Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2010-04-13 Board of Selectmen Handout
DRAFT MOTIONS BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING APRIL 13, 2010 Tafoya, Bonazoli, Anthony, Goldy, Schubert Hechenbleikner 2a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the proclamation declaring the week of April 11 - 17, 2010 as Public Safety Telecommunications Week in Reading. 3a) Move that the Board of Selectmen place the following name into nomination for one position on the ad hoc Municipal Building Committee with a term expiring December 31, 2010: Andrew Grimes 4c) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing on setting the water, sewer and storm water rates for FY2011. Move that the Board of Selectmen set the FY 2011 Water Rate at $ per 100 cubic feet with a minimum quarterly bill of $ , effective with the September 10, 2010 billing. Move that the Board of Selectmen set the FY 2011 Sewer Rate at $ per 100 cubic feet with a minimum quarterly bill of $ , effective with the September 10, 2010 billing. Move that the Board of Selectmen set the Storm water Rate at $ per unit (2,552 square feet) per year to be billed quarterly. 4d) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing for a Package Store Liquor License applied for by Peter J. Donovan d/b/a The Wine Bunker at 128 Marketplace Shopping Center, One General Way. Move that the Board of Selectmen (approve)(deny) the application for a Package Store Liquor License applied for by Peter J. Donovan d/b/a The Wine Bunker at 128 Marketplace Shopping Center, One General Way, for a term expiring December 31, 2010 (subject to the following conditions) (for the following reasons): 0 (All Bylaws, Rules and Regulations of the Town of Reading and of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts shall be followed, and subject to a satisfactory inspection of the establishment by the Town Manager.) 4e) Move that the Board of Selectmen close the hearing on amendments to the outdoor dining policy. Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the amendments to Section 3.10 of the Board of Selectmen Policies Licenses for Utilizing Public Sidewalks for outdoor dining (as amended). 4f) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the change of Officer for RARE Hospitality International, Inc. d/b/a Longhorn Steak House located at 39 Walkers Brook Drive: 4g) Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 4 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 5 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 6 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 7 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article S of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 9 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 10 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 11 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 12 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 13 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 14 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 15 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 16 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 17 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 19 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject *matter of Article 20 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 21 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 23 of the Annual Town Meeting. Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 24 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. Move that the Board of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 25 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. 9., Move that the Board, of Selectmen support the subject matter of Article 29 of the Annual Town Meeting Warrant. 5a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of March 16, 2010 as amended. 5b) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of March 30, 2010 as amended. 7a) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the Executive Session minutes of March 16, 2010 as written. BT JB CA SG RS Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the Executive Session minutes of March 30, 2010 as written. BT JB CA SG RS Move that the Board of Selectmen adjourn the meeting at p.m. -(9. TOWN MANAGER'S REPORT Tuesday, April 13, 2010 Administrative matters ♦Annual Town Meeting starts April 26 - warrant report is on the web site ♦ Customer Service survey - 87 responses in 1st Q ♦ Governor Patrick has ordered that the United States and Commonwealth flags be lowered to half-staff immediately and until further notice at all state buildings in honor of former Minority Leader of the Massachusetts House of Representatives Francis W. Hatch, Jr., who died Thursday, April 8, 2010. ♦ Town Hall 4 day work week - increased hours available to the public ♦ Election Tuesday - congratulations to all participants ♦ Election for Voke School ♦ Sharps Collection Community Development ♦ Encore Consignment Shop 159 Ash Street ♦ Reading Fall Street Faire Open House for Thursday, April 22nd at 7:30 p.m. in the Senior Center. ♦ Non conforming signs ♦ "Our thanks to Reading for the town's perseverance and patience in establishing it's second 40R Smart Growth Overlay District. Attached is a copy of the signed 40R Letter of Approval. Hardcopies to follow Bill Reyelt * MA DHCD. " ♦ Update re Mattera Cabin Public Works ♦ Lighting upgrades 1-93 ♦ There will be a ground breaking ceremony for Memorial Park on April 22 at 3:30 PM. ♦ The spring guide for recreation activities -in Reading is out to all households in Reading. ♦ The Compost Center opened Friday, April 2. ♦ The Household Hazardous waste Collection will be in Reading on May 22. There is also a fall collection in Wakefield. ♦ Sump pumps ♦ Street Sweeping has started ♦ Hydrant Flushing