2005, 05-10 Regular Meeting MinutesMINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 66 meeting
Attendance:
Diana Wilhite, Mayor
Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor
Dick Denenny, Councilmember (arrived late)
Mike DeVleming, Councilmember
Mike Flanigan, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Absent:
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Dick Denenny, Councilmember
City Staff:
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Cal Walker, Police Chief
Greg McCormick, Planning Manager
Tom Scholtens, Building Official
Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Greg "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Others Present: David Crosby, Sign Committee Chair
INVOCATION: Pastor Mike Sager of the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Wilhite led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, and
unanimously agreed upon to excuse Councilmembers Schimmels and Denenny from tonight's meeting..
City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all other Councilmembers were present.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Wilhite announced that an Executive Session will be added at the
end of this meeting, in order to discuss labor negotiations, that the Executive Session will last for
approximately 30 minutes, after which, no action will be taken and the meeting will adjourn. It was
moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Councilmember Taylor to approve the amended
agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, and Councilmembers
Taylor and Flanigan. Opposed: Councilmember DeVleming. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS
Councilmember Taylor reported that he attended the Junior Lilac Parade this past Saturday. Deputy
Mayor Munson reported that he attended a meeting in Seattle dealing with the Association of Washington
Cities' upcoming agenda for legislative action; that they discussed the new gas tax and the possible
affects it could have on us, and that the tax will likely start this fall. He also reported that he attended the
Junior Lilac Parade; and the Light Rail Committee Operations meeting last week and that they are
implementing the new route schedule which is also available on -line at the STA website.
MAYOR'S REPORT:
Mayor Wilhite reported that she attended the Junior Lilac Parade; and a Board of County Commissioner's
meeting; she then gave the highlights of the Tourism Week proclamation, and proclaimed May 7 through
15 as Tourism Week.
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
VOUCHER LIST
DATE
VOUCHER
Number(s)
TOTAL
VOUCHER
AMOUNT
04 -22 -05
6674 -6707
1,249,924.50
05 -02 -05
6720 -6758
146,559.14
GRAND TOTAL
1,396,483.64
PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Wilhite invited public comments for items not on the agenda; no
comments were given.
1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A
Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately.
(Note: Council may entertain a motion to waive reading and approve Consent Agenda.)
a. Approval of Joint Council /Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2005
b. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2005
c. Approval of Payroll of April 30, 2005 of $156,709.25
d. Approval Authorizing the City Manager to sign City Hall office space sub -lease for Suite 103,
2005 -2008 First Federal Securities, Sub - Lessor; and for office space lease for Suite 103,
2008 -2010 Northwest Christian Schools
f. Approval of the Following Vouchers:
Councilmember Taylor requested that Consent item #le be removed from the Consent Agenda to be
discussed separately. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded, to waive the reading and
approve the consent agenda minus item #1e. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:
None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
e. Approval of Resolution 05 -007 Setting Planning Commission Public Hearing for Lawson Street
Vacation Request
Councilmember Taylor asked that in examining the drawings included with this agenda item, if this road
was something that planning to going to use for an alternate access route if Mansfield was not extended.
Public Works Director Kersten replied that Mansfield is shown as an arterial on the drawings, and is on
the arterial road plan, which would go through that property; that the current vacation is half of the right -
of -way along the railroad property, and that this part would be vacated with the intention that the arterial
would remain in place. Councilmember Taylor then asked if there is an issue with an existing apartment
building along Mansfield, and if Mansfield were to go through without curving around down toward
Shannon, if that apartment complex would have to be torn down. Mr. Kersten replied that eventually for
Mansfield to go through, the property (shown on the map as the arrow on the yellow dotted line) would
have to be taken for right -of -way and construction of the road. Taylor stated asked if it is correct that if
there were an alternate access route coming from Mirabeau Parkway, an alternate route after this right -of-
way vacation could not go down around Shannon. Mr. Kersten said that is correct; that several different
alignments were examined and the problem with the curve coming from Mansfield is those curves don't
meet current standards; that several alignments were examined, but because the roadways were already
established at each end, with the current alignment standards, there is very little room to maneuver around
which results in that being detrimental to the property that is left over and would not work well.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Taylor to approve the
resolution setting May 26, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. as the date for a public hearing before the Spokane Valley
Planning Commission dealing with this street vacation. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous.
Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
NEW BUSINESS
2. Motion Consideration: Full -width Paving — Neil Kersten
It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Mayor Wilhite, that the City of Spokane
Valley provide for full width paving on the listed properties: Mica Park /Sherwood Johnston; Edgerton;
Parks Road; Orchard Avenue; and nothing [no amount listed] for Inland.
Public Works Director Kersten explained that the County has completed bids on Mica Park, Sherwood,
and Johnson, and those bids for the full -width paving were $205,167; they also completed bids on
Edgerton with a cost of $67,553; they are currently in the process of bidding the remaining projects of
Parks Road with an estimated cost of $87,774, and Orchard Avenue with an estimated cost of $97,604. In
response to Deputy Mayor Munson's question of available choices in funding the balance of 2005's road
activities, Mr. Kersten said that there are available funds within the 2005 budget; and brought Council
attention to the spreadsheet entitled "City of Spokane Valley - Capital Improvement Program Funding"
showing resources and expenditures for years 2005 through 2011; he mentioned that pave -back estimates
are difficult until the project has been designed, but that in years 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, the road
preservation would need to be reduced by about half to fund those projects; again that all are based on
incoming revenues and actual cost of each project. In response to a question from Councilmember
Flanigan on projected life -span of patching; Mr. Kersten responded that each road's life -span is
dependent upon the current age of the road; and that cutting and patching older roads (20+ years old for
example) creates more stress on the roads than doing the full -width paving; which actually decreases the
life of the pavement. Mr. Kersten stated that the roads in Mica Park/Sherwood/Johnston area are
approximately 30 years old, and would require some work within five years of patching. Director Kersten
said that if the patchwork were done, it would be a good idea to do some type of sealant to give the road a
few more years; and in the Mica Park/Sherwood area, the cost would be approximately $80,000; as
opposed to pave -back wherein the roads would not need any type of maintenance for a long period of
time, approximately another 20 years.
In response to other questions about width of a typical patch, Mr. Kersten explained that wider streets (as
in Sherwood Forest) usually have about half the street patched; and depending on where the connections
are to the home, every home or every other home will have a trench across to the other side; which results
in over half the road being torn up and patched; he added that the cut or main seam would be at the center
of the road which allows cross -cuts all the way across. Mr. Kersten said that wherever there are curbed
streets and wider roads, there will typically be a lot of patching and cutting; and those without curbs and
with narrow roads, most of those will be replaced. Deputy Mayor Munson said it would be good to get an
idea of how many projects are already approved, and how many more would be slated for this work; and
then determine how many capital projects will not be completed if this full -width paving receives
approval. Mr. Kersten went over the "Draft 6 -Year Residential Preservation Street Plan" showing the
projects which might not be completed or partially completed; he stated that if revenues stay as projected,
the Slurry seal coats (those projects are the ones in the older neighborhoods to extend the pavement for a
few more years) would likely be deleted; and that there is about one slurry project every year at a cost of
approximately $500,000 each. Mr. Taylor mentioned that for 2006 the only project next year is the
Sprague Avenue at Evergreen and Sullivan for a grind and inlay, and there will be future needs for
another revenue source to maintain the streets.
PUBLIC COMMENT: Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. The following individuals spoke in
favor of moving forward with full -width paving as stated in the above motion:
1. John Hart, 2406 N Dollar Road; representing Avista Utilities
2. Ed Simpson, 9720 E Archery
3. Terry Johnson, S 1019 Marian, Sherwood Forest
4. David Gnotta, 805 S Marian Ct
5. Margaret Heimerman, 1317 S Mica Park Drive
6. Mark Weidman, S 1021 Little John Court
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
7. Richard Harmon, 17610 E Mission
8. Steve Durgin, 1108 S Maraim
9. Tony Lazanis, Spokane Valley
10. Howard Herman, 117 N McDonald
11. Bill Gothmann, 10010 E 48
12. Dennis Stancieu, 1020 S Little John Court
13. Patty Muncy, 1014 S Dishman Rd
14. Kyle Robertson, 1320 S Robin Hood Lane
Mayor Wilhite invited further public comment; no further comments were issued. Council discussion
ensued regarding the worthiness of the project; the bond issue as proposed for the ballot issue that failed;
that the majority of those who voted were opposed to this proposal; the likelihood of another bond
measure of this type passing; full width paving compared with patching; cost effectiveness of patching
versus full -width paving; budget implications; maintaining good roads; other neighborhoods which might
need full funding in the future; other aspects of future funding; completion of the STEP program (Sewer
Tank Elimination Program); the economy; and equal advantage for all.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, and Councilmembers Taylor and Flanigan. Opposed:
Deputy Mayor Munson and Councilmember DeVleming. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor
Wilhite called for a recess at 7:15 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:29 p.m.
