The URL can be used to link to this page

88-31 / WMITE - CITV CLERK PWK - �INANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PALT L Council . CA`.ARV - DEPARTMENT BtUE -qMlLVOR File NO. •�� . ,Cou '` Resolution � �_.�� Presented By �� s1 � Referred Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, Chapter 274 of the St. Paul Legislative Code prohibits the wholesale promotion, promotion, or possession with intent to wholesale promote or promote any obscene material; and WHEREAS, Chapter 274 of the Legislative Code defines obscene work as any work which when taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest in sex; which portrays sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; and which, taken as whole, does not have serious value; and WHEREAS, Chapter 274 of the Legislative Code requires that in determining whether or not a work is an obscene work the trier of fact must find that the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interests; and WHEREAS, in determining contemporary standards, the trier of fact may utilize the standards of the community or vicinage from which he comes; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Paul has never determinec� �he community standards to be applied under Chapter 274 0� cz�� St. Paul Legislative Code; and WHEREAS, the St. Paul City Council adopted C.F. 86°1358 directing the Council Research and Investigation Division with advice and assistance of the City Attorney' s Office and o�her appropriate city departments to recommend to the City Council a method to determine contemporary community standard� relative to obscene materials; now, therefore, be it CQUIVCILMEN Yeas Nays Requested by Department of: [n Favor __ Against BY -- Form Approved by City Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY By Approved by Mayor: Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council 1 BY - By WHI7E - CITY CIERK PINK -�FINANCE C/WARV - DEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PAUL COIItICI ,j ��s -. >�«,�oR File NO. J �� Council Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of St. Paul accepts the recommenda'cion of the Council Research and Investigation Center and the City Attorney' s Office to conduct a survey of a � random group of St. Paul citizens as an appropriate method to determine contemporary community standards relative to obscene materials; and be it further RESOLVED, that the appropriate city departments, with the advice of Council Research and Investigation and the City Attorney conduct a search for an individual or firm that is profassional, competent and unbiased to perform a survey to determine contemporary community standards relative to obscene materials . CQUNCILMEN Requested by Department of: Yeas DlmOrid Nays Goswitz Long In Favor Rettman� Scheibel'� - � -- Against BY -- Sonnen Wilson ►,c Adopted by Council: Date ��e + � �� Form Approved by City Attorney Certified Yass j C ncil Sec ry BY By , Approved by 14ayor. Date _ Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By -�— — BY _,,,,_Ap�roved with the signature of the Mayor pursua to Section 6.08 of the City Charter. P��$H J a N 16 1988 /',--�_�� '/ �_.� -� GITY OF SAINT PAUL OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL i�ii�i 1°n WILLIAM L. WILSON MARK VOERDING Councilman I.egislative Aide TO: Al Olson City Clerk FROM: William Wilson Councilman RE: Community Standards Survey DATE: November 5, 1987 Sometime ago the council passed a resolution (C.F . 86-1358) requesting Council Research to recommend an appropriate method to determine contemporary community standards . Attached is a copy of the results and a resolution adopting the recommendations and authorizing expenditure of funds . Please add this to the city council agenda for next Thursday' s meeting, November 12, 1987 . Encs . CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/298-4646 �46 , � ��,.� ��.�..:�'/ � � ' . . _ . � `6.� ,,.. '� ,..".,.,,"".; . . � ,� C I TY O� SA i i�{T PA U L �4`6`/T► O'��/'�� 4� ' �+ �,. OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK ;: ' �i�i�i�" '� %,: �� ALBERT B. OLSON, C{TY CLERK ��''� "'� 386 City Hall,Saint Paul,Minnesora 55102 qiRlnem.�`�````` . � GEORGE LATIMcR 612-248-4Z31' MAYOR �''` . i:`�7 November 6, 1987 . :� � �:� ...� Honorable George Latimer Mayor Room 347� City Hall Attention: LeeAnn Turchin, Deputy Mayor Dear Ms. Turchin: The attached ordinance/resolution is hereby referred to you for review prior to placement on the City Council agenda pursuant to Section 2.07 of the St. Paul Administrative Code. Very truly yours, �C'�/.�� /'. �.�.�:��--T='�f?rti Albert B. Olson City Clerk ABO:th cc: CounCilmember Wilson � Z,�� / `�-7 � r��:�� -�.-��-.�� . l �--�..� �� _. � �f.,� �.G' C) �-�--'�`��, �`�''``r�� ° � ...�,,..�_.�..�� ^ �� t� �.��c_. � , , �--�--�_. c..G�.�,.� , � • � � ' �. .� , � � ��'�'-:�l SURVEYING PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD OBSCENTTY ESTABLISHING A COMMUNITY STANDARD At the request of the City Council,staff has been asked to research the development of a Request For Proposal.The proposal has been made to hire a consultant who would develop a survey technique to ascertain "community standards as they pertain to the de�nition , acceptance andJor rejection of the various forms of sexually oriented materials now available to the public. In addition, staff was asked to prepare back- ground information pertaining to the legal usage and defensibility of such a survey. In preliminary meetings with experts in human sexuality, community leaders, and rep- resentative individuals holding a range of viewpoints on the topic, a broad outline was prepared stating issues which needed to be addressed. Staff then explored each area and in this report, comment in depth on various considerations. This format was designed to address two prime