starts shortly Construction projects in progress or to be done this year (between now and June 30, 2010): ♦ Done except for loam and seed - School Street Lincoln street Sandra Lane South Street Main to Hopkins Scotland Road ♦ paving to occur in mid to late spring Bear Hill Road North Street Pinevale Avenue Juniper circle ♦ Micro-chip seal - mid to late spring Hopkins Street (Main. to Wakefield Town Line);.and 2 to 3 other streets ♦ Skim coating of local streets Lewis ♦ Fishing Pier - Lobs Pound Mill - Under Construction ♦ Trail construction - Bare Meadow ♦ Memorial Park ♦ Washington Park playground ♦ Killam School playground ♦ Master Plan for Joshua Eaton playground Dates and Events: ♦ April 22 - 3:30 PM - Ground Breaking Memorial Park ♦ Annual Town Meeting starts April 26 ♦ Friends and Family Day (AKA Town Day), June 19. ♦ Fall Street Faire, September 12 9 April 1, 2010 Ben Tafoya, Chairman Board of Selectmen Town Hall 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Commonwealth of Massachusetts DEPARTMENT OF MOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Deval L. Patrick, Governor ® Timothy P. Murray, Lt. Governor ® Tina Brooks, Undersecretary Re: Downtown Smart Growth District - Letter of Approval Dear Mr. Tafoya: C' ~,S i J1 6 A ~r t1J cro Pursuant to MGL, Chapter 40R and 760 CMR 59.05(4), I am pleased to issue this non-expiring Letter of Approval to the Town of Reading (Town) for its adoption on November 30, 2009 of the Downtown Smart Growth District (District). The District allows for the construction of 256 Incentive Units. The Town is entitled to a $350,000 Zoning Incentive Payment from the Smart Growth Housing Trust Fund established by outside section 26, subsection 35AA of Chapter 149 of the Acts of 2004. This Letter of Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1 If a building permit has not been issued for a Bonus Unit in the District within three years of the date of the Zoning Incentive Payment, or if a building permit was issued within such three-year period, but no certificate of occupancy for such Bonus Unit was issued within two years thereafter, the Town must submit satisfactory evidence, in the form of certification by the Plan Approval Authority, zoning enforcement officer or public works official, of the start of construction within that time period of one or more Projects as defined by 760 CMR 59.02, or be subject to revocation under 760 CMR 59.07(3) and the repayment of monies under 760 CMR 59.06(3). The start of construction requires evidence satisfactory to the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) that construction activity has occurred in good faith on the Project, such as the pouring of foundations or footings, or utility relocation, or the remediation of hazardous materials on the site, and provided that such construction is continued through to completion. The three-year time period is extended by the time that a Project on which construction would otherwise have started within the three-year time period is subject to legal or administrative appeal or challenge, or if the proponent is actively pursuing other required permits or there is other good cause for the failure to start construction. 2. The Town designates a smart growth reporting officer required by MGL, Chapter 40S. Such officer is responsible for preparing a smart growth address list, based on occupancy permits issued in the District, and transmitting such list and supporting documentation to DHCD. 0 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 300 www.mass.gov/dhcd Boston, Massachusetts 02114 ' ' 617.573.1100 3.. The Town designates the municipal official responsible for filing an Annual Update with DHCD on or before July 31 of each year. The Annual Update shall contain the information specified in 760 CMR 59.07. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit and marketing of a unit for a Project within the District, the affordable units shall be made subject to an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan approved by DHCD as compliant with the associated 40R requirements under 760 CMR 56.00. Such Plan must describe the resident selection process for the affordable units and must set forth a plan for affirmative marketing that provides maximum opportunity to low or moderate income households, including minority households. A copy of the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan Guidelines is enclosed with this letter. 5. Prior to execution and recording, the form of the Affordable Housing Restriction must be approved by DHCD as compliant with the associated 40R requirements under 760 CMR 56.00. In order to receive the $350,000 Zoning Incentive Payment, the Town must execute a Commonwealth of Massachusetts Standard Contract Form. Should you have any questions about completing this process, please contact Bill Reyelt at (617) 573-1355 or william.reyelt@state.ma.us. Sincerely, Tina Broo Undersecretary cc: Senator Richard R. Tisei Representative Bradley H. Jones, Jr. Representative James J. Dwyer Kelli E. Gunagan, Esq., Office of the Attorney General Peter I. Hechenbleikner, Town Manager Jean J. Delios, Community Services Director/Town Planner Abby McCabe, Staff Planner Charles Eisenberg, Housing Partners, Inc. PROCLAMATION PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATIONS WEEK WHEREAS: Emergencies can occur at any time that require police, fire or emergency medical services; and WHEREAS: When an emergency occurs, the prompt response of Police Officers, Fire Fighters and. paramedics is critical to the protection of life and preservation of property; and WHEREAS: The safety of our Police Officers and Fire Fighters is dependent upon the quality and accuracy of information obtained from citizens who telephone the Reading Police-Fire Communications Center; and WHEREAS: Public Safety Dispatchers are the first and most critical contact our citizens have with emergency services; and WHEREAS: Public Safety Dispatchers are the single vital link for our Police Officers and Fire Fighters by monitoring their activities by radio, providing them information and insuring their safety; and WHEREAS: Public Safety Dispatchers of the Reading Police Department have contributed substantially to the apprehension of criminals, suppression of fires and treatment of patients; and WHEREAS: Each Dispatcher has exhibited compassion, understanding and professionalism during the performance of their job in the past year. