- V , Z "__ ^ .... ~o W ~ ~ ° .. ~. A ~ ~ ~ .\ >_ fin`. ~> d ~~ o O -~ ~1 M W M ~ ~~ ~ o~ ~ °'~ a V~ ~n ~ 'b ~ oi~ ~" ~ N C '~ ~ ~ N N a ~+ 4-i ~+ N y., ~. ~ ~ O ~ ~ p ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ V vOi ~ ~ ..'" ~ ~ ~ z p+ "c3 Q ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ 4 ~ o ~ ~ 4., a 3 o 0.i , O p ~' 04 w ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ p ~ o ~, ~ ~ ~ ~. a d O V tp.. p,, bA ~ ~ Fir Q ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ,.O .,. ~, ~ a~ .-. o, •.. ,~ b Z ~ ~ ~ c~ ~ o ~ s0, ' ~ ~ ~, o 0 z ~z ~~~3°x~. ~ C7 o ~~ ao ,~~~oo ~, 4. „ ~• ~ 4. co ~ o ~ ,~ ~ ~ a? W ~ .. ~ o o a~ an 3 ~s c- w Hoy ~~~c~~o~~~ x oo° o'~'~.~'oQ.b E~ ~ ~' a~i a o p ~ aoi ~ ~ r .-. w i/1 ~ N by U ~ ~ .~ DG O p Q cd 0O • p sN.~ O ~ O O ~"" ~" , ~ 3 0 ,.., v, ~ ~ o o t~ ~,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ p., ... ~. . ~ ~ o ~' dq N ,~ O ~{0 ,.i; ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ V ~ ~x o .. ~e °, .= v N ~ N °3 ~b ~. ~ ~ ~. ~ ° o ~ •~ o ~ ~ ~, o ~, ~ ~ ~ ~. o ~ W U '~ ~ b a~ ~ ~ ~ O W N ~ N Q ~ N .rte" U ~i-+ O '~ ~ •~ Q ~ O '~ O y ~ O 4. . ~ 'a N ~ O • Q O ~+ ~ ~•+ ~ C W r° U ~ ss, w ~ a Q .'Cj ~ ' O U .., > o ~ •~~ wa-d ~ c~ 4 a S ~ ~c ~ ~ a s o o ~~ o ° ~,~~ ~, t , ~ N bA 300 ~ U b ~ k p -~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ h s . CN7 ~ "C7 ~ C: U ~ ~ ~, . O O W •~, U ~ " ~ ~ . ~ ~' ~ ... y .... f3 .~ ~ .. • ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ N N ' O ~ iU tl ~ p ~ --~ cV t3~ ~` ~ ~ , .b ~ ~ ~ :~ o ro O O ~dwa ~N ~ E'~•~ •~ ~~~ ~ O ~NM'd' ~~O Ll. !~~ ti " O ~.. M ~~ Ate! y\ ~ ~ ~~ M M Uti ~''1 s - '~ ~ 6 ~~- ~ ra ~, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ # ~ c-a ~ S r J ~~ 1+ ,.r('- l ~" .. ,~ .... ... - y ... _ ,w...~sx+a~nvr+.~ai[Nbwv4i~~.~.Y" F.3"~+IR" Z -~ ~~ ~3 0 '~ v a. a. cY ~ ~ o •~ ~ o ~ ~ •~. ~ ~ H ~, ~ ,~ ~ o ~ w u q v O "C v~ ~ W ~ ~ cis ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.. a. .b ~ .c ~ yt1.. ~ ,~ ~ U O p U ~ •Q O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O •~~ ~]y `y O :. ~ ~ N ,O fL N 3 p 4, j 00 ~.~ w°~'a~ .~~ ~ ~, ~ tl °o i o ° ~ d ~ U- ~. ¢, oo ~ ~ ~ U ~ O ctf A ~ L1' fir"' ~ •~~, °~ '~ ~, ~ ~ 'd q at p ^" 4. ~~'j ~ •~ O 'Ly Q td ,~ O ~ ~ '~, a. 0 0 o x °' ~ ° .o ° ~° ~q~~ z ~•~~ ~~ ~~~3 ~, p o v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yo rr°,A 3 c~ N CA '~ 3 W `i' c~ ~i E'er ~ ~ ~•~~ Ito ~ ~ ~ ~ >. O p ~ ~ v~ [ ~*~ U ~p O Cd N ~ ~ W N ~ ° M ~, 0 3 ~ p g U p~ a ~ °' o a,~w~~~'b~~~ ~~~ "wO icf N Gj•~~ I~pV p ~ .-. 'd flN. A CV ~ '~ O 't7 O O ~. .. -[~a~•~c~ U ~ U ~ ..fl on. N c~1 d• ~n ~ 3~~ 1 W .~ M `Q `~ ~ ~ ~„ ~ r c4- c1 ~ N ~ ~ ~ o M ~ ro ~ 1 (1 -Z ~ t~ ` ~ --~ ~ ~ W ',J a ;` {d ~ a ~ ,~ V S U s+ 0 .~ W w Z ~ C a~ ~i~~~ ~ ~ ~ _~ ~. c ~- ~~ _ ~ F ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ "~ 1 -, 4 'Q. Q o Q ~J ~ c, ~ r,~ . O w ~ C:G ~ 1 ^1 0 3 ~, a O L1+ ~i 4r ~" O ~ •~ O N R, ~ o d °' o ..~ ~ ~ w RS y V ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ,~ ~ Q O •.••~ y ~ p,~" _ O .~ V O y ~ ,tea ~, a ~ c ~ ~ w ~~° U~ abAO~ fJr Q ~ ~ ~ a~.a ~ d ~ ~ ;~ o ~ ~ ~ w~ ~~~~ a ~~ •~3 'bra ~~ ~ ~~~ d U~ ~~" ~~~a~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ w O $~`' C7 a, ~-. a o ~ ~- 0 0 W o o ~ ,y~r' ~ ~ ~, .c3 CY o a~ ,o ~ • ~ b Q i.° ~ ~ ~ ti e~ °~ O O ~~ W E°o~~ i'~ ~~~ o ~ N '~ o~ >, o a o~~ ~" ~-+ to a y~°,•3 `b~~~o ,~ ~ o N~.._, 4,~"" ~ ti ~ piw ~w ~•~~ -~ z a"~ `~ v~°"3 ~ _ .ti ~ ~ W •~~., ~ ~ tad 'y ~" Oy '~_' ~ 4D Qr .c N'' A ~C m a p b~ N y ~~~~~•. ~dWCL...;N~ N x y ~"''' ,1~ Q ~ N M ~ Vr,1 ~ O ~'' ~+ 3~0 r <~ ~ ~ !~ W Q ~ '~ ~ C v. `~ •y ~ ~ ~Y { i ~ 1..~ J r i ~ `n N ~ .~ 4~t G -~-- \ -~ ~ J ~ - VI ~ ~ ~ •: ~ ~ J ~ Q ,~ ~ ~ ``~. ~ ~ ~ _.. ._ ~-'~ ~ ~ C~ WW ~ M ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ... .. z 1 W `~ 1 1 M ,~ ,+. V .~ . _ / t' (~ ~~ • C ~l M M r .M '~ lJ,* y 1 ~~ 1 U o ~ 03 0 ~ O.C~ ~ ~ ~, C ~ ~ ~ [ _ "CJ ~ ~"' ~ ~" c,,,,, C1 p ?~ O w .,, ~ ~. O H C3 O "U 4a ~ ''~ `° p„ w cy 'L1 0 aI ~" •~ r'~.+ ~ N ~ w w ~ ~~ ~ o C w °~ > ~ ~N Q S~, ~ G . ~ 3 O N o O '~` 00 ~ ~ _ w~4 ~ . o ~ •~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ A ~ •~ o~~ ¢b ~ o ~ ~" ~ ~ •~ U ~? ' Q . ~ a.., ~ ~ w . ~ qq v ~Q >, c o N ~ ~ 'C : ~, •~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ o c i w ~ ~ . ~ ~ ° ..:.. o ~° ~.~.~ w ~o ~ ~ ~o 3 ^ w-oo~ ~ ~ w 3W ~ Lx.. ~ .~ _ E-. o ~ • ~ a~'i w ~ ~ cv ~ Q H ..' o w a i Q ~ y >, o w „~ ~ w ~' ...r c 4" a ~ c ~1 pq o~ ~ U .b w w ~ ..d iG O w w ~ p ~ • ~ O ~" v i 'b N a i w O w . ' ~ `D w v, Q ~ LO O . ` '' tW w ~ O ~ ,~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ O U ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4. ~]„ ~ ~ ~ U ~ w0 ~ CA ~ ~ • b ~.^ o ¢'Q w ~. w -q ~•~~ ~ r ~ E-~QW ? ~ N a ~c-v ~ w x w ,.O O ~ N M 'd' to ~p ~ W ~ p .i W ~ ~-, ~-, O ,,~ r' ~ ~r1 ~/1 Z~ N~ ~ ~ ~ ~o C N 6 h `~ y ~~ W ~, !~ `y ~7'~ ~ ~ / ~+ ~ V vl', 11~ ~ ,{, ~ c ~, o ~ ~ v +~ J .~ ~ ~ c5 ~' ~ W z _ ~ z s ,~ ~ .~~ ~ A T ~ ~. s 03 ~~ b ~, x ~ U '~ ~~ w U 4'" c~ O O ~ ~ W ~~ ~~ a~ ~ ~ a v~ 00 o ,~ a~ Aa ~ ~ ~~ U~ ~ Q a o a '~ o ~~ o~ 3 ° f° o a~ g ~ ~ 30 3 .~ U ~ ~' a' o ~~~ €~Q"~ .~ ~ A y ~ ~•~~ ~~ ~ ~ '~ ~. ~x o a 0 o ~ •O y N cC N ~ a~ cV U ~ ~' a ~~ .~ ~ y H ~; .~ '~ O •~ g o ~-' ° ~? 'o v' c 3 °o ~ ~~ ~o ~' ~ ~" : ? b •~ ~ o ~~ .~ c~ V ~ [. b0~ a ~ ~ `~ .~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~~3 ~'~~ ~~ ~•~~va ~~ w'~a~~ ~ e~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ O w 0 ~ ,,~~yy, ~ ~ o ~ ,b o~~W~~ ~ ~ ~ w w ~ i ,~wo~ ~°~ ~:Sxoo ~y ~ ... ~~ v r~ ~ ~ ~-'4w°~'N~~~ '-' a `~~~ " 3 cu ~~~ ~ r. ^" ~ Q W O ~ N 4~ a .-. c~ r-+ CV M ~' V't ~O `'~-- A ~ ° ~. ~ ~- o ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~ q ~1 ~ ,"i 3 M w ~ ~ ;`~y~ ~ ~ o ~ ~,~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~tl c`~ ~ z `~ L° ~~ 2 M ,~ ^~~) `;~ ~ ~n ~~ (1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ J 7 ~ C I o .~. ~ ~~ r= ~`` ~ \ ~ M r1M N j ~ r~ ~ s v `~ .i ~ u ~ v J ~ ~~ M ( I ~ ~ C~ ~ L 1 (.1~ '` ~ - -._. N M M e.,~ W H d ~ A~ w ~.w,e~. ~, . , ~..,,-. n,~ d, >x -~~ per w _ .: ~...~ ~-*„al- .~ a~ x~ ~ as ~~ ~o o ~ ~ o ~ , .o a ~ v ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ o U° ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ °~' s o w 'rs. -~ a, ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~'" ~ w ° ~ '~ on ~~ ~ ~ ~~,~1DO ~ ~ -~ ~{Y, ~w W.~ o ~, ~ '~ ~ w ..~ 'rs ~ ° ~ ©~ ~ ~ ~ ~, o w~ •°o''~ ~~~,, ,s' ~ o ~~ ~0.~ -d t N ~ ~ '~ (-a ct N O U p ~ in O ~ .~ , "~ ~. T3 ~ y , U ~ O_ ~ O~~" -+ s-, ~ N UU ` ---+ ~ ~ `O U O~' Oi ran ~- ~ ~ ^' ~ Q ~ ~, N ~ ~ .~ ^Cy ~ ~ ~ + ai ~ o ~ s.. N U ~ v r-- `~ ° ' ~ • o ¢. j ~ ,.~ U p •-~.+ ~ U ~ ~ O ~ U ~ c~ •~ ~ bA ~ c . . ~ ~+ ~' ' O ~ y7' ~ "" ~ O ~ ~ ~ s. . U 4-~ N s.+ ~ ~, d '~ p ~!) U ~~~ H d W a ~ N H a~ s~, ~ U '^" ~ .. 3~ M 5 ~`~ rS W ~ A ~ © ~ N ~~ t~ ~, ~_% H z a ,, a ~~} ~~ '~ ~ ~ r ~ ~~ `; s ~ a `~ _` ~" ,; _~ ~ J ~--= tr" .~ ~' ~` z s y W "~' ~ d u' '~ ~^ ~ A'~ ~ ~ ~ ti~ t ! ..~...JJJSSS a ~ e ~~ `C t ,.o v ~ ~ 0 0 ~ ° ' o 0 .~ a~ s~, ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ a ~ v v ° ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~° ° H O ~ vi ~ ~ ~ ~ o `~ W a. .~ .,,_, .~ .~ +~ f 3+ ~ ~+ O . ~,..,' U ~ .--. ~ ~ O ~ ~ •~ O O _ O N ~ +O' 'C~ ~ • ~ N a ~ ~ ¢S p . p 4-+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ °o ~ ~ ~ O .i. .~ , ~~" ~ ~3 ~'~~~ ~ ~ ~ w a,b o ' U , fl? c7 ~ ~ ~., ~ ~ o a s o a ~~ ~ '~ 0 ~,., i o ~, ~, o ~.~~ ~co ~-~ . ~ 0 0 ~ ~ `~ to on ~ v ~ z ~ o~3w~~ H~ ~~ ~ a~ .~~ ~ ~ ~, ~~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~o~ o . v~ N ra . ~ O ' ~" N O ~ ~+ ~ C3 ~ 'L3 .~ tv 'ZS ~ ~ ~.'' v u' ~ 0 0 ~ c i .~ ~ ~ O ~ ~+ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~~~ . ~~~~ ~3~ ~ ~,., ~ -c~ ~ ~, v .~ ao a 0 ~ ~'" ~ H~Wa ~`~'.~ a~ sue, ~ q ~ ,-. ,-~ ,-, ,-, ,-. N c*t ~' ~ ~ N •~ ~ w ^~ ' ,,\ ~'~ ~ ~ 1'~` ~: ,r~ O ~~ ~ i~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a N ~ ~ `'C w ~ .~ Q '~ N ~ 4 :;. ;... :.~<: . p'. i .,. `..'` ':+~ °c~ *i a 0. ~: ~ G ~. ~ ry,S~.. ~ k~, ~.:: ,<. ;, .:` .: ~: ` ,.. ,. ,: ... `~. :. .: . ~ , :. _: "'~i . .. .. F ~.,, ,'. ~~~~ s~ :. _. .p $ i ~e:= ,~ ,:q. ~r.W,., • WVWV.NOMARANADUMP . C OM • FACTS FOR YOU + (SOURCES) • We care about the future of Marana, Not ONLY our back yards (Silverbell West) SAVE YOUR WATER • ALL LINERS EVENTUALLY LEAK (EPA) • The dump is over the largest Tucson area aquifer where water levels are rising (USGS) • The dump is in a FEMA, high risk floodplain, AO (FEMA, PCRFCD) • The dump will be doubled lined, a necessity for hazardous waste permitting (DKL Holdings) • The landfill CANNOT refuse out-of--state waste (US Supreme Court) STOP "K"MOUNTAIN • Vice Mayor, Herb Kai, owns the landfill site (Pima Co. Records] • The proposed site is 590 acres and will be open 50 to 70 years (DKL Holdings) • The landfill is a mountain, it will be 220 feet tall (DKL Holdings) ~ WE DO NOT NEED THIS LANDFILL • Tangerine will be open until 2020 (Pima Co. Regional Flood Control District) • The Durham Landfill zoning approved (Pinal Co. Development Services) DON'T RISKAIRPORT FEDERAL FUNDING • The landfill ONLY creates 20 new j obs (DKL Holdings) • Marana Regional Airport is less than five miles from the landfill (DKL Holdings) • The FAA recommends against landfills within five miles of an airport (AC1500f5200-33) DON'T WASTE MARANA II?! DKI, Holdings =Landfill Development Co. Michael Racy = DKL representative & Town of Marana registered lobbyist Herb Kai =Vice Mayor for Town of Marana & landfill property owner Town of Marana =Potential Landfill Operator Racy + Kai = "DON'T WASTE MARANA I" Racy & Kai successfully stopped a proposed landfill in Marana ~ BUT TODA Y Kai $ +Marana $ + Racy $ = A WASTED MARANA!!!! Marana Regional Landfill Specific Plan • Exhibit ILB.2.b: Existing Land Uses within 1.25 mites • LEGEND Site Boundary ! Cry of Tucson Owned Parcel 1.25 Mile Radius P1oRTH °~ ~~ Soar ' Parcels ~ ~~~~~ Approved Development Plan Jurisdiction Boundary ~ FEE fVAA~: DIQ-01_existingtrnduses.mxd State Trust Land ~ Approved Subdivision Plat souecE: Rma county ~T GAS 2010 Development Capabil'rfy Report ll~1i RAUI. M. ~RIJA1.vA 7TH DtSTR1CT OF ARIZONA CAMMn'rEE ON NATURAL RffiOURCES ~~bcommittee an Natiaoat Parks, Forests and Public I.aads. Chair SuMximmittee on Water and Power COMal17'rEE ON 1 AND LABOR Sabcommitke ~ Workforce Pmtections Subcommittee Early Childhood, Elemoatary a~ Secondary Edueatiat CONORE4SIONAL PAOORE4SIVE CAUCUS, Co-chair Ed Monea, Mayor Town of Marana 11555 W. Civic Center Drive Marano, AZ 85653 1440 LonBwath HOB w~~4 DC 20515 Phone: (202)225-2435 Fax: (202) 225-1541 District Offices: 890 E 22nd Sheet, Suite 102 //~~ •~ ~~''.~,.::..~~,~~ {(!y.1Q1~~,~,~ ~ ~)Q ~It~lB-ilti~ ~~~~ Phone: (520) 6226788 ~nu~r of r~esenftttiuEs Fax: (520) 622-0198 1455 S Fourth Avenue, Suite 4 211515-D3D7 ttsl~uugta-n Ynma, Az 85364 , Phone: (92$)343-7933 Fax: (928) 343-7949 Mazch 24, 2010 httpJ/grijaivs.2iof>$e.govl Gilbert Davidson, Town Manager Town of Marana 11555 W. Civic Center Drive Marana, AZ 85653 Dear Mayor Monea and Manager Davidson, I'm writing to express my concern with the plans of the city of Mazana to annex 1200 acres of Pima County land in order to build the Marana Regional Landfill. I urge the city to take the necessary time to conduct a proper assessment of the environmental, health, and safety impacts of this proposed project. Area residents, Pima. County, and the Arizona State Land Department have raised several specific issues with the location of this proposed landfill. According to the US Geographical Survey, the Land slated for the landfill is located on Tucson's largest aquifer. Water levels are rising and there is substantial potential for contamination. • The site also could potentially be in a flood plain as designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. As noted in Pima Country Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2010, a solid waste facility that is subject to Arizona Department of Environmental Quality approval should not be placed in a FEMA flood zone. This adds potential legal issues to the plan and reinforces the need for further study before action is taken. The proposed expansion of Marana Regional Airport is another possible complication. The airport is less than 2.5 miles from the site. The FAA Advisory Circulaz 150/5200-33 discourages the development of solid waste disposal sites that could attract birds and other wildlife. This is another unknown consequence of the landfill development that requires additional investigation. Given the large number of concerns with this project, I urge the city of Mazana to delay further action on the landfill until the potential environmental, safety, and health consequences have been fully researched and deliberated. Sincerely, ~ ~ Raul M. Grijalva Member of Congress ce: C.H. Huckelberry, Pima County Administrator Ann Day, Pima County Supervisor, District 1 • Ram6n Valdez, Pima County Supervisor, District 2 Sharon Bronson, Pima County Supervisor, District 3 Ray Carroll, Pima County Supervisor, District 4 Richard Elias, Pima County Supervisor, District 5 ~ +~ ~ • RESOLUTION NO.2010- RESOLUTION OF THE PIMA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONCERNING THE PROPOSED MARANA REGIONAL LANDFILL WHEREAS, DKL Holdings, Inc. (Developer) has initiated with the Town of Marano (Town) a Specific Plan proposal for a new regional landfill, called " Marano Regional Landfill Specific Plan"; and WHEREAS, the 590 acre property identified in the Specific Plan for the landfill is in unincorporated Pima County, under the land use jurisdiction of the County and the Pima County Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Town intends to annex the property and that is why the Specific Plan is being processed by the Town instead of the County; and WHEREAS, the Town requested comments from Pima County on said Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the County provided comments to the Town on January 13, 2010 and February 18, 2010; and • WHEREAS, on February 24, 2010 the Marano