functions: 1.To ensure complete understanding as to the scope and desired use of such a survey. a.)On the part of the elected members of the City Council which will vote on the im- plementation of the survey and ultimately receive its findings. b.)Upon the part of the citizens of the City of St. Paul. c.)To the media which will report to the public on the survey and its results. and 2. To give direction to the contractors conducting and interpreting the survey -- not to influence the result or interpretation,but to guide them in survey design and in the breadth of the issues to be covered. ISSUES SURROUNDING A SURVEY TO ASCERTAIN COMMUNITY STANDARDS A. Direction,and interpretation to ensure legal defensibility in a court test. B. Addressing specific concerns: Free speech; sexual orientation issues. C. Definitions and descriptions of sexually provocative materials; degree of explicity. . � ,� � � �. .� . � �r��- :� � DIRECTION AND INTERPRETATION According to psychologists, a critical factor in this project will be to deternune the phrasing and presentation of survey questions and their interpretation once the results have been ta.bulated. For this reason, it is recommended that the firm chosen to ad- minister the survey be professionaly competent not only in the interpretation of statis- tics, but also in the psychology of attitudes concerning moral values. Since it is unlikely that each of the bidding vendors will be specialists in this particulaz survey field, it is suggested that as part of the Request for Proposal, the vendor be re- quired to submit the names of one or several experts with specialization in human values, or attitudes towazd the topic of sexually explicit materials, These experts would take part in survey preparation and interpretation. One particular staff concern is that many professionals have polarized into camps on the pornography issue and have become advocates either on the liberal or conserva- tive sides of the issue. With this in mind, it is strongly recommended that "expert" con- sultants be required to submit representative examples of their previously published opinions and research, a listing of occasions when their testimony has either been of- fered in court or with regard to a similar legislarive issue. Personal contact should be made with their references to evaluate objectivity. T'he City Council's designated rep- resentatives should be allowed to reject the use of experts who have shown bias in pre- vious work. Another consideration might ca11 for the consultant to be hired independently of the actual survey firm, thus building a check and balance system to encourage fair formula- tion of survey topics and their subsequent interpretation. This however would compli- cate the process and should be pursued only if satisfactory anangments cannot be achieved through the consultant. Statistical Accuracy: Three indicators of statistical accuracy should be held out as comparative factors in the evaluation of the various competing survey contractors: . � � � � �. .� . � (�-�-� r 1. Sampiing: A random sampling arrived at by any number of ineans should reflect four factors: a.)financial status b.)educadonal background c.)sex d.)age of respondents Attempts to further isolate segments of the population could prove unwieldy and should receive scrutinization as to whether they likely would produce any additional viewpoints not already expressed by the broader groups. The only additional category would depend upon the ultimate sample size - that of geographical azea. It is conceiv- able that a breakdown as to rural, suburban, or metro might be a useful comparative in the ultimate interpretation. 2.A high percentage of completed surveys: The technique chosen to "track down" and encourage participation by members of the random sampling is very important. Survey reliability can be challenged if "no-shows" tend to be a significant percentage of the sample. 3.Honesty of survey respondents: Response honesty and accuracy are essential,considering that the survey's results will be scrutinized in a legal setting. Various techniques may be used to insure this: a.) Administration of the survey in person should take place at a neutral location away from friends, family, and public notoriety. (A conference room for example within close proximity to public transportation and parking would be a suitable location.) b.) Respondents should not be required or allowed to interact with other respondents during the survey process. c.) Time of day should be broad and flexible. � � � � �. �� . �� i d.) A trained monitor shc�uld be present and available at a11 times for clarification of questions. A written guideline for question answering should be on record and com- pletely understood by both monitor and respondents to avoid skewing responses . e.) Measures should be taken to avoid the phenomenom of "de-sensitization", where survey subjects might become progressively jaded and less representative of their cross- section due to an overload of material. ADDRESSING SPECIFIC FEARS AND CONCERNS: Freedom of speech: It has been common practice in this country to espouse the principle of "free speech". In legal definition a clear distinction can be made between freedom of speech and freedom of action - in this case, the action referring to visual depictions of actual or simulated sexual encounters. This becomes an important factor when considering fears expressed that literature and music might become targets for repression. This is not a foreseeable result of this sur- vey for the following reason: The principle of free speech has been interpreted "not" to protect the dissemination of material which by content is deemed "obscene". Going a step further, City and State law is very specific as to what is patently offensive to the average person, limiting judge- ment