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Reading, Massachusetts do hereby proclaim the week of April 11-17, 2010 as Public Safety Telecommunications Week in Reading in honor of the men and women whose diligence and professionalism keep our Town and citizens safe. THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN Ben Tafoya, Chairman James E. Bonazoli, Vice Chairman Camille W, Anthony, Secretary Stephen A. Goldy Richard W. Schubert Hechenblefter, Peter From: Margaret Raciti [peg,raciti@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 4:21 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Against the Liquor Store Eric and I wanted to ask you to oppose the requested license for a liquor store and the former Linens and Things location. We do not feel a liquor superstore is an appropriate business for the family -friendly retail marketplace that is already established. Many thanks, Peg and Eric Raciti (DO Page 1 of 1 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Orbits, Valerijs [vorbits-c@shire.com] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 6:48 PM To: Town Manager Subject: Vine by boxes Hi. My name is Val Orbits,) live on 110 Village st. in Reading. Unfortunately I'm no be able to join this hearing, but I'm completely against this business in my neighborhood. Town of Reading becoming a warehouse Reading, its losing its identity after opening all those giant stores(Stop@shop, stinky market basket), so next step is gonna show that Reading residents are alcoholics and they really need to buy a box of wine not a bottle. And in local stores you can get a box of wine without any problem. So as I did state early I'm against this business as a resident, taxpayer and a father of three children. I hope my opinion help to make a right decision. Thank You Val :r•:r•~,~:~:x:r•:r•=i.~:t=r•~:a:~~:~r~~:~:~~~~~r:r.~~:~~:r•~r~=k-r•~,~:~::r~:~::~:~::~a:~:a:~~:=r.~=r-~a~ Shire plc, the ultimate parent of the Shire Group of companies,.is registered in Jersey No. 99854 Registered Office: 22 Grenville Street, St Helier, Jersey JE4 8PX Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be legally privileged and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient please note that any disclosure, distribution, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If received in error, please delete this email and any attachments and confine this to the sender. www.shire.com 4/13/2010 Page I of 2 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Paul Piraino [paulpiraino@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 8:59 PM To: Town Manager Subject: NO! To Licquor Licence Application Dear Sir, Th.ank you for the opportunity to express our opinion. We have lived in Reading since 1966 and raised three children here. Then, Reading was a "dry" town and we were happy that it was. My wife and I feel strongly against making alcoholic beverages easily accessible, as they now are and have been for quite some time in Reading. The potential heartaches, which the use and ease of procuring alcohol, can and do cause drinkers' families and loved ones, should be a determining factor in the decision to issue another liquor license, which, I think, would be a disgrace and a disservice to our town. A good question, "How many liquor businesses in a town of our size finally becomes too many?" 4/13/2010 IZ Apr, 13. 2010 9 ; 07AM No. 1277 P. 1 CL w G, Q, Q, l r~r itiu, n 0 k Apr. 13. 2010 9: 07AM Peter I Donovan The Wine Banker 35 Longmeadow Road Arlington, MA 02474 Tel: 781-572-6153 April 13, 2010 T0: Hen Tafoy'a, Chairman.-Board of Selectman Peter Heehenbleikner - Tow Manager RE: License application for The Wine Bunker Gentlemen: No. 1277 P. 2 I am, in receipt of three letters that are part of the public hearing license agenda tonight and were submitted by Brackett 8c Lucas dated April 9, 2010, Town Planner dated March 26, 2010 and Town Manager elated March 26, 2010. Even though I feel these letters were written in "your" support to deny my application before it was even heard- I will address the "critical" issues of each letter. Below are my corm-Aents; Letter from Town Manager dated March 16, 2010 in regards to store layout. The plan that Town Manager submitted with his letter was the second plan I forwarded to him. The plan submitted with application was done by hand, so the Town Manager requested a new one to which I complied. Please note; based on years of experience in the industry and dealings with the ABCC both plans are sufficient for AHCC approval, And' in the legal opinion of town counsel dated April 9, 2010; "The application also requires the applicant to identify the premises and include either blueprints or a hand drawn floor plan (drawn to scale) of the new premises Each of the floor plans that I submitted adheres to these standards. 2, Memorandum by Town Planner dated March 26, 2010. First of all, there is.nowhere in my application that references "Discount Super Store". My application actually indicates that retail space will not exceed 6,000 square feet. A reasonable person would conclude that this letter was drafted by someone who did not have all the facts arbitrary and capricious. I will address issues in letter; e Fact: Retail portion of store will not exceed 6,000 square feet. - And I am willing to compromise with town officials on decreasing retail space. • Fact: Nowhere in my application does it reference "Discount Super Store or High Volume Sales". In fact our prices are actually higher on a single bottle of wine than your typical retail package store. We will review pricing model at public hearing. Apr. 13. 