Planning Commission voted 3-2 in favor of the Specific Plan as recommended by Town staff without any modifications or conditions even though speakers in opposition to the Plan far out numbered speakers in support, the County raised a number of questions, and the Arizona State Land Department requested a continuance; and WHEREAS, it was arguably premature for the Marano Planning Commission to consider the Specific Plan since Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 9-471 states that "A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications that permit densities and uses no greater than those permitted by the county immediately before annexation" and the County's designation for the property is currently RH (Rural Homestead), which does not allow landfills; and WHEREAS, Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 49-772.A.2 states that a solid waste facility that is subject to Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) approval shall not be placed on any site "if any part of that facility is within one-half mile of a one hundred year floodplain that has one hundred year flows in excess of twenty-five thousand cubic feet per second (cfs), as determined by the federal emergency management agency"; and WHEREAS, more investigation is needed on whether the proposed landfill is or is not within or adjacent to a floodplain with a 100-year discharge of 25,000 cfs, and therefore. • is or is not in compliance with ARS 49-772.A.2; WHEREAS, the Regional Flood Control District {RECD) has asked FEMA to determine if there is a regulatory discharge value for the landfill location; and WHEREAS, it is unknown how the Developer of the proposed landfill will address concerns regarding water contamination due to rising groundwater levels from natural flow events of the two major watercourses and washes adjacent to the property; and WHEREAS, it is unknown what impacts the Central Arizona Project and the City of Tucson's groundwater recharge and recovery efforts may have on groundwater elevations in the area of the proposed landfill; and WHEREAS, although there is a visual analysis section in the Specific Plan, there are no exhibits in the document showing viewsheds from off-site after landfill completion; and WHEREAS, the landfill is proposed to be similar in size to the City of Tucson's Los Reales landfill, 8 .times the acreage of the Tangerine Landfill, 5 times the height of the Tangerine Landfill, 205 to 233 feet higher than the surrounding ground elevation and 193 feet higher than the Town's municipal center 4 miles away; and WHEREAS, at least one archaeological site and scattered artifacts from prehistoric peoples are recorded on the proposed landfill parcel and may be impacted, and buried paleontological remains of extinct Pleistocene animals have been found in the Brawley • Wash floodplain of the Avra Valley and may be impacted; and WHEREAS, review by the County's Department of Transportation raised concerns regarding the structural adequacy of the road improvements proposed in the traffic study given the weight of the trucks that are expected to use the roads; and WHEREAS, it is unknown what potential impacts the proposed landfill will have on the Pinal and Marana Airparks; and WHEREAS, Arizona Revised Statutes Title 49, Environment, identifies various categories of landfill and associated allowed waste streams and regulatory permit requirements for each category of landfill, and the proposal does not specify whether the landfill will be a municipal solid waste landfill as defined by A.R.S. § 49-?O1, or some other category of landfill, and consequently it is unknown what type of waste streams will be accepted at the Iandfill and the landfill regulatory category for which the landfill will be permitted; and WHEREAS, it is not stated in the Specific Plan whether the landfill proposal would allow for the importation of waste from outside of the Town, Pima County, or the State of Arizona; and WHEREAS, once the land use is approved by the Town, there may be no further statutory or regulatory requirements that would require any further approval by the Town that could restrict landfill operations, waste type received, or origin of waste from outside of the Town or Pima County; • • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The Pima County Board of Supervisors requests the Town of Marana Mayor and Council refer the matter of the proposed landfill back to the Marana Planning Commission after the additional information, further explaining the proposal or answering specific questions raised by area residents, is obtained and allow the Arizona State Land Department to comment on the proposal. 2. The Pima County Board of Supervisors requests that the Town of Marana Mayor and Council restrict waste disposal at the proposed landfill site to prevent acceptance ofout-of--state waste to the extent this can legally be done. 3. Pima County will continue to actively comment on any future landfill proposals located either in Pima County or in areas that would impact Pima County. Passed by the Board of Supervisors of Pirna County, this day of , 2010. Chairman, Pima County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: Clerk of the Board n LJ APPROVED AS TO FORM: • FLOODPLAIN • The proposed Marano Regional Landfill is located in a FEMA designated "High Risk" floodplain zone AO. The proposed site is characterized by a 3-foot average flow depth. It will remain the same based on the "L" series FEMA FIRM maps. • The Brawley Wash Floodplain, as designated by both FEMA and the "Specific Plan" for the landfill, has no delineated floodway. • Any proposed plans in a delineated floodway would be in violation of section 16.24.010 of the County Code and section 21.05.09 of the Town of Marana's Land Development Code • Before anything should. be done on the land a floodway has to be delineated for the floodplain. The Specific Plan states nothing about any plans to address this issue. • In response to Marana's Specific Plan review request, Pima County Regional Flood Control District has recommended that the landfill use water diversion features that would accommodate a 500 year flood event, "given the nature of the development and the serious environmental consequences if the landfill is flooded". • Suzanne Shields the Director and Chief Engineer Pima County Regional Flood Control District stated, "There is not enough information in the Marano Regional Landfill Specific Plan to evaluate their hydraulic model and claim that the actual 100- year floodplain is less than the adopted FEMA floodplain limits". • Pima County also notes, because of the large volume of the flows from the Brawley Wash located on the site, the landfill may conflict with the ability to preserve natural open space and riparian habitat. • The County sent FEMA a written request for flood volumes for the Brawley. 49-772. Location restrictions for solid waste landfills; definitions A. A solid waste facility that is required to obtain approval pursuant to section 49-762 shall not be issued a permit pursuant to • section 49-241, subsection A, receive a plan approval pursuant to section 49-762 or be placed on any site if any of the following applies: • 1. An irrigation grandfathered right created pursuant to title 45, chapter 2, article 5 is appurtenant to all or any part of the site. • 2. Any part of that facility is within one-half mile of a one hundred-year floodplain that has one hundred year flows in excess of twenty-five thousand cubic feet per second, as determined by the federal emergency management agency, except for a site used for any of the following activities: • (a) Reclamation of land through the introduction of landscaping rubble or inert material. • (b) Material produced in connection with a mining or mineral processing operation. • (c) Agricultural on-site disposal. as provided in section 49-766. • (d) Solid waste transfer or recycling or any other use that does not involve treatment or disposal of solid waste. • (e) Receipt of solid waste for application to agricultural land as fertilizer or other beneficial soil amendment. • (f) The storage, treatment or processing of solid waste at a site that is not open to the public • State trust lands border landfill on west, Werth and east betundarles 3' depth 2' depth ® 1' depth • scale: approx 'd" = 6qO` ~ Wash Fioodplain Map Panel No. 040'19C49TOK www.nomaranadump.cam • • WATER • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was granted federal authority over landfills in 1976, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. • Among the new regulations crafted by the agency were floodplain restrictions; surface and groundwater protections; insect, bird and rodent controls; and fire and noxious gas controls. • Additional rules were imposed in 1982 for control of "leachate" (water that acquires contaminants as it percolates through landfill waste) • Operators are required to equip new landfills with "liners" and a collection system to prevent gases and leachate from contaminating the air and groundwater • Once it reaches capacity the landfill can be converted to farmland, cemetery, airport runway, hiking trails, industrial and commercial development, parking, and recreation such as a golf course, fairgrounds, trails and sports fields, or a stadium, shopping mall, post office, library, or university buildings • The proposed landfill will be located on the largest regional aquifer in Pima County where water levels are rising, according to the US Geological Survey, 2407. • In any manufacturing process, all products have an industry accepted rate of failure and as per the Environmental Protection Agency, all landfills will leak, even those using the best available liners. • Most liners are damaged when they are installed, others start leaking with in two years, this is from the Federal Environmental Protection Agencies own . documents. There is no such thing as a safe liner. • A double liner is a necessary requirement for permitting hazardous waste. DKL Holding claims this landfill will not accept hazardous waste and that it will be for regional use only. However, trash is regulated by federal law as a commodity, and it is against the law to restrict interstate commerce trade. • Eventual contamination of the aquifer and our wells is inevitable, when the double liners decompose, as all liners will do, and allow toxic chemicals to infiltrate the aquifer. • In 1981, the Environmental Protection Agency discovered the Tucson International Airport contaminated the surrounding area (AZD980737530, 2009). The primary contaminant of concern was Trichloroethylene (TCE), a probable human carcinogen. This contaminant was circulated by the aquifer via a contamination plume that was pulled by water draws from the aquifer. • The contaminated drinking water supplies have been removed from service, more than 40 billion gallons of groundwater has been treated and more than 130,000 pounds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have been removed from soils and groundwater throughout the site, 100,000 tons of metals, 10,000 tons of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contaminated soils and 2,000 tons of PCB/VOC contaminated sludge have been removed. This contamination is still being cleaned up today, nearly 30 years later, without any reasonably predictable end. • DKL Holdings intends to use the leachate that pools at the bottom of the landfill • on top of the liner "be used for dust control water on haul roads within the lined area of the landfill or will be disposed of in an ADEQ approved lined leachate evaporation pond " (The Planning Center, 2010). ~www.nomaranadump.com .7 d ~. ~. SOURCE: U.S. Geological Survey, National Water Availability and Use Program, "An Online Interactive Map Service for Displaying Ground Water Conditions in Arizona", Open-File Report 2007-1436, Page 16 • HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE LINERS (HDPE) ARE NOT EFFECTIVE BARRIERS TO LANDFILL LEACHATE Two major classes of chemicals are responsible for HDPE failure. Aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene and naphthalene, "permeate excessively and cause package deformation," and halogenated hydrocarbons such as trichlorethylene and methylene chloride can permeate HDPE and cause,"softening, swelling, and part deformation." Marlex Polyethylene TB 2 Packaging Properties, Plastics Division, Phillips 66 Company, Bartlesville, OK 74004 ~ ~~ ~3u;3~;i'it71{a ~3.'"{Ei'Yiic'3~=. 'v'.'' ~ . " ~llt: i'"#D~'~ t1f ~r~ f:'N~ ~~t'. ~C ' ;~1r~~E'. The "best demonstrated available technology" for composite liners (clay and plastic) allow leakage rates from .02 to 1.0 gallons per acre per day. This would result in 730 to 36,500 gallons per year from a 1.00 acre landfill. Geoservices Inc. Background Document on Bottom Liner Performance in Double-lined landfills55 and Surface Impoundments, April 1-y987 ~y ,.s ~ jt ~ .,... IM ~~=r ~~ i .> ,;xs e^ ~J'C:a .3 ~..k ~ 4~.1 .a <. ',;~,f a!„r~~ ! 4iE`~ ;tl'1 .,~~.i i.': ~G ~'L1li. fri rnc~,~ trsar} 2,92 LANDFILL CAPS ARE SUBJECT TO NATURAL ELEMENTS AND LEAKAGE Lightning bolts striking the ground typically five million volts and 2,500 to 220,000 amperes can bore holes in the ground eight inches in diameter and fifteen feet deep. In western North Carolina, an average number of lightning strikes per hundred acres is 2.96 per year. AT&T Telecommunication Electrical Protection, AT&T Technologies, Inc. 1985 i. - ~ ~ r~;~~,~~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ : ;:• : '.~~ : r; -;_ ,mist: D~~artrn~nt ~a~ Sail, ihfat~r and Er",~irC3rtiTiC~,1i~~ .$';i. ': . ~ -~ ` ' 1-~rI~C~ '=. "~, ~.; , ~.';;!Jt E~s'iZ4tiict €C~i`3ti"i1i`?~; • • ~~ _ ._ r,~ ~~tC' ~frii~~ ~ pia !, r~~~ k}~C~'s~~~'~l ~aJ~ l'=.tllit7ti ~riCi ~ ~ililOtl volts r ~ :1~l~ , u` r,,~~~.r ~ ~~3~ i • -l-C ct',"~" I ~ I''" f'~ ~atri{~;S i~ ~',f3~:~s lcz =: ~'~VE?