A-1. Utility Rate StudyCITY OF
CAANHASSEN
7700 Market Boulevard
PO Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Administration
Phone: 952.227.1100
Fax: 952.227.1110
Building Inspections
Phone: 952.227.1160
Fax: 952.227.1190
Engineering
Phone: 952.227.1160
Fax: 952.227.1170
Finance
Phone: 952.2271140
Fax: 952.227.1110
Park & Recreation
Phone: 952.227.1120
Fax: 952.227.1110
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
Phone: 952.227.1400
Fax: 952.227.1404
Planning &
Natural Resources
Phone: 952.227.1130
Fax: 952.227.1110
Public Works
7901 Park Place
Phone: 952.2271300
Fax: 952.227.1310
Senior Center
Phone: 952.227.1125
Fax: 952.227.1110
Website
www. ci.chan hasse n. rrn. us
A'I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Greg Sticha, Finance Director
DATE: October 26, 2015
SUBJ: Utility Rate Study
BACKGROUND
Ehlers & Associates, the city's financial advisors, annually studies the current utility
fees and future projects to determine if the rates are appropriate for planned
expansions; reconstruction; and maintenance of the water, sanitary sewer, and storm
water systems. This evening, the rate study and related changes planned for 2016
will be discussed.
There are a number of changes that Ehlers will review with council as compared to
last year's study. Some areas to highlight are multiple years of reduced water sales
and the impact of that on the study, significant changes in the calculation of storm
water connection charges (previously discussed with council), and analyzing the
impact of moving the construction of the west water treatment plant from 2023 to
2017.
Attached is the entire rate study, as well as the executive summary prepared by
Ehlers & Associates. Jessica Cook from Ehlers will be present to review the study
and answer any questions. Ms. Cook will present a brief PowerPoint that highlights
the key areas of the study.
No action is needed on this item at tonight's meeting. On December 14th, the city
council will consider an amendment to the fee ordinance, which will incorporate
any changes discussed at tonight's meeting and future meetings.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Rate Study Executive Summary and Detailed Information
f:\gregs\mte study\2015 utility study memo 10-26-15.docx
Chanhassen is a Community for Lite - Providing for Today and Planning forTomorrow
FREERS
October, 2015
Utility Rate Analysis for 2016 Rates
City of Chanhassen, Minnesota
III '
1_TVi _ ,
-m-
Prepared By:
City Staff and Ehlers
Key Findings
The goal of a rate study is to ensure the long-term financial health of the utility enterprise funds.
Toward this end, the City of Chanhassen annually updates its utility rate study. This year's
update takes into account changes in water demand. Significantly, the City sold almost 10% less
water in 2014 than in 2013, and 2015 sales are expected to be similar to 2014. The bulk of the
reduction is due to the wet weather and less irrigation. However, the City is also experiencing a
5% decline in winter water use. Because of this recent trend, this year's rate study uses more
conservative assumptions about future water use than the prior studies and, as a result, is
forecasting the need for higher water rates. In addition, the study provides two options for water
rates. The fust option assumes the West Water Treatment Plant is built in 2023, consistent with
last year's rate study. The second option moves construction of the plant up to 2017.
The 2016 rate recommendations for storm water, sanitary sewer and water rates are in the charts
below, along with last year's recommendations for comparative purposes.
Sanitary
Sewer Proposed
Rates
Last Year's
Proposed
Increases for
2016
Revised 2016
2017 -Beyond
User Charges
4.00%
3.50%
3.50%
Connection Charges
2.00%
2.00%
2.00%
For a typical residential customer using 26,000 gallons of water per quarter, the difference
between a 4.25% and 5.5% water rate increase is 75 cents per quarter. That is, for about 25 cents
per month, residents can have improved water quality six years sooner than previously planned.
Rate increases less than those recommended above will weaken the cash positions of the utility
funds and may attract questions from Standard and Poor's. The City currently benefits from the
AAA rating it has earned from Standard and Poor's. Rating agencies pay attention to enterprise
fund activities for cities, and Standard and Poor's rating methodology looks at whether enterprise
funds will put financial burdens on the general fund due to structural imbalances (i.e., insufficient
utility revenue).
Growth
How quickly the City grows will impact the utility fees collected, hook-up revenues, and storm
water area charges. For the rate study, we have assumed that there will be 120 new residential
units constructed each year from 2016 through 2025. In addition to the residential growth, 35
SAC units are assumed to come from commercial development and new irrigation meters. The
number of new residential units is based on recent development activity and the estimate
assumes that the Lower Bluff Creek area will develop with the extension of sewer and water to it.