2010 9: 07AM No. 1277 P. 3 Pact: Case law will dictate that you cannot deny a license application due to competition. I understand a retailer submitted 300 names in opposition to Wine Nation's application. If this happens tonight - I reserve the right to challenge any person submiuing names in opposition to my application. In addition to my application, in the applications of Home Depot, Staples, Market Basket, Stop and Shop, Jordon's Furniture and any other large retailer that has come into Reading in past five years - has the Town Planner or Town Counsel ever drafted a letter of this type addressing competition or basically how to conduct a hearing? Seems like I have been singled out (especially in my many dealings with Ellen Callahan Doucette who was Woburn's city solicitor during my legal war with Woburn over a license) - see VILLAGE OF WILLOWBROOK, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. GRACE OLECH. • Traffic is not an issue due to the fact that most customers will come feoin Market Basket and or Stop and Shop or other businesses in immediate area. Plus I am not proposing 9,000 sf of retail space. We are proposing retail space that will not exceed 6,000 sf. The Town of Reading approved 250,000 square feet of retail space at this specific location. The building is 50% occupied, so how can this be an issue? The property owner will be on hand tonight to address this issue. Again it seems like the person who drafted this letter did not know all the facts, • Deliveries: We only take deliveries once a week from wholesalers and we encourage *all deliveries to be on Tuesday or Thursday. If the town wants us to keep a log of all deliveries we will. This is how we do it in Woburn, keep a log of all deliveries and have wholesaler's delivery once a week. Please note: we only order every two weeks. • Parking: again this was already approved by town but owner of property will address at public hearing. We anticipate that we will take no more than 20 parking spaces during hours of operation. This includes employee and customer parking. I don't want to start off on the wrong foot but these types of letters and memorandums fiom town officials and or town's legal counsel are troublesome to me, especially after my experience in Woburn on trying to obtain a license. Town officials must understand that a legal fight of this nature will cost them in excess of $200,000, I fought the city of Woburn for some ten years and they pulled every trick in the book to deny rite, but I prevailed in the long ran, Some estimate that it cost Woburn in the ball park of $450,000 in, legal fees to fight me. All this for a liquor license! These kinds of fees could pay for extra teachers, school sports, police officers and or firefighters! All I ask for is that town officials keep an open mind in hearing my- applications. And I can assure town officials that The Wine Bunker will be a good business for Reading. Please call if you have any questionsLonovan . Sin re i' Per . Ap r. 13. 2010 9: 07AM No, 1277 P. 4 Towo of Reading Read- ~ g,-MA 01967 ZOBS VAX: (781) 042AQM - ~qia . fawrananagt f~t:i.reading m~aus t TOWN MMAGER = wolrai[w wMrW. readiPgMa.yoY' ( (781.).9Atr9gA3 ` March 16.2'010 dibli'Me'Viac l3unktz 351 LonoiaADwRnncf Ar]in&X MA M474 Dw Mr. p0nvvaw. ~e received yt>ur ea~aplete alypticatioa i aacla X 2010; ftiA iaeatin Qa *s rpattht.vM be , schexloled far A013, 2010 o 8;30.pm t l~ selmimtws Nle g Rt~om. ; Whitt Sao -have wbadmd a romplaf ~d: gglicatkA f e, • p : '4* ]ail t ybl1 ' St71)fl5]ttG( f9 completely us =git*lt i'a botng, 00 -t da~;D66 tha location within the, 128 r( mee t f us A of Sbep&g ~tLf, and. the ftensibtie an layout o€ ft fmllty-. `This is T4&04 in ©s to compltt4y oonsirle'u' your proposal, a sutinttttliis i~oTmation as,5~oonaa ~rou oari. "l'cfer l.~eGGlienbYci]rn~cr ' , - ~ - • 'l'awn Mmager ~ \tj ,•S'i"^y-~~/. , . •~4/~\ti ~J•,{i y,•~. • . 'l: r. ''t4 ltj ~'a:'q^~'; CIO '6001 teV'X 1690 wo, saHipjaudD BO:t$ LOOZAZ/zo Ap r. 13. 2010 9 ; 07AM No. 1277 P. 5 1 •1 1- A. A 1 ~ _1II~j ~ 1 . S Lr) r .s I -bl Apr, 13. 2010 9 ; 08AM No, 1277 P. 6 AANDELIM pW ilk of @ad1 C1 16 Lowell Street Cumiuunity Servicos Director / Town-Planner Phone: (78)) 942-6612 tReadingr MA 01867-26$3 Fax: (781)942-071 jd~llp~OCl,reading.wa.as . MEMORANDUM To: Peter 1. Hechenblaikner From: Jean Dellos, Community Services birectorfrown Planner • Date: March 2G, 2010 Re: Application for Package Store Liquor License -The Wine Bunker 128 Marketplace Shopping Canter, One General Way i am writing in response to your March- 18, 2d1o' Mernorandurn requesting comments on the application for a. Package Store Liquor Ucense for the Wine Bunker, . Tho"Wine Bunker is a proposed discount liquor superstore that'will occupy 8,000 square feet at the 128 Marketplace Shopping Center at One General Way. In these difficult economic times, local businesses have expfessed.that they are . struggling . to survive. High volume sales allow superstores -to offer deep discounts that can't be matched by smaller stores, Parking, traffic and circulation must be carefully reviewed. Currently there are corr►ptaints that large dellVery imcks violate *the conditions placed on the Site Plan Review decision. The d'eGislon states that-access Is to be from 128/Walkers Brook Drive or 28 Via Goodall-Sanford Road, Any additional high volume retail use, such as the proposed use, must comply with this reotriotlon to minimize any impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods. A detailed analysis is needed to verity that the proposal for an additional 8,000 square feet of retail space can meet the parking and other requirements under zoning. A current use inventory is needed to verify compliance with both the 181,000 square foot retail use limitation as well as the total' 822 parking. spaces by use category (retail 570 spaces; health club - 67 spaces; warehouse -1 85 spaces). Providing future access from the site to•1Vew Crossing Road was a finding in the- Site Flan Review decision. This has been explored, and should be pursued to rriltlgato eidstfng circulation constraints. 