~?C "' ~~fi :3 rdC~ ~~~5 tr1'r~~ OkG'r ~a~e),~~'~ 3 G ~a~~ii'';.:a : ~ r ~~:~r; Burrowing animals can move 5.3 tons of soil to the surface per acre per year. "Similar activity would have a dramatic impact on landfill cap integrity..synthetic liners, measured in mils are not likely to impede these same animals." Clay presents little barrier to such animals. Johnson & Dudderar, WASTE AGE, March 9988, p.108-111 LEAK TESTING OF NEW LANDFILL LINERS REVEALS MAJOR FLAWS Tests of the new municipal solid waste liner after burial by an Arizona contractor revealed that even with the most careful construction and quality assurance testing at every stage of emplacement, the liners had holes and punctures. American City and County, .July 1991 EVEN EPA PREDICTS FAILURE OF THE NEW LANDFILL TECHNOLOGY "First, even the best liner and leachate collection systems will ultimately fail due to natural deterioration..." Federal Register p. 33345 August 30, 1988 The above information was provided by: BLUE RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE LEAGUE PO Box 88 Glendale Springs, North Carolina 28629 ~ Phone 336-982-2691 ~ Fax 336-982-2954 Email BREDL@skybest<com October 2002 www.BREDL.org : i r ~, z,~a~ _ _. r Landfills http:/lwww.iun.edu/~environw/landfills.html Unfortunately, starting in the 1970's and continuing throughout the 1980's and 1990's, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funded research, which showed that burying household garbage in the ground poisons the groundwater. EPA has spelled out in detail the reason why all landfills leak. (Dr. Peter Montague, REHN). Even with the state of art double liners, EPA officials still expect landfills to fail and eventually poison the groundwater. (Dr. Peter Montague, REHN) Groundwater contamination may result from leakage of very small amounts of leachate. TCE is a carcinogen and one of the volatile organic compounds typically found in landfill leachate. It would take less than 4 drops of TCE mixed with the water in an average sized swimming pool (20,000 gallons) to render the water undrinkable. (Landfills Leak) According to Dr. Peter Montague in Rachel's Environment 8~ Health Weekly, the following are just a few documented studies that highlight the extent of the problem: • Significantly reduced stature (height) for a given age among children who lived near Love Canal, the chemical waste dump in Niagara Falls, N.Y.; • Low birth weight and birth defects in California children bom in census tracts having waste disposal sites. In Tucson, Arizona abnormal amounts of children born with heart defects revealed that 35% of them were born to parents living in a part of the city where the water supply was contaminated with Trichloroethylene (TCE) from a hazardous waste site. The rate of birth defects of the heart was three times as high among people drinking the contaminated water compared to people in Tucson not drinking contaminated water; • Enlargement of the liver and abnormal liver function tests reported in residents exposed to solvents from a toxic waste dump in Hardemann County, Tenn.; • Derma#itis, respiratory irritation, neurologic symptoms and pancreatic cancer at 7 waste disposals sites. (Dr. Montague REHM) Landfills present a clear and present potential threat to human health as well as a threat to our environment. As noted even the best landfill liners will leak... "82% of surveyed landfill cells had leaks while 41 % had a leak area of more than 1 square feet, "according to Leak Location Services, Inc. tLLSI~ website (March 15, 2000). This is an alarming statistic considering that in addition to leakage, landfills also provide problems to our health and environment through hazardous contaminated air emissions. Over ten toxic gases are released from landfills especially the toxic gas of methane gas. Methane gas is a naturally occurring gas created by the decay of organic matter inside a landfill. As it is formed, it builds up pressure and then begins to move through the soil. In a recent study of 288 landfills, off-site migration of gases, including methane was detected at $3% of these sites. (REHM) When a new municipal landfill is proposed, advocates of the project always emphasize that "no hazardous wastes will enter these landfill." Studies have shown that even though municipal landfills may not legally receive "hazardous" wastes, the leachate they produce is as dangerous as the leachate from hazardous waste landfills. s • , ~ 1/1~lyllllit''il \ ~ 1J lrl DATE: March 1, 2010 ~.-__ ..E. ~•. _...... ~_.... ..~ TO: Honorable Mayor and FROM; Richard Miranda Council Members Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: Proposed Landfill in Northern Avra Valley and Potential Impacts to the Tucson Water's Recharge/Recovery Operations and Service Area Wells Attached is a memo and map concerning potential impacts to Tucson Water's Recharge/Recovery Operations and Service Area Wells regarding the proposed landfill in Northern Avra Valley, west of Marana. • RM:sj c: Mike Letcher, City Manager Sean McBride, Assistant City Manager Mayor and Council Aides Richard Elias, Pima County Supervisor Gilbert Davidson, To«~n Manager, Town of Marana • ~E~®~~~.i"s11 ~ V M DATE: March 1, 2010 ~~'~~~`~ FROM: eff B. Biggs, Director T/u~cs'on W.atter Department l~ Andrew H. Quigley, ector Environmental Services Dept. SUBJECT: Proposed Landfill in Northern Avra Valley and Potential Impacts to Tucson Water's Recharge/Recovery Operations and Servicee Area Wells Back round• ', A private solid waste landfill is being proposed on the western boundary of the Town of Marano. The property under consideration is located north of Avra Valley Road and east of Trico Road. The attached Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed landfill, the closest Tucson Water recharge/recovery facility and nearby Tucson Water service areas, The figure also shows the general flow direction of groundwater in central and northern Avra Valley's regional aquifer. Groundwater in the regional aquifer generally flows to the northwest in the vicinity of Tucson Water's Central Avra Valley Storage & Recovery Project (CAVSARP), but flows more westerly in the area of the proposed landfill which lies about ten miles further to the north. The westerly direction of flow in the vicinity of the landfill is the result of pronounced water-level declines caused by heavy agricultural pumping decades ago. Regional groundwater eventually resumes its northwesterly course and leaves Avra Valley through the gap between Picacho Peak and the Silverbell Mountains. In the vicinity of the proposed landfill, groundwater flaws about 20 feet per year in a westerly direction. The privately-owned land for the proposed landfill is currently being considered both for re- zoning and annexation by the Town. of Marano. A Town of Marano Zoning Board meeting was held on February 9, 2010 to discuss the re-zoning of the land currently under consideration. If annexation and re-zoning occur, the proposed landfill would still need two permits from the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality in order to begin construction and operation. Richard Miranda, Deputy City Manager Proposed Landfill in lvorthern Avra Valley and Potential Impacts to Tucson Water's Recharge/Recavery Operations and Service Area Wells March 1, 2010 Page 2 The first is a Solid Waste Facility (SWF) Permit, which requires a facility plan for the proposed landfill that addresses at minimum the following: • Best. management practices to prevent off-site discharges; • Monitoring and pollution control devices such as double liners and leachate collection systems; • Compliance with the Town of Marana's and Pima County's solid waste collection/transportation ordinances; • Floodplain analysis and use permit; and • Compliance with airport and other land use setback requirements. The second requirement is to file an application for an Aquifer Protection Permit {APP), which must include the following: • Best Available Demonstrated Control Technologies {BADCT) to achieve the greatest • degree of discharge prevention; • Hydrogeologic analysis identifying potential impacts to other groundwater users; • Financial capability for construction, operation and closure of facility; • Monitoring and compliance reporting plans; and • Contingency plans for contaminant releases or water quality exceedances. Potential Impacts: Tucson Water Recharge and Recovery Facilities - The Central Avra Valley Storage and Recovery Project {CAVSARP) and the Southern Avra Valley Storage and Recovery Project (SAVSARP} facilities are both up gradient of the proposed landfill with respect to groundwater flow paths in Avra Valley. CAV5ARP is nearest to the proposed landfill, but is approximately ten miles to the south {see Figure 1). Given the location of CAVSARP and SAVSARP and the direction of groundwater flow, the proposed landfill would have no potential. impacts on the water quality or operations of these City facilities. Tucson Water Service Areas - Two areas served by Tucson Water are proximal to the proposed. landfill location and these are also shown on Figure 1. Figure 1 illustrates the location of rive Tucson Water isolated water service areas {WC and Wl) with respect to the proposed landfill location. • • Richard Miranda, Deputy City Manager Proposed Landfill in Northern Avra Valley and Potential l:mpacts to 'T'ucson Water's Recharge/Recovery Operations and Service Area 'Wells March 1, 2414 Page 3 The WC water system serves about 250 customers with one production well; it is approximately one half mile north of the proposed landfill site and is normal (perpendicular) to the flow of regional groundwater; in other words, regional groundwater would be less likely to flow in that direction. The W 1 system serves about 3,100 customers with two production wells. The W 1 system is approximately two miles west of the landfill site and is directly down-gradient with. respect to groundwater flow direction; this means that regional groundwater beneath the proposed landfill site would generally flaw toward these wells. To summarize, Tucson Water has concerns that any release of contaminants into_the groundwater from a future landfill at this location could result in water. quality: impacts to the wells serving.: Tucson Water's W 1 system because.. it is located immediately .down-gradient. Impacts are less likely to occur at Tucson Water's WC system because it is not located down-gradient (in the groundwater flow path) with respect to the landfill site. A well designed, operated and maintained municipal solid waste landfill does not, per se, represent a threat to a ground water supply. However,: given the proximity of these water systems . to the proposed landfill .site, Tucson Water staff will monitor. the progress of the proposed landfill and review all pertinent permit applications as well as the finalized permits with: regard to protecting our customers. Although the water quality monitoring program currently conducted by Tucson Water is highly protective of our customer's drinking :water quality, additional- constituents of concenn and sampling:.frequencies will be adjusted as needed if a solid waste landfill is ultimately constructed at the proposed site. if the landfill is constructed and water ..quality irrtpacts are observed, a replacement water supply could prove necessary. Future Steps: Tucson Water staff will perform due diligence on all aspects of the proposed landfill in Northern Avra Valley. City of Tucson Environmental Services will also assist Tucson Water staff in reviewing and commenting on these applications. Environmental Services staff is aware of the latest landfill technologies and safeguards in landfill design and operation. Applications for SWF and APP permits will be reviewed and commented by City of Tucson staff on during the public notice periods required by ADEQ. City of Tucson staff will review all proposed monitoring, sampling and reporting plans to ensure compliance with required state statutes/rules in order to be protective of water supply sources used to provide customers with water service. If a solid. waste landfill is permitted by ADEQ and constructed at the proposed locationand given the above mentioned potential concerns, Tucson Water and Environmental Services staff will. review all. groundwater qualify data reported by the landfill management entity to ADEQ< ~ ~ ~ ^ _~.!! \ ^ A.. 1'Iqure 7 ~ rrop4sea marana ~.anart~~ vvc^ ~rlwcr+ir NIARANA _ ~_ O w~ T p ~~O Z ~ y MOORE Z W EL TIRO ~ ~ ~ Z OG F V~ ~ ~~ ~ MAlZANA w~ AVRA VALLEY tN PEAKS AURA VALLE P/C~RF ROCKS ~ 3 a z a MA NVILLE ~ a 0 Groundwater Flaw Direcfion ~ ~qr~ Q TWActive Potable Production WeA ~ CAVSARP Fj- Rcoposed Marana Landfill Property ~ osed Marana Annexation Area Pro MILE WIDE p -- Major Road p 1 :Major Wash ~ w 0 o.s ~ ~' Tucson Water SenriceArea t~ Town of Marana t~ Miles CASVASP Boundary `` CAVSARP Recharge Basin 2/24/201 O r ~~~ vote ~ a n ~~ ~ ~ 1 ae aecrsron remains good law. State and local governments have tried to get around the decision and to exclude out-ot-state ! waste from privately owned landtilLs by _ ~a ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ imposing higher fees, by requiring L health-inspection certificates and by insisting on prior approval of government ~_ ~~~ ~~ ~~~y ` ~~ officials, However, federal courtsaround '" I(v~ the country have predictably struck down these crude efforts to circumvent Philadelphia vs. New Jersey. By Robert Glennon ~ / ~ ~D Indeed, there is apparently arty one case, decided by a U.S. District Court, that he Pima County Board of Supervisors has upheld a county's ability to restrict the 7 will decide Tuesday whether to importation of out-of-state garbage. That ~ -1 rezone 613 acres abutting South case is on appeal and probably will be Wilmot Raad to allow Waste Management reversed. (The controversy concerning t~ Inc. to operate the first privately owned Ensco Inc. operating a toxic waste pleat ~j, landfill in county history. This proposal south of Phoenix may eventually present raises the issue of whether Waste the same legal problem for Arizona.) ,~~tl Management will accept far disposal waste ~~ ~yg mgu~ that pig County ~ c~ generated out at state. could require Waste Management to accept Propoaent5 of the plan, particularly oNy locally generated waste. Even if Waste C' i Democratic Supervisor Ed Moore, have Management agrees to the condition, the `"Ji argued that the county can use zoning ~ county may discover thrnugh li#igation tha# codes and other methods to exclude the limitation Ls uncoastitutlonal, Irr that out-of-state waste. However, if the county event, Waste Management not only may prohibits Waste Management from accept out-of-state. waste, but also may accepting out-of-state garbage, a federal actively solicit and advertise the court will almost certainly declare the availability of its Pima County landfill for prohibition unconstitutional. Rezoning this ~ out-oi~ta#e garbage. property to permit a private landfill will ~ there any ~y for the county to prated; allow out-of-eta#e waste generators to dump #seif from becoming the nation's garbage their garbage in Pima County. dump? The U.S. Supreme: Court has. a Sanitary waste disposal sites around the ~ created a et participant exception" .' .. Gauntry are quickly filling up. to the.comrnerce clause. If a state orlocai~. a ° _ approximately SO percent of all landfills government enters the marketplace as a 11 run out of space within 10 years, p~~t~rt ~ ~~ as a regulator, it ~~ l' including those Ia neighboring Colorado mgy ~ ~ favor its awn citizens. ' and in Oklahoma. in the Northeast, it - -- Following this doctrine, U.S. Courts of _ Appeals have upliekt the decisiaas of loco} already costs $100 a ton to dispose of waste, ~~~ t0 refl~e ~ wept aut-af-state ~raste for compared to $12 a ton in Pima Caunty.