to certain acts and the viewing of specific anatomical areas. It should be noted that the survey would not establish a rigid review board or code. This survey would merely supply evidence which could be used to further define obscene material in code or statute, or be used in court to more successfully prosecute those moving beyond ex- isting limitations. Morality Judgements: To quell another uncertainty, the issue of the basic harmful nature of sexually explicit materials has recently been debated nationally and in our neighboring city of Min- neapolis. This is specifically "not" the subject at issue here. While individuals may subscribe or not to belief in the connections of crime and sex- discrimination tied to sexual content, the charge of the City Council would be simply to determine a contemporary community standard as reflected by the results of this sur- vey. Thus while individuals or groups are free to publicly espouse their positions and ul- timately sway public opinion, the goal of this survey is to obtain a "snapshot" of public opinion in our times. . � �� (�'�� The resultant picture may fit preconceived notions or dispell them, but if interpreted accurately, it will serve as a basis by which to judge the appropriateness and support for specific material content which is to be made available for general viewing in our community. Sexual Preference Issues: In the results of other surveys conducted and introduced as testimony in court cases, it is apparent that public opinion is swayed by the public's general subscripdon to heterosexual orientation . Survey respondents formed predictable opinions that sexual activity depicted as heterosexual was far more acceptable than similar activity performed by same sex partners. Thus, survey techniques which differenriate between same-sex and opposite -sex activities may be construed as discriminatory, inflamatory, or judgmental. It may be the wish of the City that this survey attempt to elicit responses which would not be judgmental in terms of sexual preference. If so, then careful instructions must be given to direct the consultant to phrase a11 questions and interpret all responses with respect to sex acts or functions which might be undertaken between individuals regazd- less of gender. The attached oudine indicates "degree of explicimess" without reference to sexual orientation and could be used to model questions which neither discriminate, nor pass judgement on sexual preference. Sexual Preference Issues- Exceptions: In contemporary society there is virtually no serious debate over the general condem- nation of sexual acts which are performed under threat or actual administration of rape or other physical violence. Similarly, sex involving children is universally condemned as well as outlawed by ordinance and statute. In addition, society appears to have developed no serious support for sex acts involving non-human partners. It is suggested that several issues not be excluded from menrion in the survey. These relate to sexual practices which relate to victimization or illegal activities. They fa11 into several categories: 1. Sexual acts involving minors or minor simulations. 2. Sexual acts involving non-consensual or forced relations. • ' ' .. • � � `� ' 3. Sexual acts involving violence or sadism. 4. 5exual acts involving beastiality. DEFINITION AND CLARITY: While the form of survey technique has yet to be developed,it is possible to give some direction to the consultant in terms of what it is the City is looking for in ascertaining community standards toward sexual materials and performances.There often is con- fusion,especially with those not familiar with the variety of sexual materials current- ly displayed and sold as to what exactly is available for sale in the retail sex material trade. Addressable forms of sexually provocative material: A wide variety of sex-oriented books, magazines, motion pictures, videos, and live per- formances are currently available in St. Paul. Outlets for their distribution range from convenience stores stocking Playboy and Penthouse; to specialty bookstores offering a11 varieties of printed and filmed materials; to live shows featuring nude performers who variously dance and expose their genitals to patrons of bars and coffee houses. Currently not available in St. Paul, but offered in other national markets are live sex shows involving more than one individual engaging in sexual intercourse and other re- lated activities. Realistically, we are dealing with a broad range of materials which parodoxically are either attacked as pornographic or defended as free speech by individuals who by and large do not view the materials themselves. Individuals who maintain their positions of support or condemnation often form these conclusions based on vague and often er- roneous notions of what is actually depicted. Because of this, opinions have become clouded and unclear when put to a practical test of specific content as opposed to dtles and reputation. For example, individuals who view magazines such as Penthouse as benign, are often surprized to discover that the primary visual focus is upon spread-eagled photographs of female genitilia. Conversely, opponents of adult bookstores may be unaware of the fact that a lazge per- centage of of magazines they stock offer little that is more graphic than the same Pen_ thouses and Pl o _ . .� � � �. �.