0 Apr, 13. 2010 9 : 08AM BiRACI'MTT & LucAs COVNSISLUAS AT LAW' 19, CRIDAR S1 IM, WORCSSTFI MOMCHUSUM 01605 ,50E X99-9739 ' Fexsosass~7~ GARY S.13RACKLrIT Jt)I rffl A, FICKEn ELLEN CALLMAIV DOUCETI'E JASON D. GROSSFIBLO .April.9, 2010 No, 1277 P. 7 QF glum EL,AWE WLVCAS Dlrtet email: ecdoucette@brmkcttlucasxoui ten Tafoya, Chair Board of Selectmen Town Halt . 16 Lowell Street " Reacting, MAD 1867 Re, Considerations in granting New Liquor Licenses - Conduct of Hearings Dear I&. Tafoya: This memorandum shall serve to inform the Board of Selectmen regarding the liquor licensing process including, the timeline for conduct of theimblie'soaring and issugAce of decisions, and the considerations that may be taken into consideration when the Board deliberates on whether or not to issue a liquor license in the 'own of Reading. 1 en s e the lic$tin Friar to the, publication of nbtice for an application for a new-liquor license, the Town Manager reviews the,application packet for completeness. The foam provided by the ABCC and approved for tlse by local licensing boards, requires an applicant to provide the B oard with'informatian upobi whioh it eats examine the applicant's background, oxperience in similar vontures, the proposed licensed premises and the identify of persons/corporations that have: a Imancial interest in the application. The application also requires.the applicant to identify the premises and includo either blueprints or a hand drawn floor plan (drawn to scale) of the new premises. Renovations or oonstiuuctMon to be clone must be, identified. In the evo.M that the premises have not yet been constructed, the Board may grant a licerise upon the condition that thtti license will not issue until the premises have been completed in accordance with the filed plan. GI, c.138, §1SA. Incorrect, incompiete, mtrwhful ox vogue answers should be duly noted. 30 dz 0' AP r. 13. 2010 9: 08AM No. 1277 P. 8 2. Timeline for Apnrnval.. or Disapprp!val of'LicLuor Licciises G.1, c.138, §15A states that within ten day) after receipt of a completed application, "the local licensing authorities shall cause a notice thereof to bo pubiishod at the expense of the applicant" in a newspaper of general circulation in the Towh, pursuant to c,138, § 16B; the Board's decision to grantor disapprove the applicatio4 shall be made no less than thirty days after the filing of,the application. The hearing on the application shall not be held-sooner than ten days after the publication of notice. If the applicatiari is disapproved, the applicant may file an appeal with the ABCC within five (business) days of their receipt of the decision. If approved, the approval shall be submitted to the AB' CC ~witbin three days for its approval. 3. Qualifications of Applicant- "Good Ch4acte_r G.L c.138, §12 ("pouriAg-licenses") and §15 (package store licenses) required that applicants be 21 years of age and of "good character". Section 12 prohibits the issuance of a liquor license to a person who has been convicted of a violation of 'federal or State law involving narcotics, Section 15 prohibits the issuance of a liceneo to a porson ' who has bcen convicted ofa felony; Although Section 14(f) bftho ABCC's application requites the applicant to state, under the pains and penalties of perjury, whether or not. they have over bean convicted of violating any state or federal law, it is strongly recommended that someone on the T'own's behalf obtain the applicant's criminal history from the Criminal )History Systems Board, a CORI check, in order to adcquntoly assoss ' tht applicants character for issuance of the, license, 3, ' Standard of Public Need or public Convenience G.L. Chapter 138,-§23 provides that a local licensing authority may issue liquor licenses in order to "serve the public need and in such a manner as to protect the common good; cad, to that end, to provide, in the opinion of the licensing authority, an adequate nur;nber of places at which the public may obtain ; . , different sorts of alcoholic beverages' With respect to the deteimination of "public need", the Board possesses a-oartain amount of discretion in deciding whether to grant or deny a liquor license, but this does not mean that the local authority "Sean do whatever it pleases whenever it chooses to do so . , , the [local authority] may exercise judgment about public convenience and public good that is very broad, but it is not untrammeled," Ballarin. Inc, v. PeensingBd. of BosloA 49 Mass.App.Ct. 506, 611(2000). What this means, is that the Boas ws decision as to public needmust be based upon facts, not speculation or copiecture, W a reasonably analysis. 