~As ~ ~ more densely populated areas of the government-owned landfills. Tt Pima. country exhaust suitable sites far waste ~m-tY and operates the landfill, it disposal, private businesses and ~Y exclude nut-of-state garba~,. government officials are looking west to The idea of a privately owned landfill what they consider inexpensive tracts o! appeals to those who prefer private useless desert. ~ ~ industry ra#her than government • After the American Renalution, petty- regulation- in this instance, however, it t commercial squabbles and rivalries among would be folly for the supervisors to rezo~ the states prompted trade barriers and - ~ d~revent the sitpmabeco ~~ economic retaliation. To correct this ~ p miag a - situation and to stimulate afree-market dump for out-oi-s'tate waste. The national economy, the newly drafted U.S. supervisors oughYto retain ownership and Constitution gave Congress power over control over landfills lest pima County interstate commerce. interpreting this become the nation's garbage dump power, the U.S. Supreme Court has Robert Glennon is a declared that states may not discriminate professor of law at against or unduly burden commerce from the University of Arizona. other states. While we do not normally think of garbage as commerce, it is a mayor . national service fndustry. - in 1978, the U.S. supreme Court decd ~~_ _ Rezoning to ~rmit a City of Phitacielpt~ia vs. New Jersey, cez~ning a New~ersey statute that ~~ private landfill will aliovl~ ~ ' rohibited the importation of waste from- outside the state: The supreme Court hid out-of-state waste that the statute violated thGCOmmerce clause becau~ it discriminated against ~ generators to dump their nut-ot~rate ~. , garbage in Pima Cownty. CONFLICT OF INTEREST • January 20, 2010 Herb Kai Vice Mayor for the Town of Marana recused himself from involvement in this project and the re-zoning process, yet on Feb. 22 he contacted Kirby Colter resident and president of Rillito Water Association for a letter of support. • It is suspected the planning process is on the fast track because of Mr Kai's position within the town council. Marana has the ability to expedite the property entitlement process. These entitlements can be as costly as the development itself. DKL appears to be getting the benefit of Marana's fast track, saving them an unknown amount of money. • Ironically, two decades ago, Waste Management wanted to locate a dump east of I-10 and north of Tangerine Road. Vice-Mayor Kai, Michael Racy, and others, not wanting a dump in their back yard, adamantly and successfully opposed the site, using the catch-phrase, "Don't Waste Marana." • Az Daily Star July 29,1991--Kai used his position as a board member of Cortaro- Marana Irrigation to oppose the Waste Mgmt landfill plan according to then irrigation district manager Robert Condit. The main opposition was the ground water • Az Daily Star Feb. 25, 1998--Marana discusses need to protect views along Silverbell Rd. Then Councilman Kai stated he thought the town was already doing a good job protecting views along Silverbell. • Az Daily Star Jan. 22, 2009--Kai family opposes Union Pacific switching yard on i state land they lease on the premise of air & water pollution & retirees in an RV park. Herb Kai states "we just think it's a bad place." • Michael Racy, DKL Holding's representative, publicly announced there will be no appraisal conducted as part of the sales transaction between the Vice Mayor, Herb Kai, and DKL, therefore, no objective value opinion will be used to negotiate the purchase price • Mr. Racy publicly announced the Marana Regional Landfill Specific Plan has detailed, lengthy, technical reports that back up the data, Later he admitted these reports do not exist. • Michael Racy who is representing DKL, Holdings and Herb Kai (Explorer Jan 20,2010)appears to be a paid lobbyist for: o Pima County o Town of Marana o Marana Northwest Regional airport • Michael Racy is a representative for AOPA's Western Region and The Airport Support Network volunteer for Marana Regional Airport. • Michael Racy did not disclose this at the Planning Commission meeting • Mr. Racy is the registered lobbyist for the Town of Marana. Mr. Racy was given hours to present his application on Feb. 24th to the Marana Planning Commission, their agenda clearly notes applicants may have 10 minutes typically and only 5 minutes to respond, which he well exceeded • Although requested of DKL Holdings numerous times, no site selection process has been provided to the opposition group. • PLANNING PROCESS • The General Plan Amendment Procedural Guide states that "Any proposed rezoning must be consistent with the General Plan's land use designation for the property". While the land is currently in unincorporated Pima County with an RH zoning, the proposed annexation will place the land in one of Marana's residential zones. The existing area is rural density residential. Therefore, a landfill is not consistent with the General Plan or the County's current Comprehensive Plan. • By State Law ARS 9-461.07,A, the Planning Commission should "encourage effectuation of the[Generalj plan." For the same reason as above, the planning commission vote on Wednesday night should have been to recommend against the proposal. • According to State Law ARS 9-461.07,A,3, the Planning Commission should "Endeavor to promote public interest in and understanding of the General Plan..." The Council Chamber was completely full Feb. 24th. The overwhelming majority of the audience was opposed to the proposal as was indicated when Robin Meissner asked those opposed to "stand, raise their hand, or both." Strong arguments against the proposal were presented by numerous citizens. Few stood to argue in support. • According to State Law ARS 9-461.07.A.4, the Planning Commission should consult with "...citizens generally with relation to carrying out the General Plan." Our consultation on Feb. 24th was ignored by the Planning Commissioners who voted in support of the proposal. • According to State Law ARS 9-461.08.A, "The planning agency may, or if so directed by the legislative body shall, prepared specific plans based on the General Plan..." For the reason cited above, the proposed specific plan is not based on the General Plan. • According to State Law ARS 9-461.08.B.5, specific plans may include "Measures required to insure the execution of the General Plan." No measures can be made to insure that a landfill comply with residential zoning/planning criteria. • According to State Law ARS 9-461.09.B, Marano LDC 05.06.04.F.4, and Marano LDC 10.03, the Planning Commission is required to provide a statement to the Town Council discussing the reasons for the Commission's recommendation in favor of the proposal. We did not hear any reason on Feb. 24th. Any statement provided by the Planning Commission in support of the proposal will not satisfy the laws listed above and cannot bury the fact that the proposal will not be in conformance with the General Plan in place for the Town of Marano. It will also not bury the fact that the public (especially the residents in the area) are strongly opposed to the proposal. • According to Marano LDC 05.06.01, the purpose of LDC 05.06-Specif c Plans is to "provide uniform procedures and criteria for the preparation, review, adoption and implementation of specific plans as authorized by ARS 9-461.08". • According to Marano LDC 05.06.02.C.1.f, the applicant should have provided a "development capability report" in conformance with LDC 05.06.02.D. As the • name implies, the purpose is to demonstrate the technical feasibility of the project prior to approval of the specific plan. Yet, the developer stated very openly during Feb. 24th hearing that the purpose of the hearing was not to prove any technical • feasibility. That is clearly wrong and against this particular code. Among the many items listed as minimum requirements for a development capability report are hydrology, roads, and existing infrastructure. The proposed specific plan does not provide an adequate technical analysis of these items and should not have been recommended for approval by the Commission. In fact, Brian Varney was copied on a letter from the director of the Regional Flood Control District which stated that there is not enough information in the specific plan and that the "floodplain limits modeled for the Specific Plan are unlikely to be accurate." The letter was dated February 10, ZO10, well before the February 24th public hearing. • It is still unknown whether the proposal can conform to ARS 4-772.A.2. Therefore, technical feasibility of this project cannot be demonstrated at this time. This topic is one of many concerns listed by Pima County Development services in a letter to Mr. Varney dated February 18th, 2010. The letter was dated well before the February 24th public hearing. • According to Marana LDC 05.06.02.C.1.g, the specific plan should have included a drainage plan,a hydrology analysis, a discussion of the compatibility with adjoining land uses and standards for the conservation of soils, vegetation, and wildlife. Again, the specific plan did not present technical data and Michael Racy openly stated in the hearing that he intended to address the in depth technical studies and design work after the approval of the specific plan. The specific plan is not in compliance and the Commission's vote on Feb. 24th should have been against recommendation to the Council. • • According to Marana LDC 05.06.02.F, "Adopted specific plans shall be in substantial conformance with the Town of Marana General Plan and any other land use plans adopted by the Marana Town Council." • According to Marana LDC 05.06.02.G, "The Planning Administrator and the Town Engineer" shall "jointly review specific plan applications for the purpose of determining whether such applications are in conformance. with the provisions contained in this Section 05.06." For the reasons listed above, the proposed specific plan is not in conformance. • Marana LDC 45.06.04.C lists conformance with the General Plan and an assessment of the development capability report as criteria for the Planning Administrator. and Town Engineer in making a recommendation to the Planning Commission. • According to ARS 9-471, "A city or town annexing an area shall adopt zoning classifications that permit densities and uses no greater that those permitted by the county immediately before annexation." • In the Honea Heights case prior to the Landfill case, Mr Schisler argued that flooding would be a very important aspect of the project. He then voted "no" on that particular proposal because of the flooding concerns. Yet, there was no real concern expressed by the Commission that the Landfill Specific Plan proposes to place a mountain on top of the immense floodplain that virtually covers the entire site. • 550 • 540 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 • 5a 0 Visual Impact Kai Landfill www.nomaranadump.com LOCATION • The residents of Silverbell West have not made the landfill opposition focus on a `NIMBY' (Not In My Backyard) argument. This is a legitimate argument. It is not responsible planning to place one of the most noxious land developments within 2,000 feet of residential properties. • Based on the Specific Plan, the northeast area of the landfill will only provide a natural vegetation barrier. Although this may be beneficial from an environmental land perspective, it may be at the expense of Silverbell West residents. • Although health and safety are our primary concerns, our financial investments are at jeopardy as well. On Feb. 9~', Mr. Racy publicly announced a study that concluded landfill proximity does not adversely impact residential values. Although we requested this study, he never provided it. DKL Holdings then hired Southwest Appraisal Services to conduct a valuation study, effective Feb. 21 St, which they concluded "...the development of the proposed Marana Regional Landfill does not adversely affect the market value of neighboring properties." • In contrary, Pima County Senior Property Appraiser concluded "Proximity to a major landfill depreciates residential property values". In addition, residential properties near the proposed Marana Regional Landfill "could be negatively impacted at a greater rate of depreciated value than