Water System
Water Capital Improvements and Bonding
Major capital improvement plans for the water fund include:
• Painting the Lake Lucy Water Storage Stand and Pipes
• Replacing water mains under street reconstruction projects
• Oversizing costs to extend water main along TH101 and to the Lower Bluff Creek area
• Painting of the Watertower Place in 2019
• New wells in 2019, 2023, and 2025
• Elevated Storage Tank in 2023
• West Water Treatment Plant. The treatment plant is estimated to cost $20 million in
today's dollars. Two alternatives are provided for the timing of the treatment plant —
keeping the treatment plant in 2023 or moving the construction of the plant up to 2017.
Regardless of the year in which it is constructed, the costs of the treatment plant are split, with
40% paid by user charges and 60% paid with hook-up fees. Based on conversations with the
City Engineer, this allocation of costs is consistent with the demand patterns created by growth
of the community. All capital costs are inflated 3% annually beginning in 2018.
The rate study anticipates the need to bond for a majority of the improvements listed above. The
need to issue bonds depends upon many factors, and the City should annually review whether it
has sufficient cash to pay for capital improvements prior to issuing debt.
Water Usage
The recommended increase to the water rate in 2016 is largely driven by lower water
consumption. Rain has been plentiful the last two years and irrigation is down. In addition,
water consumption during the winter months has declined about 5%. Overall, the City sold
almost 10% less water in 2014 than in 2013, and similarly low sales are expected in 2015. Most
of the costs associated with the water system are fixed and do not fluctuate with changes in the
amount of water delivered. Therefore, the loss of revenue has not been offset by a similar
decline in operating or capital costs. In 2014, the City's water fund had a net cashflow of just
$13,084, which leaves very little financial capacity to fund future capital projects.
In conducting a rate study, assumptions have to be made about future water consumption. Does
the lower water consumption of the last two years reflect a trend or is it an anomaly? To help
answer this question, we graphed historical water pumping and billing records.
Historical Water Consumption and Future Use
1,400,000,000
1,200,000,000
1,000,000,000
Gallons Sold
800,000,000
Historic Water Pumped
600,000,000
400,000,000
—Future Water Use
Assumed
200,000,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Water consumption varies primarily with weather; however, as previously mentioned, we are
seeing a trend for lower winter consumption as well. To be conservative, this year's rate study
assumes future water use of approximately 920 million gallons per year, as indicated by the
green line in the graph above. If water use trends upward again, future rate increases can be
moderated.
Proposed Water Rates
Over the next five years, the proposed rates shown on the following chart are necessary to meet
future operating, capital and debt costs. Two options are shown, depending on the timing of the
water treatment plant.
2023 Treatment Plant: 4.25% Annual Water Rate Increases
10
0
2.87
3.33 3.47 3.61 3.77
99,000 gallons) $4.06 4.23 4.41 4.60 4.80
2017 Treatment Plant: 5.5% Annual Water Rate Increases
IT'ie'rl (0-6,000 gallons) $1.10 1.16 1.22 1.29
Tier 2 (6,001-24,000 gallons) $2.20 2.32 2.45 2.58
3.06
Tier 4 (48,001-99,000 gallons) $3.19 3.37 3.55
4.28
Different types of water customers are currently billed at different tiers:
• Single family residential customers are billed using all five tiers.
• Multifamily properties pay a flat rate per thousand gallons. The multifamily rate for
2015 is $2.20 per gallon.
• Commercial customers are billed using Tiers 1 through 4 only.
• Irrigation meters are billed using all five tiers.
In addition to the usage charges above, the City of Chanhassen collects a fixed quarterly charge
of $7.98 for the water utility. In 2016, the fixed quarterly charge is proposed to increase the
same rate as the usage charges. If the treatment plant is constructed in 2023, the quarterly charge
will be $8.32. Moving up the treatment plant to 2017 will result in a quarterly charge of $8.42.
Water Hook-up Fees
Water platting and hook-up fees are an important source of revenue needed to expand the water
system and to pay for the second treatment plant. Last year we anticipated the need for a 3.75%
increase in 2016. We are recommending a higher annual rate increase in this year's report
because we are anticipating funding 60% of the water treatment plant with hook-up fee revenue,
whereas we previously assumed only half the treatment plant would be paid for with hook-up
fees. The revised allocation is based on an assessment by the City Engineer that recent and
future growth is driving the need for the West Water Treatment Plant.