4 "[p]ropor assessment of "nm&' for another liquor otore, , . , requires a more particularized inquiry, "the test [for need] includes an assessment of public want and the appropriafencss of a liquor license at a particular location." Donovan v. City of Woburn, Apr, 13, 2010 9: 08AM No, 1277 P. 9 65 Mms.App.Ct; 375, 3111 citing Ballarat at 511. "Consideration of the number of existing dispensaries in a locality is a proper ccncem," Victoria, Inc. v. Alcoholic- Beverage Control Comm'n, 33.Mass,App.Ct, 507, 514 (1992), In addition, tho Board may take into consideration a wide range of other factors including.traf$c, parldug noise, size, and the reputation of the applicant in conducting such a business., See, Ballorin at 511. I Ncver; the Board cannot deny aliquot license based upon factors which it has the ability to arnelioratc through the imposition of conditions keeping in mind however, that this is a licensing issue and not a zoning review, The above is intended as a general overview although specific questions rpay arise regarding a pahlculax application. Please do-not besitato to call on me if you have my questions, or wish to•discass these issues further, verb holy yours, Mien Callahan Mucettc cc: Peter 1. Hechenbleikner; Town Manager Apr, 13. 2010 9: 08AM. No. 1277 P. 10 Village of Willowbrook v. Olech NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash- ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. SUPREME-COURT O.F THE UNITED STATES No. 98-1288 VILLAGE OF WILLOWBROOK, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. GRACE OLECH ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR. THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT (February 23, 20001 PER CURIAM. Respondent Grace Olech and her late husband Thaddeus asked petitioner Village of Willowbrook to connect their property to the municipal water supply. The Village at first conditioned the connection on the Olechs granting the Village a 33-foot easement. The Olechs objected, claiming that the Village only required a 15-foot easement from other property owners seeking access to the water supply. After a 3-month delay, the Village relented and agreed to provide water service with only a 15-foot easement. Olech sued the Village claiming that the Village's de- mand of an additional 18-foot easement violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Olech- asserted that the 33-foot easement demand was "irrational and wholly arbitrary"; that the Village's demand was actually motivated by ill will resulting from the Olechs' previous filing of an unrelated, successful lawsuit against the Village; and that the Village acted either with the intent to deprive Olech of her rights or in reckless disre- gard of her rights. App. 10, 12. The District Court dismissed the lawsuit pursuant to. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a cognizable claim under the Equal Protection Clause. Relying on Circuit precedent, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed, holding that a plaintiff can allege an equal protection violation by asserting that state action was motivated solely by a "'spiteful effort to'"get" him for reasons wholly unrelated to any legitimate state objective.'" 160 IT. 3d 386, 387 (CA7 1998) (quoting Esmail 23 Apr, 13. 2010 9: 08AM No. 1277 P. 11 v. Macrane,.53 r, 3d 176, 180 (CA7 1995)). It determined that Olech's complaint sufficiently alleged such a claim. 160 V. 3d, at 388. We granted certiorari to determine whether the Equal Protection Clause gives rise to a cause of action on behalf of,a "class of one" where -the plaintiff did not allege membership in a class or group.* Our cases have recognized successful equal protection claims brought by a "class of one," where the plaintiff alleges that she has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment, see Sioux City Bridge Co, v. Dakota Counter, 260 U. S. 441 (1923); Alle- gheny Pittsburgh Coal Co, v. Commission of Webster Cty., 488 U. S. 336 (1989), In so doing, we have explained that ""[t)he purpose of the equal protection clause of the Four- teenth Amendment is to secure every person within the State's jurisdiction against intentional and arbitrary discrimination, whether occasioned by express terms of a statute or by its improper execution through duly consti- tuted agents,"" Sioux City Bridge Co., supra, at 445 (quoting Sunday Lake Iron Co. v. Township of Wakefield, 247 U. S. 350, 352 (1918)), That reasoning is applicable to this case. Olech's com- plaint can fairly be construed as alleging that the village intentionally demanded a 33-foot easement as a condition of connecting her property to the municipal water supply where the Village required only a 15-foot easement from other similarly situated property owners. See Conley v. Gibson, 355 U. S, 41, 45-96 (1957). The complaint also alleged that the 'V'illage's demand was "irrational, and wholly arbitrary" and that the Village ultimately con- nected her property after receiving a clearly adequate 15- foot easement. These allegations, quite apart from the Village's subjective motivation, are sufficient to state a claim for relief under traditional equal protection analysis, We therefore affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals, but do not reach the alternative theory of "subjective ill will" relied on by that court. It is so ordered. * We note that the complaint in this case could be read to allege a class of five. In addition to Grace and Thaddeus Olech, their neighbors Rodney and Phyllis Zimmer and Toward Brinkman requested to be connected to the municipal water supply, and the Village initially demanded the 33-foot easement from all of them. The Zimmers and Mx, Brinkman were also involved in the previous, successful lawsuit against the Village, which allegedly created the ill will motivating the excessive easement demand, Whether the complaint alleges a class of one or of five is of nb consequence because we conclude that the number of individuals in a class is immaterial for equal protection analysis. zK Rp r. 13. 