the subdivision properties used in this study", which were 16.22% to 26.85%. • Pima Co. Appraiser noted, the Southwest Appraisal Associate's valuation study only considered Gladden Farms and Rancho Valencia subdivisions, concentrating on visual impact. The Pima County report uses statistical analysis and larger sales sampling for his conclusions. • • Impact of the Economic Obsolescence Imposed by Landfills on Residential Property values This study is limited in scope to possible negative effects a landfill might impose on area property vatues. This assessment employs mass appraisal techniques and is intended to show only general valuation effects on properties located in close proximity to a major landfill. Sales in four subdivisions and their relevant landfills were used in this study: Tangerine Landfill -Gladden Farms (closest proximity) and San Lucas Los Reales Landfill -Rancho Valencia (closest proximity) and Empire Vista All of these subdivisions have been developed in the past 10 years; they consist of production homes of average quality; they are easily accessible to and from the I-10 Freeway. The sales data analyzed came from the Pima County Assessor's records. The unit of comparison is sale per square foot. General Economic Effects on Residential Property Values The overall decline in residential property values in Pima County is the effect of factors that can be applied generally and equally to all properties. These are: the credit crisis which is limiting the availability for mortgage loans; foreclosure sales that are driving down home values; unemployment; over building from speculative investments that increased inventories. Specific Factors Effecting Residential Property Values Location is the single most important factor influencing residential property values especially for families whose purchasing decisions are based on the desirability of certain amenities within a particular location. These are: • Schools -Perceived quality of school districts heavily influences buying decisions and perceived value. • Transportation -Accessibility to major thoroughfares, traffic conditions and commute times to major emp{oyment centers are important conditions influencing value. • Shopping - Accessibility to major retail centers. • Parks and Recreation -The availability within a community of parks and leisure activities directly affects the desirability of a specific location. These factors can positively or negatively affect the desirability and subsequently the property values within a specific location. There are other specific factors that can affect property vatues, especially environmental (floodplain) and economic (waste water treatment facilities, airport noise zones and landfills) obsolescence. Tangerine Landfill The two subdivisions compared for the effects of the Tangerine Landfill are the Gladden Farms development and the San Lucas development. Gladden Farms is located to the west of the I-10 Freeway and north of the Tangerine Landfill. Access is shared with the landfill by the newly installed four lane Tangerine Farms Rd. a San Lucas is located to the east of the f-10 Freeway. Access is negatively affected by a railroad crossing and is accessible by a two lane road. Both subdivisions are equally desirable in relation to the factors Schools and Shopping. They are both in the Marana Unified School District. They are both equally distant from the closest major retail center at Cortaro Farms Rd. and I-10. Gladden Farms is superior in that it has walking and bicycle paths and parks. It is also more convenient to the Town of Marana parks. Subdivision 2007 Sales 2007 per SF 2009 Sales 2009 per SF Pct. Decline Gladden Farms 49 $143.67 60 $105.10 -26.85% San Lucas 104 $113.84 45 $95.37 -16.23% The sales statistics indicate the Gladden Farms has experienced a much greater decline in value than San Lucas. Possible reasons for the steeper decline specific to Gladden Farms is that during this time frame Tangerine Farms Rd. opened and it now services traffic to both the homes and the landfill. The traffic mix of large waste haulers and commuter cars as well as families traveling to and from shopping, as well as the close proximity to the land fill has diminished the desirability of this location. los Reales Landfill The two subdivisions compared for the effECts of the Los Reales Landfill are the Rancho Valencia • development and the Empire Vista development. Rancho Valencia is located to the south of the I-10 Freeway and north of the Los Reales Landfill. Access is from Valencia and Swan Roads. Empire Vista is located to the north of the I-10 Freeway. Access is from Valencia and Littletown roads. The access to the Los Reales Landfill from the I-10 Freeway is by way of Craycroft and does not affect either of these subdivisions. Access from the southwestern portions of the City of Tucson is by way of Valencia and Swan Roads. The Schools, Shopping and Parks and Recreation factors are equally applicable to these two subdivisions. Only the Transportation factor, taking into account the traffic from large trash haulers and City of Tucson trash trucks, makes the Rancho Valencia subdivision a Less desirable location. Rancho Valencia is closest in proximity to the landfill. Subdivision 2007 Safes 2007 per SF 2009 Sales 2009 per SF Pct. Decline Rancho Valencia 148 $108.96 66 $94.40 -16.22% Empire Vista 104 $113.84 69 $102.04 -10.36% The property values declined at a greater rate in the Rancho Valencia subdivision which is affected by the Los Reales Landfill. • Probable Effects of the Proposed Marana Regional Landfill on Residential Property The results of this sales analysis indicates that the proximity to a major landfill depreciates residential property values. First it must be acknowledged that sales analysis relating to the effects of landfills on property values involved subdivisions that were developed many years after the establishment of the landfills. Buyers of homes in Gladden Farms and Rancho Valencia were or should have been made aware of the negative impact of economic obsolescence on their property values by the developers who sold them their homes. In the case of the proposed Marana Regional landfill the negative impact of economic obsolescence would be imposed after their properties were purchased. Since the local residents purchased their homes with the existing zoning, rural low or medium density, prior to any rezoning they could be negatively impacted at a greater rate of depreciated value than the subdivision properties used in this study. The sates analysis and conclusion was produced by: Brian Johnson Senior Property Appraiser Pima County Assessor's Office • (520) 243-7405 Brian.JohnsonCa~asr.pima.eov • ~""~ ~~ AS YOU ALL MAY KNOW, THE FAA HAS RE(~UIREMENTS REGARDGING AIRPORTS WITHIN A 6 MILE RADIUS OF A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED LAND FILL. ACCORDING TO A SURVEYOR, PINAL AIR PARK IS 5.48 AND MARANA REGIONAL IS 23 MILE WITHIN THE PERIMETER. BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED SITE. ACCORDING TO FLIGHT LINE OFFICIALS AT THE PINAL AIR PARK, THEY STATE THAT THEY DO HAVE REGULARLY SCHEDULED FLIGHTS. ALSO ACCORDING TO ROGER YOHEM AT THEAZ BIZ.COM ARTICLE DATED JANUARY 22, 2QI0, MARANA AND PINAL OFFICIALS ARE STATED SAYING ,"THAT THE LONG TERM POTENTIAL FOR PINAL TO BE ANNEXED INTO MARANA. FOR THE PURPOSE OF SHIPPING AND CARGO IS A VISIONARY IDEA THAT BOTH MARANA AND PINAL ARE PROPOSED TO EXPLORE." AS HAS BEEN DEBATED ABOUT THE KIND OF AIRPORT OR HUB THE MARANA REGIONAL AIRPORT CURRENTLY IS, DOES NOT ACCOUNT TO THE FACT THAT IN A CHAPTER S AIRPORT PLAN THE EXPANSION OF RUNWAYS AND DESIGNS TO EVENTUALLY SERVE BUSINESS AND CORPERATE USERS WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE LIMITATIONS OF THE FEDERAL FEGULATION ESTABLISHED BY THE FAA FOR NEW LANDFILL LIMITS. THE TOWN OF MARANA HAS NOT NOTIFIED THE FAA, STATE OR OTHER REGULATORY COMMISSIONS ABOUT THE FIRST ORDER ON THEIR LIST," WHICH IS TO INSTALL A DUMP BEFORE THE AIRPORT ". HOW WILL THAT EFFECT THE FUNDING FOR THE AIRPORT EXPANSION? IN TABLE SD OF THE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER S, NOWHERE ADDRESSES THE ISSUE OF THE LANDFILL THAT MARANA KNOWINGLY IS PROPOSING AND WILL HAVE A LOT OF IMACT ON OUR ENVIRONMENT AND SAFETY. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THEY HAVE IDENTIFIED EVERY OTHER ISSUE IMAGINABLE BUT FAIL TO MENTION THE DUMP. THEY HAVE ALSO CONCLUDED IN TABLE SD LABELED, THE SECONDARY INDUCED IMPACTS, THAT THEY ARE ACKNOWLEDGING WITH THE EXPANDED FACILITY AND SERVICES WITHIN THE AI:RPORT," MARANA WILL IN THE FUTURE, ATTRACT ADDITIONAL USERS TO INCLUDE INDUSTRY, TRADE AND TOURISM TO ENHANCE THE FUTURE GROWTH AND EXPANSION:' HOW MANY MORE JOBS WILL BE AVAILBLE TO THE COMMUNITY WITH. AN EXPANDED AIRPORT VERSES THE ONLY 20 JOBS AVAILABLE WITH THE DUMP ACCORDING TO MR. RACEY. MANY OFFICIALS ARE NOW AWARE OF THE PROPOSED LANDFILL AND HAVE GREAT CONCERN. THESE INCLUDE, MIKE O DONNELL DIRECTOR OF AIRPORT SAFETY STANDARDS IN WASHINGTON, D.C.,, WILLIAM WITHYCONIBE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR, DAN BURKHART REGIONAL PROGRAMS, AOPA PILOTS ASSOCIATION, TONY GARCIA AND DAVIDE DOCHADE OUR REGIONAL DIRECTORS, JUST TO NAME A FEW. WE ARE ASKING FOR A DENIAL OF THIS PROPOSAL BASED ON ,NOT ONLY ON THE AIRPORT ISSUES,. BUT MANY OTHER CONCERNS THAT WE ALL HAVE PRESENTED .MORE TIME SHOULD $E TAKEN TO MAKE SUCH A LARGE DECISION THAT COULD HAVE ADVERSE AFFECTS FOR THE FUTURE OF MARANA. • • ~~ ~ Adviso U.S. Department of Transportation C i rc u l a r Federal Aviation Administration Subject: CONSTRUCTION OR Date: January 26, 2006 AC No: 150/5200-34A ESTABLISHMENT OF LANDFILLS NEAR Initiated by: AAS-300 Change: PUBLIC AIRPORTS 1. Purpose. This advisory circular (AC) contains guidance on complying with Federal statutory requirements regarding the construction or establishment of landfills near public airports. 2. Application. The guidance contained in the AC is provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for use by persons considering the construction or establishment of a new municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) near a public airport. Guidance contained herein should be used to comply with MSWLF site limitations contained in 49 U.S.C. § 44718(d), as amended by section 503 of • the. Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21St Century, Pub. L. No. 106- 181 (April 5, 2000), "Structures interfering with air commerce." In accordance with § 44718(d), as amended, these site limitations are not applicable in the State of Alaska. In addition, this AC provides guidance for a state aviation agency desiring to petition the FAA for an exemption from the requirements of § 44718(d), as amended. 3. Cancellation This AC cancels AC 150/52300-34, Construction or Establishment of Landfills Near Public Airports, dated August 8, 2000. This revision contains no substantive changes to the original. Changes include revised and new website addresses, revised strike statistics, and regulation titles. 4. Related Reading Materials. AC - 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractions On or Near Airports. Wildlife Strikes to Civil Aircraft in the United States. FAA Wildlife Aircraft Strike Database Serial Reports. Report to Congress: Potential Hazards to Aircraft by Locating Waste Disposal Sites in the Vicinity of Airports, April 1996, DOT/FAA/AS/96-1. Title 14, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 139, Certification of Airports. . Title 40, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 258, Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Criteria. Some of these documents and additional inf ormation on wildlife management, mcludmg guidance on landfills, are available on the FAA's Airports web site at htt :/Cwwur.faa, ovlair orts airtraffic/air ortsl or htt :1/wiidlife-miti ation.tc.faa. ov 5. Definitions. Definitions for the specific purpose of this AC are found in Appendix 1. 6. Background. The FAA has the broad authority to regulate and develop civil aviation under the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, 49 U.S.C. § 40101, et. seq., and other Federal law. In section 1220 of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-264 .