Proposed Water Hook-up Fees
(Per SAC Unit)
Developers are concerned about the total cost of City fees associated with their development. To
the extent higher water hook-up fees can be offset by lower increases in other fees, developers
will be less concerned about the water fees. Later in this report we are recommending lower rate
increases for storm water area charges, and modest increases for sewer hook-up fees. Containing
cost increases in the other utilities will help lessen the impact on land developers of the proposed
higher water hook-up charges.
Target Cash Reserves for the Water Funds
The cash balance of a fund is a measure of its financial health and allows the City to respond to
unexpected events without imposing sudden rate increases. The City's cash reserve target for the
Water Fund has historically been equal to six months' worth of operating costs plus 15% of
accumulated depreciation. This target cash balance can be achieved if the treatment plant is
constructed in 2023 and the recommended rate increases are adopted. The following graph shows
the projected cash balances as measured against target cash reserves. Cash balances were high in
2012 because of bond proceeds in the fund that were subsequently used to refund old bonds and
to pay for capital improvements. The City also used cash in 2014 to retire debt early, saving
future interest expense. Finally, cash reserves have dropped the last two years because we have
had regular rainfall and residents and businesses are using less water for irrigation.
Water Fund Capital Cash Reserves - Treatment Plant in 2023
14,000,000 - —
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
4,000,000
2,000,000
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
■Target Working Capital 0Emjected Cash Balance
Moving the treatment plant up to 2017 puts more financial pressure on the Water Fund and will
result in lower cash balances. When the City is undertaking a large capital improvement it is
common to fund less depreciation in a reserve and we have concluded that reducing the target
working capital to six months of operating expenses plus 10% of accumulated depreciation
would be appropriate in the short term. The following graph shows the projected cash balances
if the treatment plant is constructed in 2017. Note that in 2024 the cash balance dips to $3.7
million. Over time the cash will reach the target reserves, but it will require a sustained
commitment to annual rate increases.
Water Fund Capital Cash Reserves - Treatment Plant 2017
14,000,000 - --
12,000,000
10,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
i
4,000,000 -- -
2,000,000
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
■Target Working Capital �Projeded Cash Balance
7
Sanitary Sewer System
Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvements
The capital improvement plans for the sanitary sewer funds are attached in Exhibit A, which
begins on page 14 of this report. Major capital improvements include:
• Replacing sewer mains under street reconstruction projects
• 2010 MUSA Sanitary Lift Station in 2018. We have assumed that half of this project cost
will be assessed, with assessments deferred for up to five years.
• Lower Bluff Creek Trunk Utility Improvements
• TH 101 Improvements from Pioneer to Flying Cloud Drive
• Sub -District LB -1 Lift Station in 2020
• $200,000 per year indefinitely to address inflow and infiltration
Sanitary Sewer Rates
There are two driving factors in setting sewer rates. The first is the amount of discharge,
which is measured by the amount of winter water used. The City of Chanhassen has seen its
winter water consumption decline, consistent with the experience of other cities in the metro
area and across the country. The second factor is the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services' (MCES) disposal fees, which are the single biggest expense in the Sewer Fund. The
following chart shows the last five years of MCES charges plus the expected cost in 2016.
Year
2011
$
MCES Total
Cost
1,519,879
%
Increase
9.7%
2012
$
1,506,629
-0.9%
2013
$
1,398,891
-7.2%
2014
$
1,451,000
3.7%
2015
$
1,579,600
8.9%
2016
$
1,436,872
-9.0%
Early in the decade the MCES charges were increasing rapidly, and the City was expecting to
have to increase its sewer rates accordingly. Our rate study from 2011, for example, projected
6% and 7% annual rate increases. Fortunately, the MCES costs moderated, and even
declined, allowing the City to maintain reasonable rate increases for the last several years.
The MCES has informed the City that 2016 charges are going to decline 9%. We have
assumed future MCES charges will increase again by an average of 4% per year.
Last year we recommended a 4% rate increase to city sewer rates in 2016. This year we are
moderating that to recommend a 3.5% annual increase to the City's sewer rates in 2016 and
annually thereafter. The proposed sewer rates are shown in the following chart.
Quarterly Sewer Rates
Quarterly Fee
11
Usage Fee
(over 6,000 gallons)
Sanitary Sewer Hook-up Fees
Hook-up and platting fees are an important source of revenue needed to expand the sanitary
sewer system. We are recommending that sanitary sewer hook-up and platting fees increase 2%
in 2016 and annually thereafter, consistent with last year's study.