2010 9: 08AM SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 98-1286 VILLAGE OF WILLOWBROOK, ET AL., PETITIONERS v, GRACE OLECH ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT [February 23, 20001 JUSTICE BREYER, concurring in the result. The solicitor General and the village of Willowbrook have expressed concern lest we interpret the Equal Pro- tection Clause in this case in a way that would transform many ordinary violations of city or state law into viola- tions of the Constitution. It might be thought that a rule that looks only to an intentional difference in treatment and a lack of a rational basis for that different treatment would work such a transformation, zoning decisions, for example, will often, perhaps almost always, treat one landowner differently from another, and one might claim that, when a city's zoning authority takes an action that fails to conform to a city zoning regulation,.it lacks a "rational basis" for its action (at least if the regulation in question is reasonably clear). This case, however, does not directly raise the question whether the simple and common instance of a faulty zon- ing decision would violate the Equal Protection Clause. That is because the Court of Appeals found that in this case respondent had alleged an extra factor as well-a factor that the Court of Appeals called "vindictive action," "illegitimate animus," or "ill will." 160 F, 3d 386, 386 (CA7 1998). And, in that respect, the court said this'case re- sembled Esmail v. Macrane, 53 F. 3d 176 (CA7 1995), because the Esmail plaintiff had alleged that the munici- pality's differential treatment "was the result not of prose- cutorial discretion honestly (even if ineptly-even if arbi- trarily) exercised but of an'illegitimate desire to 'get' him," 160 F, 3d at 388. In my view, the presence of that added factor-in this case is sufficient to minimize any concern about trans- forming run-of-the-mill zoning cases into cases of constitu- tional right. For this reason, along with the others men- tioned by the Court, I concur in the result, research the law Cases & Codes / • Opinion Summaries I • Sample Business Contacts / • Research an attorney or law firm /l No. 1277 P. 12 v Board of Selectmen April 13,' 2010 FY201 1 Enterprise Funds Water, Sewer, Storm Water Rate Hearing 0 Reserve Fu* nds Balances & Policy Balances Water Sewer Storm Water 7/1/09 $881,972 $996,689 $177,099 MTBEs $719,891 Balance $1,601,863 $996,689 $177,099 Target(est) $500,000 $500,000 $1.00,000 Available $1,101,863 $496,689 $77,099 Policy Water Sewer Storm Water 3yrs $367,299 $165,563 $25,700 5yrs $220,373 $99,338 $15,420 1 0yrs $110,186 $49,669 $7,710 0 Reserve Funds Policy Consideration Projected Debt service Water M1 $1,839,206 FY12 $1,785,591 FY13 $1,703,076 FY14 $1,914,786 FY1.5 $2,109,890 FY16 $1,923,257 FY17 $1,839,624 FY18 $1,301,097 FY19 $1,274,045 FY20 $1,023,669 Water Enterprise Fund Projected Revenues FY09A FY10B FY11B User Pmts $4,725,359 $498927404 $5,133,495 (Abatements) (7,086) (10,000) (10,000) Service Constr. 40,727 33,264 36,995 R/E Liens 1751733 193,306 . 212,636 Int. Charges 33,425 36,767 40,443 Int. Income 40,457 26,297 19,722 Other 5,832 RESERVES 3557000 425,000 TBA BUDGET $57369,447 $5,597,038 $5,433,291 2a Water Enterprise Fund Reserves Policy for FY1'1 No reserves Syr policy ($225k) 3yr policy ($375k) User Pmts $5,133,495 $4,908,495 $4,758,495 Discount 700,022 669,340 6487886 Required Billing $5,833,517 $5,577,835 $5,407,381 Rate/100 cu ft $8.40 $8.03 $7.78 FY10 $7.73 $7.73 $7.73 Change +8.7% +3.9% +0.6% 36 Sewer Enterprise Fund Projected Revenues FY09A FY10B FY11 B User Pmts $4,546,290 $4,914,253 $5,152,536 (Abatements) (12,112) (12,000) (12,000) Service Constr. 31468 R/E Liens 1681748 194,060 2131466 Int. Charges 31,879 347723. 381195 Int. Income 201382 16,305 137044 Other 49,530 7,920 7,482 RESERVES $330,000 $100,000 TBA BUDGET $5,138,185 $5,255,261___ l $5,412,723 0 Sewer Enterprise Fund Reserves Policy for FY11 No reserves Syr policy ($100k) 3yr policy ($175k) User Pmts $5,152,536 $5,052,536 $4,9777536 Discount 702,619 688,982 6781755 Required Billing $5,855,155 $5,741,518 $57656,291 Rate/100 cu ft $8.62 $8.44 $8.32 FY10 $8.02 $8.02 $8.02 Change +7.5% +5.2% +3.7% 3z Effective Date` water Sewer' Total % Change July 1, 1981 $1.50 $0.80 $2.30 n/a July 1, 1985 $1.87 $1.43 $3.30 43.5% July 1, 1986 $2.56 $2.25 $4.81 45.8% July 1, 1987 $2.62 $2.35 $4.97 3.3% July 1, 1988 $2.59 $2.79 $5.38 8.2% August 1, 1989 $2.50 $3.09 $5.59 3.9% August 1, 1990 $2.56, $2.96 $5.52 -1.3% August 1, 1991 $2.29 $3.31 $5.60 1.4% August 1, 1992 $1.52 $4.33 $5.85 4.5% August 1, 1993 $1.68 $5.06 $6.74 15.2% February 1, 1994 $2.13 $4.63 $6.76 0.3% August 1, 1994 $2.33 $5.13 $7.46 10.4% August 1, 1995 $2.39 $4.53 $6.92 -7.2% February 1, 1996 $2.39 $3.84 $6.23 -10.0% Composite, FY96 $2.39 $4.22 $6.61 -11.4% August 1, 1996 $2.85 $3.97 $6.82 3.2% August 1, 1997 $3.11 $5.11 $8.22 20.5% August 1, 1998 $3.39 $4.98 $8.37 1.8% August 1, 1999 $3.41 $5.30 $8.71 4.1% August 1, 2000 $3.56 $5.47 $9.03 3.7% August 1, 2001 $3.66 $5.15 $8.81 -2.4% August 1, 2002 $3.75 $5.28 $9.03 2.5% August 1, 2003 $4.25 $5.28 $9.53 5.5% August 1, 2004 $4.66 $5.35 $10.01 5.0% August 1, 2005 $4.78 $5.78 $10.56 5.5% September 10, 2006 $5.59 $6.06 $11.65 10.3% December 10, 2006 $6.36 $6.06 $12.42 6.6% September 10, 2007 $6.90 $6.80 $13.70 10.3% September 10, 2008 $7.65 $7.59 $15.24 11.2% September 10, 2009 $7.73 $8.02 $15.75 3.3% September 10, 2010 no $8.40 $8.61 $17.01 8.0% September 10, 2010 6yr $8.03 4 $8.44 $16.47 4.6% September 10, 2010 3yr $7.78 $8.32 $16.10 2.2% 33 a> E O N C v- m O 3 aa) N O U- a) 0 Q LL (f1 } O } O LL LL 00 r O LL M } LL 00 LO 0 (O ° M N N cD t o t p It Cl) cri (6 N ti CD ~ o 0 0 0 0 a to (D D) O) O p CO ~ N N N O 0 (D V O r N O N ~ . - ( D W m 0 O P- O (0 W V LO rl- 'It. O ~ N r r (D O LO r- V fl- r-- to n r r• Di M r N O O (O to M N N r r- M CD It "T 00 0 co M N O 0 0) N r r• N N O 0 CD N ~ co t() O M (D O 0 O OD r O N N LL U _ _ a) ° w U o »s c J ~ O ~ Q O tY C CJ C~ -t ~ Q .N- c N M mot' O ~ O 00 O W m M w O W W LO co e•. 