(October 9, 1996), the Congress added a new provision, section (d); to 49 U:S.C. § 44718 to be enforced by the FAA and p acing limitations on the construction or establishment of landfills near public airports for the purposes of enhancing aviation safety. Section 503 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21St Century (AIR-21), Pub. L. No. 106-181 (April 5, 2000) replaced section 1220 of the 1996 Reauthorization Act, 49 U.S.C. § 44718. (d), with new language. Specifically, the new provision, § 44718(d), as amended; was enacted to further limit the construction or establishment of a municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) near certain: smaller public airports. In enacting this legislation, Congress expressed concern that a MSWLF sited near an airport poses a potential hazard to aircraft operations because such a waste facility attracts birds. • Statistics support the fact that bird strikes pose a real danger to aircraft. An estimated 87 percent of the collisions between wildlife and civil aircraft occurred on or near.airports when aircraft are below 2,000 feet :above ground level (AGL). Collisions with wildlife at these altitudes are especially dangerous as aircraft pilots have minimal time o recover from such emergencies. The FAA National Wildlife Aircraft Strike Database shows that more than 59,000 civil aircraft sustained reported strikes with wildlife from 1990 to 2004. Between 1990-2004, aircraft-wildlife strikes involving U. S. civil aircraft resulted in over $495 million/year worth of aircraft damage and associated losses and over 631,000 hours/year of aircraft down time. From 1990 to 2004, waterfowl, gulls and raptors were involved in 77% of the 3,493 :reported damaging aircraft-wildlife strikes where the bird was identified. Populations of Canada geese and many species of gulls and raptors have increased markedly over the last several years. Further, gulls and Canada geese have adapted to urban and suburban environments and, along with raptors and turkey vultures, are commonly found feeding or loa#ing on or near landfills. In light of increasing bird populations and aircraft operations, he FAA believes Locating. landfills in proximity to airports increases the risk of collisions between birds-and aircraft. To address this concern, the FAA issued AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractions On or Near Airports, to provide airport operators and aviation planners with guidance on minimizing wildlife attractants. AC 150/5200-33 recommends against locating municipal solid_waste landfills within five statute miles of an airport if the landfill may cause hazardous wildlife to move into or through the airport's approach or departure airspace. • • 7. General. Using guidance provided in the following sections, persons considering construction or establishment of a landfill should first determine if the proposed facility meets the definition of a new MSWLF (see Appendix 1). Section 44718(4), as amended, applies only to a new MSWLF. It does not apply to the expansion or modification of an existing MSWLF, and does not apply in the State of Alaska. If the proposed landfill meets the definition of a new MSWLF, its proximity to certain public airports (meeting the criteria specified in Paragraph 8 below) should be determined. If it is determined that a new MSWLF would be located within six miles of such a public airport, then either the MSWLF should be planned for an alternate location more than 6 miles from the airport, or the MSWLF .proponent should request the appropriate State aviation agency to file a petition for an exemption from the statutory restriction. In addition to the requirements of § 44718(4), existing landfill restrictions. contained in AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractions On or Near Airports (see .Paragraph 5, Background) also may be applicable. Airport operators that have accepted. Federal funds .have obligations under Federal -grant assurances to operate their facilities in safe manner and must comply with standards prescribed in advisory circulars, including landfill site limitations contained in AC 150/5200-33. 8. Landfills Covered by the Statute The limitations of § 44718(4), as amended, only apply to a new MSWLF (constructed or .established after April 5, 2000). The statutory limitations are not applicable where construction • or establishment of a MSWLF began on or before April 5, 2000, or to an existing MSWLF (received putrescible waste on or before April 5, 2000). Further, an existing MSWLF that is expanded or modified after April 5, 2000, would not be held to the limitations of § 44718(4), as amended. 9. Airports Covered by the Statute. The statutory limitations restricting the location of a new MSWLF near an airport apply to only those airports that are recipients of Federal grants (under the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982, as amended, 49 U.S.C.. § 47101, et seq.) and primarily serve general aviation aircraft and scheduled air carrier operations using. aircraft with less than-60 passenger seats: While the FAA does not classify airports precisely in this manner, the FAA does categorize airports by the type of aircraft operations served and number of annual passenger enplanements. In particular, the FAA categorizes public airports that serve air carrier operations. These airports are known as commercial service airports, and receive scheduled passenger service and have 2,500 or more enplaned passengers per year. One sub-category of commercial service airports, nonhub primary airports, closely matches the statute requirement.. Nonhub primary airports are defined as commercial.service airports that. enplane less than 0.05 percent of alt commercial passenger enplanemenfs (0.05 percent equated to 352,748 enplanements in 2004) but more than 10,000 annual enplanements. While these enplanements consist of both large and small air carrier operations, most are conducted in aircraft with less than 60 seats. These airports also are heavily used by general aviation aircraft, with an average of 81 based aircraft per nonhub primary airport. • • In addition, the FAA categorizes airports that enplane 2,500 to 10,000 passengers annually as non-primary commercial service airports, and those airports that enplane 2,500 or less passengers annually as general aviation airports. Both types of airports are mainly used by general aviation but in some instances, they have annual enplanements that consist of scheduled air carrier operations conducted in aircraft with less than 60 seats. Of the non- primary 'commercial service airports and general aviation airports, only those that have scheduled air carrier operations conducted in aircraft with ess than 60 seats would be covered by the statute. The statute does not apply to those airports that serve only general aviation aircraft operations. To comply with the intent of the statute, the FAA has .identified those airports classified as nonhub primary, non-primary commercial service and general aviation airports that: 1. Are recipients of Federal grant under 49 U.S.C. § 47101, et. seq.; 2. Are under control of a public :agency; 3. Serve scheduled air carrier operations conducted in aircraft with less than 60 seats; and 4. Have total annual .enplanements consisting of at least 51% of scheduled air carrier enplanements conducted in aircraft with less#han 60 passenger seats. Persons considering construction or establishment of a new MSWLF should contact the FAA to determine if an airport within six statute miles of the new MSWLF meets these criteria (see • paragraph 11 below for information on contacting the FAA). If the FAA determines the airport does meet these criteria, then § 44718(d), as amended, is applicable. An in-depth explanation of how the FAA collects and categorizes airport data. is available in the FAA's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). This report and a list of airports classified as nonhub primary, non-primary commercial service and general aviation airports (and associated enplanement data) are available on the FAA's Airports web site at htto:r`""/www.faa,aovlairports airtrafficfairt~ortslplanninc,capacity(. 10. Separation distance measurements. Section 44718(d), as amended, requires a minimum separation distance of six statute miles between a new MSWLF and a public airport. In determining this distance separation, measurements should be made from the closesf .point of the airport property boundary to the closest point of the MSWLF property boundary. Measurements can be made from a perimeter fence if the fence is co-located, or within close proximity to, property boundaries. It is the responsibility of the new MSWLF proponent to determine the separation distance. 11. Exemption Process. Under § 44718(d), as amended, the FAA Administrator may approve an exemption from the statute's landfill location limitations. Section 44718(d), as amended, permits the aviation agency of the state in which the airport is located to request such an exemption from the FAA Administrator. Any person desiring such an exemption should contact the aviation agency in the state in which the affected airport is located. A list of state aviation agencies and contact information is available at the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO) web site • at www.nasao.o or by calling NASAO at (301) 588-1286. LJ A state aviation agency that desires to petition the FAA for an exemption should notify the Regional Airports Division Manager, in writing, at least 60 days prior to the construction of a MSWLF. The petition should explain the nature and extent of relief sought, and contain information, documentation, views, or arguments that demonstrate that an exemption from the statute would not have an adverse impact on aviation safety. Information on contacting FAA Regional Airports Division Managers can be found on the FAA's web site at wwrw.faa.gov. After considering all relevant material presented, the Regional Airports Division Manager will notify the state agency within 30 days whether the request for exemption has been approved or denied. The FAA may approve a request for an exemption if it is determined that such an exemption would have no adverse impact on aviation safety. 12. Information. For further information, please contact the FAA's Office of Airport Safety and Standards, Airport Safety and Operations Division, at (800) 842-8736, Ext. 7-3085 or via email at WebmasterARP@faa.gov. Any information, documents and reports that are available on the FAA web site also can be obtained by calling the toll-free telephone num ber listed above. Cl~ ~~ • DAVID L. BENNETT Director, Office of Airport Safety and Standards 6- • APPENDIX 1. DEFINITIONS. The following are definitions for the specific purpose of this advisory circular. Construct a municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) means excavate or grade land, or raise structures, to prepare a municipal solid waste landfill as permitted by the appropriate regulatory or permitting authority. Establish a municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) means receive the first load of putrescible waste on site for placement in a prepared municipal solid waste landfill. Existing municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) means a municipal solid waste landfill that received putrescible waste on or before April 5, 2000. General aviation aircraft means any .civil aviation aircraft not operating under 14 CFR Part 119, Certification: Air carriers and commercial operators. Municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) means publicly or privately owned discrete area of land or an excavation that receives household waste, and that is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile, as those terms are defined under 40 CFR § 257.2. A MSWLF may receive other types of RCRA subtitle D wastes, such as commercial solid waste, nonhazardous sludge, small quantity generator waste and industrial solid waste, as defined under 40 CFR § 258.2. A MSWLF may consist of either a standalone unit or several cells that receive household waste. New municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) means a municipal solid waste landfill that was established or constructed after April 5, 2000. Person(s) means an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, company, association, joint-stock association, or governmental entity. It includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, or similar representative of any of them (14 CFR Part 1). Public agency means a State or political subdivision of aState; atax-supported organization; or an Indian tribe or pueblo (49 U.S.C. § 47102(15)). Public airport means an airport used or intended to be used for public purposes that is under the control of a public agency; and of which the area used or intended to be used for landing, taking off, or surface maneuvering of aircraft is publicly owned (49 U.S.C. § 47102(16)). Putrescible waste means solid waste which contains organic matter capable of being decomposed by micro-organisms and of such a character and proportion as to be capable of attracting or providing food for birds (40 CFR § 257.3-8). Scheduled air carrier operation means any common carriage passenger-carrying operation for compensation or hire conducted by an air carrier or commercial operator for which the air carrier, commercial operator, or their representatives offers in advance the departure location, departure time, and arrival location. It does not include any operation that is conducted as a supplemental operation under 14 CFR Part 119, or is conducted as a public charter operation under 14 CFR Part 380 (14 CFR § 119.3). • Solid waste means any arba e, or refuse stud a fr g 9 g om a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic sewage, or solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or industrial discharges that are point sources subject to permit under 33 U.S.C. § 1342, or source, special nuclear, or by-product material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (68 Stat. 923) (40 CFR § 258.2}. r ~ _ `~ n ~ _ p+~. 3 "~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,fin ~ ~~ ~ ~ -. ~ ', ',~ ~ ,... yf ~ ,, ..~. 4 ~q .3~ , ~- ..~ ; ~i~r f / tE S ~ ~ / ~' -~`r to ~ ~ Q f ~ ~ ~ a ~ ` ~~ ~ z r ~ r ..i ^,~ ?- " 0. at ~ Z "' ~ g a~ :'~' Q0.' d '~ .~ y ~ 4 ~ ~' ~ y ~ ,~* ~ ~ .~ s. ~ ' t. a n111YirN ~- M ° ~ F- a ~ <w x eo ° ~ CJ t~. ul ~ ~ ~ ~ ~{ ~ sa~sw y°5 s o- °~< ~QOC ~. -0 ~ . Y1 F G 9 .~.' a ~ fF. fi 'd w tl +~ r.+~°' ~' a '` ,_ ~_ .... a ed _ q ,~ i oo ~ ~ S w'"1 '. c1~ ~ .~ ~ Ey H a S S q b 1~ :a~ rt'~~ w~ t, 1 xGO 3u r ~.. SY'~ ~~il~ ~. h, ~~ f yy' :v'~". 'S ~~P , .~ .N '~ ~~ ~ ~ ° ,+~ ~~ 1~ s '.'~ iT ` ~ t ~ +~ ~ . i" Y-f ' 1. ~ n -~ ~, ~R, _g ` ~ 3~ ... _ i...