Target Cash Reserves — Sanitary Sewer Fund
Adequate cash reserves are needed to accommodate cash flow needs, fund emergency repairs,
and save for larger future capital projects. The projected cash balance for the Sanitary Sewer
Fund, as compared to the target cash reserve, is shown in the following graph. The target cash
reserve equals nine months of operating expenses plus fifteen percent of accumulated
depreciation, not to exceed four million dollars.
,500,000
,000,000
500,000
Sewer Fund Capital Cash Reserves
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
■Target Working Capital 0Projected Cash Balance
Storm Water Fund
The City of Chanhassen collects two types of storm water fees: quarterly storm water fees paid
by all property owners, and storm water area charges paid by developers when land is platted.
Quarterly Storm Water Fees
We are recommending a 2% rate increase to the quarterly storm water fee for 2016 and beyond.
This is a reduction from the 4% increase projected in last year's rate study. The reduction is
possible because we have a better understanding of storm water capital costs, and have refined
the allocation of the capital projects between those that must be paid with user rates and those
that can be appropriately paid with area charges.
A 2% rate increase in 2016 will result in the following quarterly fees for single family homes.
Fixed Quarterly Fee
Quarterly Storm Water Rates
2015 2016 2017 2018 201
$10.05 $10.25 $10.46 $10.67 $10.88
Commercial and multifamily properties pay storm water fees based on their land use type and
acreage.
The proposed rates will be adequate to meet on-going, maintenance related storm water
expenditures, which include pond maintenance, street sweeping, and implementing the surface
water management plan.
Storm Water Development Charges
Another important revenue source for the Storm Water Fund is the area charges that are collected
when land is platted. Currently, the area charge has two components: water quality and water
quantity. The first charge is intended to cover costs related to improving the quality of water that
runs off impervious surfaces. Developers can get a 50% credit on this charge if they do on-site
ponding. The water quantity charge is intended to cover the cost of infrastructure to handle the
volume of water discharged. In 2015 the water quality charge is $3,110 per developable acre
(before credits) and the water quantity charge is $4,440 per developable acre for single family
residential property. The fee increases as the intensity of land use increases. Most developers do
on-site ponding and thus currently receive the 50% credit to the water quality charge.
Staff has identified two concerns with the current rate structure for storm water area charges.
1) The current fees do not adequately reflect the fact that the majority of storm water
improvements to be undertaken by the City relate to managing water quantity, rather than
quality; and
2) There are inadequate incentives, through credits on fees, for developers to achieve the
target reduction of 1.1 inch of run-off during storm events.
To address these concerns, Ehlers has worked with staff to develop a simplified storm water area
charge that incents reductions in run-off volume. We propose that the distinction between water
10
quality and quantity be eliminated so that there is a single charge per developable acre. Credits,
or reductions to the fee, would be provided if the developers undertake any of a variety of
improvements or design features to reduce run-off. These features would include pervious
pavers, rain gardens, underground storage and the like. The goal would be for each development
to reduce run-off by 1.1 inches during storm events and reach the maximum credit of 50% of the
storm water area charge. Because of site and soil constraints, staff estimates that, on average,
developers will receive a 25% credit.
The proposed 2016 storm water area charges, as compared to the current fees, are listed in the
chart below. The proposed fees are expected to generate a similar amount of revenue. For single
family developments, the net charge (after credits) will be similar to the 2015 charges. For other
types of property, fees have been adjusted to accurately reflect their proportionately higher storm
water generation. With the new structure, townhome developers will pay more than they
currently do, while industrial developers will pay less, depending on the credits awarded.
2015 and Proposed 2016 Storm Water Area Charges
Single Family $3,110 $4,440 $7,550 $8,000
Residential
140 $11,980
$5,840 $6,140 $11,980
$6,490 $9,510 $16,000
Commercial
$22,940
$8,900
$31,840
$30,299
Industrial
$18,030
$8,900
$26,930
$20,742
A 2.5% increase to the storm water area charge is anticipated for 2017 and beyond. This is less
than the 4% increase projected in last year's rate study.
Target Cash Reserves — Storm Water Fund
The projected cash balance in the storm water fund is shown in the following graph. The target
cash reserve is a base of $1 million dollars inflated over time, in order to provide sufficient funds
for future capital needs. The target cash amount approximates 6 months operating expenses plus
the cost of the next year's capital improvements. We expect capital needs will grow as the state
develops more regulatory requirements relating to storm water.