3. Second Reading Proposed Sign Ordinance 05 -016 — David Crosby
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and
seconded by Councilmember DeVleming to approve ordinance 05 -016 amending the sign regulations.
Mr. Crosby briefly gave the background of the sign ordinance leading up to this second reading. Deputy
Mayor Munson stated that he wanted to ensure that all recommended changes brought up at the study
session are included in the ordinance, specifically that previously Councilmember Denenny brought up
the sign replacement issue in that if a sign were damaged, that he felt it should be replaced with the same
size sign. It was mentioned that change was not made. Mr. Driskell also mentioned there are two
provisions in the proposed ordinance which might need amending: page 2, obsolete sign: a sign not
removed within 36 months by the owner; and page 10, section 10.07.09.08.4 — in the existing sign that no
longer advertises a bona fide business, referring to 60 days; and that he suggests the time limit be
consistent with either 36 months or 60 days. Mr. Crosby stated that page 2 deals with the sign structure,
and the reference on page 10 deals with the copy area. Councilmember Taylor asked that that section be
clarified. After discussion concerning sign structure, definition of support structure and the possibility of
referring to that in the obsolete sign section; copy area, the length of time to keep a sign if the business no
longer exists; the idea of granting one -year extensions; cost to remove and/or replace signs; and
Councilmember Denenny's previous concerns, Deputy Mayor Munson withdrew his motion; with
concurrence from seconder Councilmember DeVleming. It was Council consensus to bring this issue
back for further council consideration so that staff can address these issues.
4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 05 -018, Amending 2005 Budget — Ken Thompson
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and
seconded by Deputy Mayor Munson to pass ordinance 05 -018. Finance Director Thompson gave a brief
overview of the ordinance and the changes since the first reading. In response to Council question, Mr.
Thompson stated that in regard to full -width paving, adequate appropriations for that fund have been
allowed, and whether those funds are spent on full -width paving or something else, the funds are
available. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
5. Motion Consideration: Authorization of Permit Specialist Position — Nina Regor
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Mayor Wilhite to approve the authorization of
1.0 FTE Permit Specialist. Deputy City Manager Regor explained the need for this position, the
background of the proposal, that the position is included in the proposed budget amendment just passed,
and that there already exists a classification and position description for the permit specialist. Mayor
Wilhite invited public comment. No comments were offered. After brief council discussion concerning
the cost and duties, the vote was taken by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
6. Motion Consideration: City /County Park Facility Cooperative Use Pilot Project — Mike Jackson
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to authorize the City
Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute a letter of agreement with Spokane County for
cooperative use of park and recreation facilities. Parks and Recreation Jackson explained the proposal of
facility sharing as shown on his May 10, 2005 Request for Council Action form. Mr. Jackson mentioned
that the cost of field preparation is included in the Senske contract at a fixed rate; that should this be
approved, we would be able to use Camp Carro for summer camp and summer programs; and the County
would have access to our ballfields; that he proposes we develop a letter of agreement and once agreed
upon, staff will track the use and report back in the fall. Director Jackson added that Plantes Ferry would
be included in the exchange, but he would have to check on the question of including the Fair Grounds.
Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. No comments were offered. Discussion then included frequency
of ballfield use; that other options can be examined later; our actual use and the County's actual use; other
possible facilities for exchange purposes, and adding a list of all facilities in the agreement letter; and that
this is a pilot program and the first year can be viewed as a learning year. Vote by acclamation: In Favor:
Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on
the Agenda.
Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague: said that he would like to comment on the proposed sign ordinance as
public comments were omitted as the motion to approve the ordinance was withdrawn. Council
concurred that Mr. Behm may comment. Mr. Behm stated that signs are worth thousands of dollars and
are viewed as permanent structures, and are appraised and taxed as real property; and if the City takes a
sign down in that 36 month period, that would be a taking and he suggests Council ask the Attorney to
examine that issue.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment]
7. Helmet Safety Update — Michelle Wolkey, Spokane Regional Health District
Michelle Wolkey, legal council for the Health District, and Spokane Valley resident, updated Council on
the status of the helmet safety issue. She stressed the importance of this issue as she sees many bicycle
riders without helmets; and yesterday on her way home from work, she saw a crunched up bike in the
bike lane, that the rider had obviously suffered a traumatic head injury and she understands that person is
in critical condition. She briefed Council on the proposed ordinance, and mentioned that the helmets
would be required for bicycle riders, scooter operators, and skateboard riders; she explained the different
penalties proposed for the different ages (five to fifteen; and 16 and over); the need for education; how to
get helmets if the rider could not afford one; and that guardians could be cited if their charge were riding a
bike without a helmet while in the presence of the guardian. She also addressed that special events would
require the use of helmets to participate in the event; and mentioned the idea of having promotional
materials to educate the public on the change, if approved. [ Councilmember Denenny arrived at 8:20
p.m.] There was discussion concerning the penalty of civil infraction; the enforceability of such an
ordinance; discretionary citing capabilities of officers; and other cities that have enacted similar
ordinances. It was Council consensus to move forward for formal consideration.
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
8. Initiative /Referendum — Cary Driskell
Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that staff was requested to provide an update on the
initiative /referendum issue; that one question that arose was whether initiative and referendum must be
linked or if one power can be adopted without adopting the other; that at this point there is no case law,
and no Attorney General Opinion; and therefore he feels the issue is still open. Discussion then included
the possibility of citizens asking for a levy for full -width paving and other taxing issues; and Mr. Driskell
indicated he would check on the limitations of the powers. It was Council consensus to place this issue in
ordinance form for an upcoming study session agenda item.
9. Mansfield Road Development Agreement — Neil Kersten
Public Works Director Kersten reported that A& A Construction & Development are proposing to
develop their property on Mansfield Road between Pines and Mirabeau Parkway; that they participated in
the Pines /Mansfield development and entered into voluntary agreement on this property also; that Phase I
can begin immediately, they have submitted a building permit request for their apartment complex; and
that while they are still working to ensure all conditions will be met, staff proposes moving this forward
for a motion consideration at the May 24 council meeting. Discussion then ensued regarding concerns of
the road width; grant funds to cover some costs; parking restrictions; peak traffic numbers; the question of
a quit claim deed to be signed within a certain number of days of agreement finalization; access to the
development; and concurrency. It was decided staff will bring this issue forward at the May 24 Council
meeting.
10. Greenacres Moratorium Request — Scott Kuhta
Senior Planner Kuhta stated that this is an attempt to finalize any remaining issues dealing with last
August's citizen petition requesting a moratorium against development of densities of more than one
house per acre until interim zoning is adopted; that the Planning Commission voted not to grant the
moratorium; that the issue was resolved on the area -wide rezone; that since then he spoke with Mary
Pollard (who brought the petition forward) who asked that Mr. Kuhta express that they (the petitioners)
want it to have time to finish the planning, that they are currently working on the transportation network
planning, and are concerned the area will be fully developed before they have time to implement any
plans. Mr. Kuhta stated that he believes the intent is for the neighborhood group to have a moratorium of
no more development until plans are developed and then development would have to abide by those
plans. Council asked if the Planning Commission realized that intent when they made their
recommendation to deny, and Mr. Kuhta stated he is uncertain if the Planning Commission was aware of
such intent. Discussion followed on the length of moratoriums, time constrains for renewals; procedural
requirements for such; and of the desire to hear Planning Commission perspective on this issue; and of the
desire to have closure for those residents.
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded by Deputy Munson, and unanimously agreed to extend
the meeting five additional minutes.