~ ei1:. _ - f,. .. f. Marano, Final Airpark looking to form a partnership for regional shipping center By Royer Yohem, Inside Tucson Business Published on Friday, January 22, 2010 Folding. Final Airpark into the Town of Marana's economic development portfolio could propel the creation of a regional shipping and distribution center for freight and cargo. It's a visionary idea that both Marana and Final County officials see as an extraordinarily prosperous, long-term economic opportunity. Marana has an interest in annexing the 2,080-acre Final Airpark, which is just north of the town limits. The airfield, west of Interstate 10's Exit 232, is surrounded by massive tracts of vacant State Trust Land. Its lone runway is two .miles long_ "Certainly, any possible airport annexation by Marana, we would encourage. It is a very good spot for potential long- term economic development," said Tim Kanavel, economic development manager for Pina1 County_ "obviously, the ~ared costs, shared benefits details would have to be worked out." Growing. the Final Airpark into a comprehensive regional distribution center has been "touched on for years" by state and local officials, Kanavel said, but not all the pieces were in place to "actively move forward" That's why there has been little public discussion -about the concept. But due to the economy and recent developments, the annexation idea "is now gaining momentum," he said, "With the possible rail yard going in at Red Rock, we've got everything we need: rail, air, and interstate to move freight. It's our three-legged stool of economic development. That leads to a lot of speculation about what types of new industry would want to locate here. Any new nickels that we can create benefits the whole county," said Kanavel. At Red Rock along I-10, the Union Pacific railroad has been planning to build a 900-acre switching and rail yard. Although the project is currently on hold due to the economic downturn, Kanavel said new ventures like this are important to Arizona because the state suffers from a lack of economic diversity. Marana Town Manager Gilbert Davidson said development of a regional freight center is more likely to happen in the vicinity surrounding the Airpark than at Marana Regional Airport, 11700 W. Avra Valley Road, about 10 miles away to the southeast. Marana and Final County officials envision some type of partnership for the Airpark site where both governments would share in the expansion expenses and the subsequent financial benefits. "Cargo shipping is not something we're interested in for our airport. That type of business is more appropriate for a place where you could bring in larger jets, like Final Airpark," Davidson said. annexation and joint venture is at least five years away. It would marry Marana's strategic economic development and access to financial resources to Final County's underutilized facility and access to available land. Final Airpark's tenants include Evergreen Aircraft Maintenance, Silverbell Army Heliport, the Western Army National Guard Aviation Training Site, and a parachute training operation. The main function, however, is as a "bone yard" for airlines to park commercial planes they've taken out of regular service. ~ie site already has a history with freight. Evergreen is an international cargo company. And during the Vietnam War, it was the headquarters for the Central Intelligence Agency's air cargo operations. Establishing a regional cargo center likely would attract new aerospace manufacturers and other light-industry companies. These types of businesses would create hundreds ofhigh-paying, good-benefit jobs. "These are the types of jobs that bring in new money for our residents to buy cars and houses," Kanavel said. Shippers like UPS and FedEx definitely would be "prime recruiting" targets. Marano Regional Airport has a 6,900-foot-long major runway and a shorter 3,900-foot crosswind runway. In the next few years, town officials would like to add another ma~}or runway and a tower so more aircraft could use the airport.. Final design of the tower should be finished this year and, with some hoped-for federal grant money, construction could begin next year_ All approvals have to go through the Federal Aviation Administration. "We just finished a new road at our airport that will attract additional private business investment," Davidson said of MaranaRegional Airport. "Its future will be more like the .Scottsdale Airpark business model At Scottsdale, you've got more private jets flying in. You're not going to have a situation where you buy an airline ticket and board a commercial plane at our airport." The 571-acre Marano Airport has 268 "condo-style" hangars. The structures are owned and leased to tenants by Pima Aviation, the development company that operates the airport for the town. Most of the on-site businesses perform aircraft fueling, refurbishing, maintenance and repair, and flight training services.. .Hants include Tucson Aeroservice Center, ATW Aviation, Skywards Aviation, Maricopa Aircraft, Marano Skydiving and the. Sky Rider Cafe. Looking ahead, the biggest rewards lie "outside the fence," in new industrial parks that will surround the airport. Although the facility has-.some limitations to its expansion and us€, these enterprises will generate new revenue not necessarily tied to aviation. To strengthen the town's economy, Davidsonsaid "infrastructure investments will be made" at the airport. He envisions the site becoming a private planelcorporatefet center that will include manufacturing, light industry, charter flights, aerospace research and development, and hotels and car rental companies. "There will be major, future growth around the Marano airport," he said. Ca~ztc~t reporter Roger Yohem at ohem(a~c~zbzz. com or (52~~ 295-4254 Copyright ©2010 Inside Tucson Business r~ c co J c 0 .~ a~ c~ c ca c~ Z O H O a a O .~ O M C~ 00 N Q ca ca Cn Z c~ N ~;. - ~~" ~~. r {~, f ;~ f ~~ r~, ~+ 1 1 i t ~' t,4X yy R~ ~a i • W H t/1 z a ~c `~~. .t~ 'e~ +~ t 1--1 ',, '~ ~, ~/ / ~ O ~ ; ~' ~ ~/1 O ~ ^V,~ ~ ~ ~ W .~ ~ - ~ ~ c~ Z O- N ~ -~ CCS Q-L}'~ - z ~ -~-~ I..L Q ~ -~ ~ ^~~ c~ Q ~ ~ ~ o -~-, ~ W ~ . C~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~W~ ca .~ ~ ~ -~ `~ ~ ~_~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ C~ V ~ O W V o .~.~ ~ ~ U~~c~ c~.o ~cn ~~ ~ ._o4~N ~ COQ _~ O ^,~ W .~..~ ~~ V -O o ~ -~ ~ -- ~ ~ ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ._ ~ c~ ~ - >, ~ ~ - ~ ~ - o ~ ~ ~ U ~ O .~ ~4~~U ~ ~ D ., ~ - ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ o a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ..~ _ - -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ +~ ~ > ~~ V U W O ~ - W ~ ~~~_ ~ O ~ • ~ °~Uo= ~ ~' U O 4- ~ ~ ~ -~~ w Q 0 w O J U 0 0 Y ~~ ,~ _' i L..: ` ~,.~. tz~~. ~~ `. ~~ xt_. e=- N.3~ „ ~+1*r. > ~ U ~ ~ d ~ CO C r C I` 0 ~ O C N Q ~ + ., O ~ ~ (0 ~ ~ ~ LO ,~ a~ c ~ Q. ~O ~ i~ N (Q Q (6 .~ > ~ Q ~ L Q 0 ~U C L Q ~ i-+ Z ' ^~ (Qn vJ v U ~ '~ >+ O ~ O Q" ~ N ~ ~ '^ L vJ 0 ~ U U a~i ~~ ~ ~ O~ Z Q J d J L.L Y 2 C~ 2 Q w Y m a~ ~ ~ .a o ~ ~ ~v w~my N ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~ ~ w ~. la ~ d ~ w U aL.. C +4 O O O tq .fl c ~ ,. ~ ~~ a ~~ ~ ` "y ~~~ ~.' ~~~~ ~'~ ~.» ~'€'' a» i. y. 2 Q Q C ~~v Y a° O ~ O ~O V ~.~.. ~ T t Q N ~ ' O A O ~ Z 3 ~ c ma N X ~ 1~ ~~~` _._ - ;~~ ~ o...... f ~ r ~.. r _... 3\, ... ..vim- ~~. .. - ~ ~ ~ ~ ' .. ~. .... :., ~ i ____ . i .- ~~ ~ ~ 1 I \ '. \,.: . ~ - Z N :~ 6 ~ ~ z ,. ~, m a~ .o .rQS ~"_° ~'z m di '~ '; :D~~ ;' 3 C' Q Ip O ~ O 0 C1 ~ L L L W W Y a a a m m m 'o v v M N r ~~ i ~ ~ ' `.f9~ 4N07 0 n k 0 a a A m m V E 0 V C R 0 C 3 3 o ^ M O ~ L O ` . T ~ ~ ~-_+ i ° (IS o ~ ~ ~ Cn ~ ~ N ~ ~ •- ~ ~ U o ~ o ~ c~ L ~--+ t~ Q ~ ~ ~~ //~~ VJ ~ ~ ,~, •--+ ~: r:~ ~ .. t ~ ~f ' ,4 i ~ ~~ r s~ s ~ ~ ~ i -t ~, 7 1 i F ~~ t fi i'v it K i? s. A ~f Al ~ ~'.~ _. ~kHtl x Y L '~ ..~" / *f ~~ ~~ z Q z 0 .. .. V V O O O O O O O O O O O u'f O ~ O ~ O ~ O O O ~t7 ~ ~t M M N N ~ ~ ~ c 0 U Q 0 U C6 U .~ U W ~ dj .~ _~ L ~ O Ca ~- ~o o~ ~~ O ,~ N ~ ~ U >~ ~ :. U • N L L _~ O 2 Y 0 U Ii U -I--+ U ~ ~~ ~ U ~ ~ O ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . U U N ~ ~ ~ (~ ~ U . ~ v O ~ W ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f- ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o /~ ~ ~~ w /~, ~ ~ ~ ~ `'_ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ V - ~ I V • N ~ ~ ~ -~ • N ~ ~ . - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .X ~ ~ ~ _ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p W ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 J . ~ ~ ~ O ~ •~ > ~ ~ ~ ca a~ cn ~ ~ ~ N O ~ ~ Q U I ~ ~ • a--~ M 0 U (~ L U 0 U N O 0 U .~ ~ -~ ~, O • - CCS ~ ~ • - -~' U ~ -~ W O~ ~ ~/ to V ~ ~ p o I..1~ Q ~ ~ W ~~~~~ -~ •~ ~ ~ L ~~ ~ ~ z - ~o ~~~ o~ ~ ~.. ~ LL L~`~'L ~~~ ~~ c~~~o~ >Op ~o ~OU~~ U o~~ -- ~ ~ . Q ~~ Q -~ o c~ LL ov,~, ~ ~ -~ c~ ~ ~~~ o~ O ~ O C~ a- U ~~~ W U_ ~ 0 4- ~ O •~ ~ ~ ~ U U Q,• - 4- ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O ~, U - ~ +~ -- U L ~ O ~ O ~ -~ ~ `~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ -°~ o O ~~ ~ -~ -- po .~ > ~ .~ ~ ~ .C) O O ~~_ ~~~~ ~~0~ ~ ~ a~ ~ .~ c~ ~-~~.~ ~~ J ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ r~wure ~~ . rroaosea ~v~arana ~anar~~~ vverv~ew _~~ ..:i~ ~ ,a ~~ z~ - ~ ` n~~ ~i _.. ,.. ~` ~ ~~.~~~ ~-' we _ ... s~ ` ~~~ ~ I- i wi ~~~ ~; R #~ L L E Y. ~ ~> ., A~lR',~ t,%,L~E1( F~~rUR~ RACKS ~' ~; ~~ ''b Groundwater Flow Direction e TWActive Potable Production Well Proposed Marana Landfill Property Proposed Marana Annexation Area Major Road Major Wash Tucson Water ServiceArea Tov~n of Marana CASVASP Boundary ` CAVSARP Recharge Basin F i -x '; ~' U: E:~.r,~i~Y~L~ :.;..'.I i , ~: a ~ _ ~ '~€LE V1lIDE ~ ~ M 0 0.5 1 Miles P~~.~~1 ~; ; '~~=' ~' ''i.. '.. b • 2/24!2010 Pima County Solid Waste Operations Cost .?~~a~~~~~`~~'~~~d __ t.~t.4~ ~_,~~.~~ ~'~~~~-' ,~'~'n~rr,„~ .~f~!rt:a~a,' ,~rj.~~~ ,~'f~': t~_,~~:~~~.r. ~~~a~~~,;;~., g r~' ~ ~~~~~ a~~ ~ffde~~'~`~ ~~. ~~ ~ E ~~ ~..16.643.a'~~'YF '~~ c S.. ~ ~.. i (( , , L ~I~.~~i~St ~~~.''.l 4d F. ,~. ~. ... _,. C. ~ k'i'ck I1'C° (~'. ~ ~ (~. ._ ~ q _ I~ ~ F~i ~.. ~~1~ f ~ '~~ i _F ', Pt J. l.l~~~. ~~ ~~1 ~ e.NI ~i ~~ ~ ~ 2 ( ~° _ ~_ya ~ ¢ °__gI F '. P9a 1~4.:t ~.:. ~? . ~?~~3 k iJ i Y ~ ~` ,. , £ . , 1 TT ~. ~: l 1 ~~ ~ ~.. ~ 11 1LL "j} 1 V ry ] 1 ; t ~ % r g ' y ~ i~~. l 1 1, t+:,T l ~i a.~ . t~•~Y ~ S~ F k a 3 l t ... yy -- ^ 'y~ ~7 y { ) • .} ( t ~i~ t. 3. 1{ ~i'~ t 4~•~ 1 ~.. ,C411~ *~:f x ' t y ~~~.i~ i~t~..~i1:~.1 .'~„i~.~,='~l. ~ ~~ ~.~,j~ Il. ~~ 8 € ~ )„`,~,I; ....~t..~el.. ~ ti:~'`r.. L_ ~$ ~~'~~.~ 1'4, t .It t;~~~;1-T ....._s..,..... ,. _ ..._.._ ..~ . ., `~`~n~~rin~ ~ 1(~le~~k~~ ~~; ~" l,SgO,t~~O ~ ~~,~Ut~,~QC~ ~~ a~rc;,~. ~~~rrerz~~y , 3(}it«r7 ~~ focr~ ~~~~~r~ grk~~~ncl E J~~ fc~Ul Z~t~t't; €;rt~UI1C~ cat (~~~~lir~ ~~~~~~1 F~~l~ E ~~d~n~z 14}~,0~7~ ~ 1 ~0,~}t~ 2.(~ ~~r~ 1~~;~e ~`at~~ li~~~ ' ~ ~ ~},~e~tr-~ 70,~~~ ~ 3~~0~}~ ~~~~r~~i~n~t~a}r 3 ~~r~s far the ~r~~~sfe~• __~ ~ ~~~i~~it)Il ~~c~~l~l~}' O~t~~ r~ri~faca f) ~ _ . ~ _ 77,G(l(l acres 1~F~~e S~~s~~be/Ari~~aca . _ _ ~ (~ ~ _a~ ~ ~ ~,(JC1~l~ _ 1 acre e~tse~lle~i~ L~.~l~e~~ill~ (~ {~ 1 ~~,C~(~(7 t~.~a (par~il~ lc~t lr~c;a[ic~t~~ '~}~}~ f~ ~ ~~,~00 L,~~s ~lta~~ l~ acre Tcatt~I _ - ~ ~~,~~2f),O(}~)~t~(} _ _ _~~ `~~,~#(,Cz,fl(~O.(l~ - Unsuitable Landfill Sites 1. In an incorporated area (inside town boundaries) 2. Parks, forests, Indian Reservations 3. All land within a 100-year floodplain 4. All land within 1 mile of a major waterway 5. Land with grandfathered irrigation water rights 6. Land within 10,000 feet of an airplane runway 7. All land within 1 mile of active wells in Tucson Water well fields 8. Mountainous areas with rock outcrops 9. All areas with more than 10 persons per section or within one mile of an area with more than 50 persons per section ... " I've lived in this location since 1990, and presumed that this would be a nice country life style and a great place to raise a family. I am not against growth, but this is the most disgusting proposition for this Valley I have ever seen, to put in an almost 500 acre landfill over the largest water aquifer in the region. Even though I only live in Pima County, I am here to relay to you the messages from the vast majority of people living in Marana. First of all, we are a small but mighty group living in the Silverbell West Subdivision. We have been in opposition of this proposed landfill from the beginning, but are now even more informed than before, especially about the water and flood issues posed, by letting this land be used to put masses of trash on. We are very disappointed that even with the facts presented to you by numerous political entities that you still insist to go ahead with the annexation and re-zoning. How irresponsible is that? We as disenfranchised residents have made efforts to inform the Marana residents of your proposal for the Valley. I can tell you that without effort we have collected 600 signatures in opposition. If you vote to proceed with this landfill we are prepared to put this on a referendum to vote. We will make a group effort to lobby against you if you continue with this endeavor. In fact, I work in the middle of Continental Ranch and Reserve and they do have a vote for your reelection. I can tell you we are committed to do what is right for our water supply and community. l still can't believe that you have NOT even thought about the impact it will have on the expansion of the airport, which will be a more responsible and respectful way to generate revenue for Marana. There are too many issues to discuss in only 3 minutes that I have. You need to really look at your hearts, the facts, and your community to reconsider your opinion and vote about this huge landfill. ~"~~~~ ~. ~~,~~~ 11555 W. CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, MARANA, ARIZONA 85653 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Apri16, 2010, 7:00:00 PM To: Mayor and Council Item D 1 From: Steve Huffman ,Intergovernmental Affairs Administrator Strategic Plan Focus Area: Not Applicable Subject: Legislative/Interg}overnmental R,~ort: Discussion/Direction/Action regarding all pending state and federal legislation and report on recent meetings of other legislative bodies Discussion: This item is scheduled for each regular council meeting in order to provide an opportunity for discussion of any legislative or regional intergovernmental item that might arise. Periodically, an oral report may be given to supplement the Legislative Bulletins. ATTACHMENTS: Name: Description: Type: ~ 201_l)_Legislatiye Bulletin 12.pdf Legislative Bulletin # 12 Backup Material Staff Recommendation: Upon the request of Council, staff will be pleased to provide recommendations on specific legislative/intergovernmental issues. Suggested Motion: Mayor and Council's pleasure. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 40 of 45 t r3` i~ C„ ~~ ISSUE 12 -MARCH 26, 2010 ~f , ~ i ~ t- l 0 - HB2512 municipal taxes; auditors ~t collectors HB2512, municipal taxes; auditors Ft collectors, sponsored by Representative I~ck Murphy (R•Glendale), is likely to be voted upon on Third Read in the House next week. This bill would prohibit cities and towns from using third party contractors for local sales tax administration. The League has been opposed to the bill and encourages members to contact legislators to ask them to vote NO on H132512 next week. A fact sheet regarding this bill has been compiled by Revenue Discovery Systems and is available here. HB2596 free exercise of religion This bill was heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee this week and passed out 4-3 along party lines. The League and the City of Phoenix testified against the bill regarding concerns that it gives churches a more than level playing field when it comes to siting and zoning. We also raised concerns about locating churches within a city's entertainment district where they could have the effect of prohibiting the issuance of liquor licenses. The bill's sponsor, Representative Steve Yarbrough (R•Chandler), acknowledged our concerns and said he was willing to consider an amendment that would exempt entertainment districts. HB2632 immigration; law enforcement; safe neighborhoods On Tuesday, H132632 immigration; law enforcement; safe neighborhoods, was heard in the House Committee of the Whole. There was an amendment added to the bill that exempted first responders from penalty if they transport someone who is in the country illegally. With this amendment the bill is now different from its Senate companion, SB1070, and therefore the bills will have to go through the normal process of being heard in the second chamber. We understand that there are still many House members uncomfortable with provisions of the amended bill. The League will continue to closely monitor these pieces of legislation. Impact Fees On Thursday, the House heard two impact fees bills in Committee of the Whole; H82249 municipal development fees; refunds and H132259 development fees; proportional share which Representative Andy eggs (R-Gilbert) sponsored. A final vote on each bill is anticipated in the House in the near future. Currently, cities and towns are prohibited by statute from increasing any impact fees until July of 2011. Atwo-year freeze on impact fees was included in Ht32008 from the Sixth Special Session. As a result, the League of Arizona Cities and Towns does not believe we need any more legislation on impact fees at this time. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 41 of 45 However, we have negotiated in good faith with the sponsor of HB2249, regarding the issue of impact fee refunds but we have not yet reached final agreement on language. Also, we have requested that this bill contain a fix to something that was not agreed upon in H82008: a retro-active effective date for the freeze which caught some communities by surprise after they had already completed their impact fee studies. We have tentative agreement to include a fix to that provision in HB2249. On the other hand, HB2259 is completely unacceptable. It contains several provisions that either are already in current law, or that contradict current law, making the impact fee statutes virtually impossible to comply with. There are already requirements that impact fees pay only for infrastructure to serve new development and that require existing residents to pay their proportional share of infrastructure that will serve all the residents of a city. HB2259 is impossible to implement, unnecessary, contradictory and unfixable. While noting these concerns, the League encourages members to vote yes on HB2249 to move the bill along in the process, but to vote no on H82259. Eminent Domain A package of four eminent domain bills sponsored by Senator Chuck Q'ay (R-AAesa), passed out of the Senate this week and have been transmitted to the House for further action. Several bills were amended on the floor; the current status of each bill is as follows: 581362 eminent domain; attorney fees; interest was amended to specify that a court may award the property owner attorney fees in a condemnation action upon a finding that a municipality has not acted in good faith. This language insinuates that municipalities are 'bad condemnors' and creates unknown litigation consequences. X1363 eminent domain; requirements; taking property requires municipalities to take additional actions as a prerequisite to approving condemnation action such as: estimating the cost of condemnation; identifying reestablishment costs to federal standards; outlining alternatives to condemnation and disclosing finalized plans for the property. These extra requirements add time and expense to an already burdensome condemnation process. More importantly, such requirements enable a defendant to contest non-valuation issues, raise further defenses, and move to dismiss proceedings, as courts will have to determine if a municipality's actions were sufficient to satisfy this statute. An anticipated outcome of this legislation is that property owners will demand higher and higher settlements. 581365 eminent domain; disclosure violation defines 'just compensation' as the cost of relocation and the cost of reestablishing lost property, business and livelihoods. This allows property owners to be more than fully compensated by paying them severance damages without regard to any special benefits (e.g., increased value per square foot of remainder parcel for pad and convenience uses that would not be as valuable absent an adjacent freeway). The bill also requires municipalities to comply with additional disclosure requirements that conflict with provisions amended into SB1363. Requirements include final project details and an independent risk assessment. SB1366, eminent domain, relocation assistance amends existing statute by requiring the adoption of regulations that provide relocation assistance standards prescribed by the federal government as a minimum level. This bill has the potential to impact projects funded by federal transportation grants, as the funding will be jeopardized if relocation benefits are granted that exceed federal standards and are paid using federal monies. SB1443 photo enforcement procedures Senator Linda Clay (Rr pendale) is the sponsor of S131443 which modifies photo enforcement procedures and allocation of revenues. From a local government perspective, key provisions include changes to the placement of Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 42 of 45 photo enforcement systems and speed limit signage, in addition to the mandate that thirty-five percent (35%) of photo enforcement revenues remaining after court costs be spent on law enforcement. The biggest change addressed in the bill is the requirement that photo enforcement citations are personally served to violators. The bill is being transmitted to the House for further action. THE WE~7~Y 9~'~TLIGHT F>~presentative Frank Putt (R- Casa Grande) Representative Frank Pratt's family moved to Arizona in the late 1800s. His mother was born in Florence. He is a second generation Pinal County Native. Rep. Pratt attended Florence and Maricopa High Schools, CAC, NAU, and Arizona Western. He is married to Dr. Janice Pratt. Their son, Bryan Pratt, is a partner with him in a swimming pool construction company. Mr. Pratt has operated successful small businesses in Casa Grande since 1986. The representative is a Red Cross Volunteer, former Pinal County Merit Commission Chairman, Public Safety Retirement Board Member, and graduate of the Department of Public Safety Citizens and U of A Project CENTRE Leadership Academies. He is a member of the Maricopa Chamber and the Casa Grande Chamber where he serves on the Government Affairs Committee. ia,~, . ~ s K, .-`> , :h 'rr His legislative assignments include being the Vice Chair of the Environment Committee, and a member of the Commerce and Natural Resources, and Rural Affairs Committees. What is your long range vision for Arizona?What are your short term goals for this session? I would like to see Arizona have a more balanced economy. It is evident by how much we suffered in this financial turndown that we had placed too much reliance upon a single industry. Quality of life issues are always going to be extremely important, that is why most people move to Arizona, so our planning should reflect that. Transportation will always be a big part of Arizona's future because of our low density lifestyle. We need to plan for and provide a good transportation infrastructure. I have several bills that are very specific to correct local problems. I would certainly like to see all those bills passed and signed this year. If you could guarantee one piece of legislation would pass, what would it be? I also am working hard on an intergovernmental agreement bill that will provide for future energy needs as Arizona develops and grows. How can the state government and local governments be better partners? On the state level we have to recognize that all of our actions cause reactions and sometimes unintended consequences for our cities. I am very pleased that I maintain a strong communication with a number of the cities that I represent; their feedback on pending legislation is very helpful to me when it comes to making decisions. It is also important as legislators that we are aware of their long-term goals so we can work with them to help them achieve their vision. What's the best book you've read recently?Why would you recommend it? "The 21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader" by John C. Maxwell. This is a book I have read several times and every time I read it, I get something else out of it. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 43 of 45 PLEASE OPPOSE HB2512, MUNICIPAL TAXES; AUDITORS AND COLLECTORS On behalf of our client, Revenue Discovery System (RDS), we respectfully request that you vote NO on HB2512, which would rp ohibit cities and towns from contracting with third parties for the "collection, processing, and administration" of transaction privilege taxes (TPT). This bill is bad public policy that would outlaw private enterprise solutions that assist cities and towns with the fundamental responsibility of tax administration, while also interfering with the authority of local governments to effectively manage their own business. HB2512 is particularly damaging to smaller cities and towns who don't have the capacity to establish their own tax systems. There is growing concern by local governments that the Arizona Department of Revenue (ADOR) TPT administration program is failing to meet the cities' and towns' most basic requirements for service, support, functionality and accuracy. Given budget cuts and staffing shortages, that situation will only get worse. As a result, many local governments are reviewing the option of using private vendors like RDS as a centralized processing alternative to the ADOR program. While ADOR faces reduced staffing and resources, HB2512 would eliminate a proven, effective and efficient alternative for smaller local governments. The House has already voiced its support for third-party contracting and auditing services o The General Fund BRB (HB2012, sec. 18), now law, and HB2240, Recovery Audit Services, each expanded the authority of ADOR and the Auditor General, respectively, to use third-party contractors for collections. o In both instances, the House gave authority to the State to collect payments from companies that it would deny cities if HB2512 were to pass. Third-party contracting is "Pro-Business" and "Pro-Privacy" o Instead of being captive to ADOR, which is unable to meet many customers' needs, cities and towns can utilize a private business, held accountable by contract, to effectively meet their requirements. o Both the cities, towns and ADOR currently disclose confidential taxpayer information to authorized third-parties on a regular basis, and ensure that third parties comply with all essential safeguards to protect that data. o RDS has been in business for 30 years, and has 800 local government clients and HAS NEVER HAD A BREACH OF CONFIDENTIAL TAXPAYER DATA. Third-party contracting makes sense for the cities, and the taxpayers o RDS remits paid taxes to cities and towns approximately 12-15 times per month through a single, centralized processing alternative that can simplify tax collections both within and across multiple jurisdictions. o If HB2512 is passed, this option would be prohibited, leaving cities and towns only two options -continue using ADOR or create their own self-collecting alternative at great expense and with less efficiency and effectiveness. RDS does not do "contingent fee-based" auditing or enforcement o In fact, RDS and the League of Cities and Towns support the provision of HB2512, which prohibits contingent fee based auditing for TPT administration. o RDS does not have any enforcement duty or responsibility under their contracts. Cities and towns remain responsible for any enforcement action. RDS is NOT subject to a class action lawsuit o Supporters of HB2512 have attempted to tarnish the reputation of RDS with misleading, inaccurate statements. o It should not surprise anyone that a company assisting municipalities with the unpopular task of tax administration gets sued from time to time. Two such lawsuits were summarily dismissed in February A third is pending in a different jurisdiction, but has NOT been certified as a class action. We urge you to oppose HB2512. Please contact any of us with any questions you may have prior to the vote. Thank you for your consideration. Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 44 of 45 John Kelly (602) 639-0852 Barbara Meaney (602) 430-8438 Mike Gardner (602) 697-3588 R an Har er 602) 910-0879 Knox Kimberly (602) 999-5666 Julie Rees 602) 625-0400 Regular Council Meeting -April 6, 2010 -Page 45 of 45 ~~'` `~ MARANA ..STATEMENT OF AGENDA CONFLICT l , I, NCO ~~~ , declare a conflict on Agenda Item - f , .entitled: For the following reason(s): ~'~2~7`_` G~ Signature ~ ~~ ~`~ Date