11
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
800,000
600,000
400,000
200,000
0
Storm Sewer Fund Capital Cash Reserves
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
®Target Working Capital OProjected Cash Balance:]
Community Comparison
Each community faces unique challenges and cost structures in delivering utility services to its
residents and businesses. Nonetheless, it is interesting to know where the City of Chanhassen's
utility rates stand in comparison with other communities. A comparison of a quarterly bill can
be found in the chart below. The communities in the chart were selected by the City because they
are growing communities with similar characteristics to Chanhassen.
ms.m
$zso.m, —
uzs.m
umw-
$nsm
$1.
81 }S.W
81 W.00
$75.W-
850 W'
VII.
AMorer
2015 Quarterly Residential Bill for
Chaska Chanhassen PMWsed Proposed CoUags
(Ad.12015) Chanhassen Chanhaasan G,ova
(WTP 2023) (WTP 2017)
Storm Water
I
I
Elk R,,ar Farmi,gton Lina Lake,, Prb, Lake Rosemount
12
13 Storm Water Charges 13Sewer Charges 11Water Charges
Putting It All Together: The Utility Bill
The chart below shows a utility bill for a sample of residential customers who use varying
amounts of water, assuming the treatment plant is constructed in 2017. Proposed hook-up fees
for a single family home are also shown.
Sample Residential Utility Bills - 2017 Treatment Plant
13
Average Quarterly Residential Bill
26,000 gallons water and 26,000 gallons sewer
Water
59.68
62.96
66.43
70.08
73.93
Sewer
108.11
111.89
115.81
119.86
124.06
Storm
10.05
10.25
10.46
10.67
10.88
Total
$177.84
$185.11
$192.69
$200.61
$208.87
Percent Increase
3.5%
4.1%
4.1%
4.1%
4.1%
Amount Increase
$6.23
$7.27
$7.58
$7.92
$8.26
Samnle Bill for Lower Water User
11,000 gallons water and
8,000 gallons sewer
Water
25.58
26.99
28.47
30.04
31.69
Sewer
30.71
31.78
32.90
34.05
35.24
Storm
10_05
10.25
10.46
10.67
10.88
Total
$66.34
$69.02
$71.82
$74.75
$77.81
Percent Increase
3.5%
4.0%
4.1%
4.1%
4.1%
Amount Increase
$2.23
$2.68
$2.80
$2.93
$3.06
Sample Bill for Higher Water User
255,000 gallons water and
26,000 gallons sewer
Water
919.42
969.99
1,023.34
1,079.62
1,139.00
Sewer
108.11
111.89
115.81
119.86
124.06
Storm
10.05
10.25
10.46
10.67
10.88
Total
$1,037.58
$1,092.13
$1,149.60
$1,210.15
$1,273.94
Percent Increase
3.4%
5.3%
5.3%
5.3%
5.3%
Amount Increase
$34.49
$54.55
$57.47
$60.55
$63.79
Hook-up Fees Per Unit
City Sewer Hook-up Fees
2,257
2,302
2,348
2,395
2,443
City Water Hook-up Fees
6 523
6 882
7 260
7 660
8 081
Total
$8,780
$9,184
$9,608
$10,055
$10,524
Percent Increase
3.30%
4.60%
4.62%
4.64%
4.67%
13
Exhibit A — Projections and Capital Improvement Plans
Water Fund Projection: Treatment Plant 2017
Water Capital Improvement Plan: Treatment Plant 2017
Sanitary Sewer Fund Projection
Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Plan
Storm Water Fund Projection
Storm Water Capital Improvement Plan
14
W
O
r
a.
N
a
W
�
U
W
..
q l0
b
M
N
W b
N r
Q
M
O`
Q M
r
b
q
O O
cG M
b N
Q N
C r
N O
V N
N
N
M
r+
M M
O
N
Oi
N
N
C
b O M
q
Q O
N
N
O q
O
h_
r
M
M
T o7
Q
N
r
P
y
o aye
m❑
QNN
NM
ti O
.�
`M
Vi
y
;
b
PNr
r
oo
C
Q q
N
v,o
n
ro
t
u
L
OOZ
O
wa.