It was determined that this issue will be placed on the June 7 study session in an attempt to come to some
resolution of this issue.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to extend the meeting
for 35 minutes for purposes of entering into Executive Session. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor
Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, Councilmembers Taylor, Denenny, and Flanigan. Opposed:
Councilmember DeVleming. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
It was moved by Mayor Wilhite, seconded by Deputy Mayor Munson and unanimously agreed upon to
enter into executive session for the purpose of discussing labor relations for approximately 30 minutes;
and thereafter the meeting would adjourn without further decisions being made. Council adjourned into
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
Executive Session at 9:07 p.m. Mayor Wilhite declared Council out of executive session at
approximately 9:50 p.m. It was then moved by Mayor Wilhite, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, ,
and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:51 p.m.
ristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
"67.--
0-uoti, lAikk.(k
Diana Wilhite, Mayor
Council Meeting: 05 -10 -05 Page 7 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -24 -05
SOOkane
May 2, 2005
Spokane Valley City Council
11707 East Sprague
Spokane, WA 99206
RE Greenacres Moratorium Request
Council Members-
On November 18, 2004, the Spokane Valley Planning Commission considered a
request for a development moratorium in the North Greenacres neighborhood.
The moratorium request was forwarded to the Commission via the City Clerk in
the form of a petition signed by Greenacres residents
After discussion, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City
Council deny the requested moratorium. The Commission did not find that a
development moratorium was warranted, but did believe that the Greenacres
areawide rezone would address many of the neighborhood's issues.
Thank you,
r� c
David Crosby, Chair
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhallwspokanevalley.org
Attachment: November 19, 2004 Planning Commission meeting minutes
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
TOPIC OF CONCERN
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
h� --AVti
�! � ,d 1-L.
; Al . /(Rt(
9) 7z
E6 v / ,tit f's J
`
P74. /4 f
`x_ / _ / r 5;rj
T /7/t /.._Th /1
`e* t// A.,- ,
s /41/9 -14 4 '.... -,
9„I 2 7 ) e
72 v r d C. Nor( A
va4 A, i, ,
8o 5 1
9 1) vS
� , , Al
E /Q9° 4 ' 7Z ( ,�ol.A)
,
. '08 L
j Mi P: ;JP li• , ►e 1 . 1
1 , r k 5 'Pt (l (Lt-
i Avt
962% -( E Grrck
° )Z`1-23
T`o .r>�6tts 6c:
ct ; ,
9 (c-ay L /1rct-4 ,
qa4 - .;-
,-S;4.,,Qi C (L ,,
P /4.0
/o r s s 1_46 Jol
8 21- - 38s g
/.tom :, . a.
• , I.
__ ,
; • __..
- f 7 / 1 / � :
, 01 -4
411.41.
a:tiAit s
& • - / I.4iI ±
!_.. i
akdatSL = "...A.;.
fl 1 7/< INA laiDg4'
/0111
A , J4)
/I.kwafik
- _ it 7L
q C
-540 /Z Ir/Li. , 7 1 0#4 o
f 1 eit. AA1.= 41oAJ
I icrly L. N ISs ,0•.1
79 P- - ' 2 K
Stevt hpi '„„
pav
sl lob lht04,o.v,
(2.(0-)-391-1
PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN -IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE 4 -/ -a s
CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THIS AGENDA. PLEASE STATE YOUR
NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOUR TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
•
Mansfield Road
Development
Agreement
anlre
•
May 10, 2005
Phase I
• Upon approval of this agreement by the
Parties, the City shall issue a building
permit for Phase I.
Page 2
Mansfield Road May 10, 2005
Pha
F he Develop er shall prepare the Mansfield Avenue
et plans. Upon plan acceptance by the city, the
eloper shall post a bond for the construction of
the improvements, as identified in Paragraph 11
above. The Developer shall secure a street easement
across parcel 45103.0203 from the owner allowing
for public travel and construct an access street in
accordance with the paragraph entitled "Phase 11
Access" of this agreement. The City shah then issue
a building permit for Phase II, providing all other
conditions have been met.
Page 4
Mansfield Road
_I May 10 2005 I -
F
Phase III
• When the City obtains funding and right of way
to connect the Developer's property and street
improvements to the existing Mansfield Avenue
intersection with Pines Road (SR 27), the
Developer shall then construct Mansfield
Avenue through the Property in accordance with
the construction plans accepted by the City as
described in Phase II. . Any street
improvements must be accepted by the City
before they will be deemed to be in compliance
with this Agreement or City standards.
Page 6
Mansfield Road May 10, 2005
iM • •.
�:,-
- 1 i •