0 0 0 0 0 O (R C) O O 00 Iq N It O N N N N O P- t-- N Lo 0 m co O 1- 0 0 M Ln M L6 ~ (O t N. O to N O 00 O) (D O d' I,- LO ~ O r . - N 00 (D Cl) I~ d ~ N m ( O m v r- 00 L tri 0 M LO to N , h N CT) Cl) NT W N 00 10 m r (D W r r r c) V) 00 Il- r- C) P- to D) W M to CO Cl ti N 0 N r M r- LL U = w a) U) a " J O W N Cl) d' N N oD (OD r ^ M M a) m m m m 0 0 0 - o O) 00 O O) co m m 0) m O O ( D L N d' co OD OD co OD O m rn O m 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tD N 00 V' r• rn rn 00 rn rn rn 0 0 0 0 0 d rn r OR to rn rn m rn 0 0 0 0 o o to Cl) O d rn rn m rn m Q.' a N cu ca CO o U O a . v m O ~ V s cn 3K O } LL N co Q O w 07 y OF y Storm Water Rate Calculation ; per 2,552 sq ft Impervious) 10,703 units FYI.1 FYI 1 Dollars Unit Cost s $377,826 E $35.30 Discount of Payments vs Billing 10.880 ;,Required Billing i Abatement/Reserve Fund 51,522 $4.81 $429,348 $40.11 ! $2.69 $28,800 148 $42.80 000); ($2. $428,148 ! $40.00 . 's $ 39.84 $ 36.88 -7.43%1 $ 36.88 $ 40.00 8 45% 3~ Page 1 of 1 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: rnrchambercom@aol.com Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 2:25 PM To: RNRchambercom@aol.com Subject: Reminder Public Hearing for outdoor dining license - with alcohol Attachments: outdoor dining license - with alcohol DRAFT 3-8-10.doc REMINDER: The Town of Reading will hold a Public Hearing to review that attached policy for outdoor dining license with alcohol on public property. Tomorrow, Tuesday, April 13 at 9 pm. Board of Selectman Meeting Room, Reading Town Hall. All interested parties are encouraged to attend. Irene Collins Executive Director RNR Chamber of Commerce 978-664-5o6o - < < zt t u: ~}a ~~kizLti 1 Eck is oii S, r; N 0W << : 111,11 s(l iV, t)ril -2'o. Visit ~4'l1'i1..I'c:tz~lirigi►7 c a in chainl:~ei%w g f'< }r all file details. 4/12/2010 3~ 1 r^ , 1 ' ~ c N m c c O O_ O7 N N c O CL O y •C 0 0 co N :3 a 0 - m = N -c c L, SI7 67 Qi 'O 'O_ ,"S •0 -O 'L7 O C SS tp CL f0 ~ = C6 f0 O = ` N N Q1 C.J O N N tY in 3 m °o m m m y m N rn m Co m° c~ W = v m e U t > a m o o a a w o 2 2 'S > c > c cn N > m (~I a w w d m m _ 'S v to (3 C1 0- :D rn 0- = N Zl d Dc c z>:' ~C_fa®oooooooar~ou a, oo 0 co co CL ILI KT. W CL 4 L LT q q c b w Iw S Mkt v tit 49 'O . C _ rt,7 {I I r' Q' J, ' .~~~~_r~ "IN 00 t e ~ f-v.. ~~`S6'i • `t~C:~:~p~\~`' f ~ it :i ~ '~~rf.~~ ~ r ' ff ~ /r, lip. % U i rw '1 y~g~yr,. ~~9~-,.`'y-:~ ~'t I~ ~'S CFA,-'"~...~y ~ r'r r i~ v r ~ 1. i5(~'` ~,'3 "Vtrt1 ( -~'.l ~1t I f i (i~ t\ ~ Zk•' _ r w~1 ~'"~r"'""( - -1 r' iw~ 1 ( s 3' ,l ~ tom' ~ t~ T-1 4 F77, ia' 't~,, `b f~e~• ,.l ` c• 1 ~ ''0•'' cj . `~•r - , r. Q©,'• `+,t 4,•3 ti i~ ~ "W5, i } i ~O 1 7~ ,_...4r (.•~~I~ f y n -1"" . f ~ "^.yy~.i~r r~ - - ~,~5/, ~F''~ y~ ``~e~ t w:: S+ tt~,i! r~ 7 Q .,r' 7 NJ i l N u OVA r.~ O O A d Q Z W w, 6mm n G, • O ~ Wl ~1 ~ sd Vl _ V l 4 J ® 4-0 u t'°°°I ® ® 4) I~ PSI r wl 00 ~n C4 ' a 00 a ~ 'm - w a 44 a a c ai y Cd „x~ cz a~ 0 a~ U W o ~ b ~ --q o EA ct ~ ~ o v a t ect 02 I ® Cd C4 p 41 ° v TA pp c~ y C/1 v y ~ V y col l F~ ci o Q ea r AN It PC rA 4-4 o A ° l qo . ri) rij a d c 4-4 H ,b eet y.4 , ~ P-4 a ;W4 te' 4 • .a ~ a N m W ~ ~ ~ ~ c , a U U ~ ~ ~ o 1-4 • ~ Cd cad ' -4 Ed d) Cd b a~ o M v s+ ' 4ZI con ~ V3 bq O 0 A 4.4 P, C) C) rfl 3a zC O ~ o o a 0 U bA O N S Cd O M i-+ O O p "C3 00 d Q) N' N ~ r/a ~ 1 O U H U' U N cd O p O r~-+ O O N b O Cd ~,•H3 ° o0 cu a~i t?O 4-i U' cn U~ u ° cvsl o o 0 C, VI ;-4 M P= L3~o O C°a•o ~ N U ~ ~ N O Cd 7131, O ° o~ O a .14 3 O -4 0 ~ U O N Q N U N U ,--i A51 N U Cd 7j 10 ~ U cn a~ AS N ~ U 4-i -d O O p, cd ~N O O v~ obl) , O O Lo O bD (1) M 7J C) 0 O U ( N C/1 0 a~ 0 n N U N . O O o M cd I p . ; c .4 o ° i b. C40 W p1 O ~ O it CCS ~ a G All % ~ v O G a.~ Q AMA c~ ~ p .c1 GCt G rd O A~ rAP) O o rA w w O po P4 p V ` y po p CA CS= 0 G ~ G Uzi bA 4-4 un r.., ett 400-) N O O 00 a N 61 O ~ bA O a w 0 4° O i•+ W 0 H z O u bA ..C'a bJl O O O p ~ w c~ rol ' w ~ o w G 'O roi •a 'ice a a° p o Wl r W O O -4-W V W ~ ~ cu ~ O a~ po m y o C 0 .a f~ O `n ® 4° a~ 4-4 bA O ~ v2 cet ~ ~ C ~ ~ . ~ too ~ Q ;Fill as ~ ~ cd w e~ v Pt 141 344 `tea p a ® ® ic a O r N d L - o O C) - a> N d e ~ tZ L O f o T \ p O ~ r ' O 4 C) ~r o ~ Cl) D LO m C o m C L U a s Z o ~ s c r ~ o C Cl) cV r 0 0 co O ~ O c= CC) T Z 0 z z m d A L L C m d t: C~ t.. i i 49 NN Y. A L N L lie M~ W ® ® o 0 o 0 rn ca L OC) fi nn V 0 e' - C W v S 04 W ~ O N I.I. o w LO 4a of 0 .L o N _ v t6 Q. o w - - p co ~i CL L } S:J, c c ~ p tV ALI N - Q1 p M N r V o 0 O T O T co N Z O 1- Cl) D LLJ O cY>- z N ch •N 75 LI. L lid c m d d F- 0 O r O I M r 0 - o - m a ~ a u~ 0 - O 1 0 M 0 I 0 : T C . O . M N r M z 0 P N W D a O V O Q. N i N 3 «s L 40 W ~ ~ v as J m+~ N ~ ~ N M O N N d v C ~ N O 6d N M Z _0 F- Cl) w C1 3® z 0 O O r L .:5: M~ W Z OL_ 'r V/ W ~Jy V 0 T o 0 0 1rn 0 - Cl O I o 0 0 o O _ o i6 O r g. 1~ Y " N O -j o O M N r' O G CD N co y~ LO_ r W n Cf z 0 O O T ® ® o N~ f.L. A d N L C m d C LO z 0 w 0 0 ;o O ~ _ o 00 0 I 0 0 o LO 0 0 IT a M N 0 Cl) N o ~ O O N 0') O ~ r Z 0 Cl) w to = W z cY .N N O m CO s. M~ W d a~ s 1-- 1 4i v tTS U- .C O O ~ Z° ~ tq d s. a i s( ~ o i ~ ~ 5 0 M v O - cc S. 0 o `a cu v a i ~ o 1,42 ~ ~ V y ~ o a~ N C d' w c6 ~ i O ~ 0 m U) a a=~'~ v, ~ ~ m 3 m ac y ~ _ o 2 dd 2 mc o tl1 C O T .0 N ro y d O O V ~ cv C t i o U . = y oo°:o C : . y nss~a°oa°as M G M i.. L z L Q~ N ~N o E = 11 ~e (D w 14 S V QQ, r'l W' O <t LLJ U) O °o Un 0) N to d c~ < H o «s O O C: o U U z c CIA r-- ~ U) N ti d .(n co !11 v U a) : L ~a x W U- o ro Lo 00 C*4 4) to co E :3 d V (D m w T a O (a O c') O) n a) to ka t!3 ca E = x N W to I- v v O a (D a) CO) m° a o .°0 z ti M, (a to a) v C\l o c U a) co to U) U , Ln M N N „r m a) (D O_ - 0O Z a E o O X p o co W ° LO to . 0 to ° -FD 0) m m a) n E 0 :3 N tf} EA 'Ea =j co 0 a) c a) F i~ L O C O 0 c O U O C W C o o o _ 3 co f co a) N O C: c 0 c i •y~ O N Lo > p) .n E o ° ) (a to c V L N as V v C p N N 3 Q. U) to cm m a) N d c 0 U) C: o c~ C a) ~ FD c - . c 41) C - a ca m -0 0 c 1 CL v U 3 a) M N a) N cn c cv a) 0 E a -%X~ - cu - D a co -a co x E s N U ~ U U ~ m m L a 0 0 Q .