t°
Z
.5 v°�'O
q O—
Ua°i
M It
N
O
N .v
% W
y
O
O
O
lD �O
N
Q O
O
r r
A O
b
N
4-
q b
M
N M
N
N
W O N
q
N O
c 11!1
Q�
� P
teV�
'+
M
N_
q b
N
% P%
n
N N
o0
Q
0
P
W
N
N q
N
M
P N
N
a0 O
C r
O V
M O
^ N
N
oo
N N
O P
r
°�
N
N q
fV
Q O
GO h
M M
—
Q oob
N O
M
�
r a
O
P�
hR
�aqC
PO
q
W N
M
N
O M
ci
O O
P q
N b
b N
Q
P D
O
n O
NGe
N
P
N
h
W
Ii N
O b
Q
^ N
M
N -+
r O
P Q
r
vw
N
Z
N
D
N
P
O r
O N
O O
N 1g11
V
O O
O
q
P
O
OooO
q
O O
C h
Ph
M M
q
Vl
N
Q
O O O
Q
r O
r h
N
r
m
M N
m
ti N
N�
o0
N
C
H
er
Q�
M r
b
N O
NJ
b b^
M
V^j O
P 1^
M R
O O_
C
T
b
P
b
P
R
C C W
M Cl b
NM
Q
q
N h
O q
r
a.
N
a
W
�
U
W
..
❑
y
y
o aye
m❑
m
❑pp
Cy
ti O
G C
9
W
y
;
b
N.
Q
C
t
u
L
OOZ
O
wa.
t°
Z
.5 v°�'O
Z
Ua°i
z21
FO
C
A
FL
c
d
E
m
F
n
0
N
is
z a`
C C
d
t E O
N N E
U N =
o�t0
a m
am -
O0
•
U�U
O i N
O N
O M Yf
M •
O W
O a? M
N M
N M n
N M
O
O ^ V
O M W
O e O
N O N
W W
W W
O O
N N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
W
O
O
O
O
W
W
Tr
in
M
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
W
N
N
�n
M
W
pf
C
v
W
0
00
oov
o00
O
O
O
00
O
O
00
O
N
pf
t�l
M
00
OMM
W
M
N
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
W
O
O
0
0
r
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
viM
C5
CS
c
W
r
o
0
EiM
N
O
D)
O
M
N
M
W
O
N
O
(O
O
W
n
W
N
M
�
O
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
0
V
M
00
O
MEO'
-
4
in
W
W
OOM
M
N
V
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
OO
0
0
O
0OM
O
0
N
W
�
M
00
O
O
M
V
N
00
00
O
O
O
M
O
O
O
_
n,O
00
00
N
W
00
N
,O
M
C
O
C
HN
C
O
O'W
.�]
n
•-
N
W
N
Or
O
�N
O
O
O
W
O
O
W
00
00
O
O
O
W
m
EMO•
W
M
6
0
,yl
0Oi
V
N
d
V
M
N
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
00
O
OO
O
EC
O
00
00
O
O
ni
o
iri
ao
n
o
0
0
0
ue
nv
m
m
�
nm
ry
ENi
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
OW
O
O
W
O
O
0
O
0
O
oM
O
NO
W'EO'
O
00
N
O
n
pi
W
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
W
W
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
OO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
`.�
<M
ObOO
O
N
N
O
00'
N
�nNW
in
to
TN
WN
N
N
N
N
N
O
0
0
O
O
O
00
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
00
O
O
00
O
O
O
OO
OpOO
OO
Cl
O
OO
r
h
0
goo
O
W
NW
n
W
O
W
O
O
n
N
N
n
n
n
n
M
M
o
o
r
h
vN
0
9
0
�Qo
min
•
w
$
�rn3
00
o
?
o
U
E
0
3ed�
>3oc3
a
r
a.aOd
C
9-0
c
d
c0
W`
NyN
Wo
No
M'
-
v3
7o
W
E'oC_-
o
0Yd=
'03\'
N
c
0
W
>-�9W.Woa
°°"
pEv
dw
003
w-
�
c
3
EN
C~ON
U
-5W
2
O
ENw@N`NNry
E
o
"O
j2
�•
C
C
d
3
c
c
E
c
oi�co'a
W
d
F-
€3Jr
0
dc'�o
o
o
rte
d
a
_
t
E
dda3
cc0
r�W
U
O
>2
U
C
Fan3
JL
p
wny
0v
a
O
o
v
O
tmmw
o
M=
OdE
a2
o
yN
E
3E
x
md
aaUd
75
3
ik
m
o
Q
m
i
d
O
m
N
d
U
d
d
m
m
m
d>;
C
N
N
N
N
0=
N
o
o
m
a
d>>
ted,
0
J
Q
U
3
V1
2i
�i
d
K
S
d
K
J
K
3
a
W=
3
3
3
3
J
H
3
2
N
n
2�
2
W
C
O i N
O N
O M Yf
M •
O W
O a? M
N M
N M n
N M
O
O ^ V
O M W
O e O
N O N
W W
W W
O O
N N
N 01
M
O h
Vf
W
vt P
M
O O
M Q
O �C
N
0.
v3
S
W
U
h O
h
v
e
N@
1�
v
N W
O �-•
M M
f!1
V v
rPco
MM
@
v,o r
oo
N
v,a
og
r �n
OO
W h v�
O
h
hN
O1�
C
W
N �
Vl
D
•�_.
W�
W �W
L
M
It P
N
h
V1
m
V M f+
m
vl
Q
O C
M N
O
i•O� C.
M
V V
N r
h
M h
W
M
U N
r P
�O Qi
r
m
N M
O O
h
O
li
M W
m
N
P
OOZ
W 0.FO
Z
DO
Z
um
zw
FO
M N
M
O
10
@ O
O Q
W
M
O M
M
C
r V
V
N O
O O
m P@
b r
M
00
T v)
m
V
r O
O P
N
W
O
O
P e
O K
a •r-�
r M�
oP0 h
r
P
O M
m
h r
V
r
p r
O
C OS
O^
M N
M
a
P
C`
00
00
P
m O r
M
r O@
N
O N
M O
Y =
O=
r
O
O
C
N N
N N
Q
a
N N
O
Moo
O
O
e 0@
m
10
0l
O l�
h
a
M vi
w
vy
.n m
c
W
red a
O CO
O e
h M
N
m W@
r
W N
m
W
N1
h O
O O
m N
N
@
W@
Q
M
Vl
M
N
O
N N
�
@
@
vl P
m
W O
W
W
M O W
P
V O
e b
O 4
e
m
P
o vi
r o
vi Vi
o
r M@
M
M
r
M O
m 00
O^
O M
ON1�
r
r
O
r
O
O
r
P m
O
h
O
h P
O h
m m
O
m
m
M
vl W
h
vl
� O
O O
m N
@
M
M
r
v
@ Ir1
O Ifi
N N
Q
V
mm
n
N N
v
Q
M
O O
O
O O
O
O
O O O
O
O
0p
O W
vi r
oo
m
m
—
.. m
h
P
•^. T
-. r
N N
Q
M
M r—
M O
M
CO
W Vi r
t`
Vl O
N CC
eG
r M@
@
Q
P
M m
M
M e
^ M
VO@
M
M
O
M'+.
@
Vl
WM
^N
P r
N
@
@
M
T r
NI
vI
r_ O
O O
N
C
W
v
N
0.
v3
S
W
U
�
U
N W
C
W
N �
Vl
D
•�_.
W�
W �W
L
S C
C L d
y aS
¢�.
0� O'
U
St; •S
C y
3 y
WI W�
A Q
L
O
i•O� C.
>N>
r-Gi Q
�
W P.
.0 V
U N
OOZ
W 0.FO
Z
DO
Z
um
zw
FO
C
M M
ark
M
u
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
00
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q
M
O
O
ON
O
m
O
N
M
O
NN
N
O
OOZY!
W
W
O
O
O
ow
O
N
N
N
N
0
0
0
00
o
d
o
o
d
0
0
0
N
0
0
0-
O
O
m
6,6
O
O
M
O
O
O
M
YI
';9
N
NN
N
OWO
CMN
O
N
ON
NN
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
C,0-
00
O
O
O
CL
r
OL
1
_
OM
N
Om
N
N
c,
O
06,6
W
C
ON
N
N
N
N
00
00
O
O
M
O
O
O
00
00
00
00
O
OON
O
M
O
O
O
OED
O
M
00
O
M
N
O
O
M
N
N
N
O
M O
N
N
N
O
O
00
O
O
W
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
o
O
O
M
N
O
O
O
O
N
W
O
N
M
O
N
N
N
O
O
M
W
O
N
O
O
O
O
I
M
0
0
0
00
O
O
o
o
O
CO
W
m
I-
0
N
0
0
00
O
O
N
N
N
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
CO
O
O
�O
tOM
OM
ON
O
O
O
O'
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
V
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
N
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
O
O
O
O
N
0000C,
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
W
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
N
_J
M
O
O
O
O
MM
O
O
O
O
M
N
N
N
N
Q
W
O
O
N
N
N
N
M
NO)
n
W
O
NM
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
N
N
O
OO
O
N'
N
N
N
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
00
O
O
00C,
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
v
M
O
N
O
N
N
O0
O
O
N
N
N
N
y
N
N
N
N
N
T
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
O
O
0
00
00
OO
o
0
00
,.7
0
0
0
0
C
0
0"
0
0
0
0
r
iri
vi
Yi
Yi
n
r
vi
O
N
vi
M
Q
Q
M
M
M
O
O
N
y
Q
y
V%
NC
W
V
49
y
E
a
E
aN�
o
—R9
o
o
d
0
N
'0
O
• a
O
LL
O
M
L
OI
W
CO
Op
.N
O
N
O
m
E
fn
c
�oU
co
C7w
efn
o
E
o
d
•E''�r
0
2
m
m
c
E°cg'EE�cvw
na
U
N
N
tUV
E
R
7
V
G
N
7
i
p
LL
C
O
N
0
fq
�
c:,
J
3
r
T
_
W
Wm
c
O
y
a
C
2
C=
0
c
0
G
O
F
q
'C
y~�
U
U
y
M
C
o
LL'
O
q
Y
K
y~
V
a
a
g
a
N"-
2JCJd
aU
p•o
a
�cm
cerci
U
aJ;E,
0•o
a
o
xnofnin
E�a�iq
'o��2
M
-a
a
3
c«
n
E
S
o
t
3
y
a
c
o
in�'
Q«
0
0
�
O
Ja�J
U1N
O)
�
�
LLN
C
�
N
JFK
-�/1LLN
C
M M
ark
M
u
U
N
N
O
O P
1
N
r r
C
V
R
M
N
Oz
N �G
�D
N
v1
v1 0o
P
O
o0 b
h -
b b
T
P
b VV
O
N
of M
W V.
N
N yy�
it
N W
P
O O
O
n
N O P
rl
r O
P M
P O
a
N
M
N
N
^
W
V
V' O
W `L
M
P
T
M [
(pY
O
N O
h b
W
N H
b h
Q
P
.ri rq
O
b
r.
M N
O O
O
O O
O
O
O O N
N
O O
N b
O b
�
P
P
p
619
M
N
rpt
M
V
a
O
O
O O
O
O O
O
O
O O O
O
O O
O V
O O
10
J
b P
N
N
ti M
M
O
rvi Mj
O
P
O
y
4>
C
Q
i
aft
.a
3
�
G
0
A❑�
v
S G O
�
L D
V
'� C
p
Z
D
z
0O
z
W GCF
Z
Sl.,O
Z
UW
z
FO
N
N
O
E
yej ^ yej
N O N
W
0
O
00
0
0
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
r
O
N
N
r
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
i
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
'S
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
ONO
O
Y>O
00�
O
�tl
00
O
00
0
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
C I
O
N
N
o
O
0
O
0
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
N
O
O
O
O
G
as
3�
<
�o
a
a
�sN
9�N9
N
m
a
w-aEia��,w,3
3�
o
c
p
W
N
�oNO'_
E
y
y�a"[L
N
.
,~p
a
E
E
a
w
Q=
a
E
m
o
0
E
d
a
o
v
y
3:
y
0
w
o
o
a
a
o
E
-E
2
iN
o._a��
p
o
0
G
v
v
a
v
a
tO
E
3
N
c
W
'v�
2i
J
d
Q
w
i
N
E
E
N
4
cm
.N.
��5aQcumfOm
dm
wwd
10
U,
K
c
o
p
E
2
U
c
c
E
d
.E
w
w
2
a
x
w
a
`c
o"
Y
x
N'N
c
y@
U
wt�aww
�
a
O
w
F
O
O
U
N
d
O
^'
p
C
J
U
p
U
`>MW
1C
N
N
y
d
a`.
a'
'o
U
3
m¢>.
E
d
v
m
d
`o
N
n
m
3
°.0
3
a
T
y'n
c
°'
E
0
w
€=�15yd
U
y
a
v
mQ
-
3
x
O
0
7
0
w
a
n._x._m
O
p
Y
R
U
fn
:7
O.
VI
ON
J
J
M
J
M
CO
>
D
d
H
J
J
V
ll
yej ^ yej
N O N
W