� . � ��' In other words, materials with sexual content cannot be lumped together by tide group- ing. A question such as "Should magazines such as Playboy be allowed to be sold to the public?" would not be acceptable. The survey should be specific as to content - not pre- conceived reputation as to title. DEFINING LEVELS OF EXPLICITY In an attempt to disassociate titles from content, the following summary of sexual ex- plicity has been compiled. To some, this may appeaz vulgaz, to others, clinical. Regard- less, a basis in fact needs to be addressed to avoid confusion and vagueness when the standards aze ulrimately to be applied. LEVEL OF EXPLICITY ACT I. Affection,kissing,embracing II. Petting,fondling,with clothes on III. Exposure of body parts,simple nudity IV. Simulated sex act,implied but unexposed contact with genitals V. 5imulated sex act with exposure of breasts and or genitals VI. Graphic sex act: visible penetration or explicit focus on genitals VII. Ultimate sex act,visible body fluids; excretory functions . - _� � �. .� . � �� -�/ If a format such as this were to be adopted for use in this survey, respondants would be asked to deternune the extent of their perception of community standards through questions designed to cover the above . The questions would also be asked within the context of consensual, forced, or violent behavior. Medium: In addition to specific sexual acts, it occurs that community attitudes might be different depending on the medium in which various sexual pracrices were presented. The question can logically be posed: Is a sexual topic more pornographic if it is a photograph? If it is a video? Or if it is a live performance? Historically (at least in contemporary times), visual sex acts are far more likely to be li- able to prosecution than erotic literature and most communities place many more restraints on live sex shows than on other forms of eroticism. Similarly, the spoken or sung word is treated far differently by society than any of the previous examples. Current legal precedent suggests that only visual material be addressed . .� � � �. �.� . � ��-�� SUGGESTED FORfVI OF "REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL" The City of St.Paul solicits proposals for professional services to survey and evaluate public attitudes toward acceptable levels of erotic materials and performances and to determine community standards by which a material or performance may be judged "obscene" as defined by the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Interested parties should submit their proposals in response to the request for proposal by A formal bidders conference will be held. Proposal should be prepared simply and economically, providing a straight forward, concise description of the offerers ability to meet the requirements of the RFP. Em- phasis should be placed on completeness and clarity of contents The City of St. Paul reserves the right to accept other than the lowest price proposal, cancel the request for proposals at any time, or to reject any or all proposals received, based on the evaluation criteria contained herein. Proposals should, therefore be sub- mitted on the most favorable terms for both price and performance. A contract award will be based upon the City's judgment as to which proposal is most desirable and in the City's best interest. Right is reserved to cancel on a written 30-day norice. Five copies of the proposal should be submitted to the Purchasing Division, 233 City Hall, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55102 by The City of St. Paul assumes no liability whatsoever in regazd to this proposal includ- ing but not limited to any costs or expenses incurred by the vendor. . . � � � . � �� . �� - � �,,c-�-�� City of St. Paul Request for Proposal for Professional Services to Survey and Evaluate Community Standards toward Sexual- ly Oriented Materials and Performances 1. Background and History The City of St. Paul, Minnesota is concerned with the public display and sale of materials and performances which may exceed acceptable community standards and fall into the category of "obscenity" as prohibited in City Ordinance. Supreme Court decisions have upheld the rights of communities to define obscenity . In most cases however, this definition has been subject to interpretation by enforce- ment personnel and then further by interpretation on a case by case basis in the Courts. Scientifically valid survey techniques have been presented and used in the Courts both by prosecuters and by defendants. Most often however, these are sta.tistics which have been developed to support a specific position in a specific court action. They aze always subject to question as to their validity. The City of St. Paul wishes to ascertain prevailing community standards now, to give objective direction to its enforcement personnel and legal staff in their duties. Further, the City wishes to create a supporting body of evidence for use in prosecution through the courts of those violating these community standards. 2. ' iv . � � � � � - . �� -�� Survey and evaluate community attitudes toward sexually oriented materials and performances. Factors to be considered include, but are not be limited to: a. Guidelines as defined by law, whether the ma.terials appeal to the prurient inter- est and whether they are patently offensive to the average person. b. The various forms of sexually explicit material including, photograph, film or video, and live performance. c. The establishment of a threshold at which the community finds sexually explicit material to be obscene. d. Adherance to a survey questionaire which is neutral as to sexual preference. e. Produce a survey that is admissible in a court of law as evidence of contemporary community standards regarding obscenity. 3. Scope of Work The consultant shall be required to: A. Meet with staff from the City Attorney's Office and the City Council Reseazch Center to: a. Determine the issues to be addressed in the survey and to , . ,- . . . .. ��,�� b. Determine the content and phrasing of survey questions. B. Conduct a random survey of residents of Ramsey County on the issues and ques- tions determined in A above. The random survey sha11 be of sufficient size to provide reasonable accuracy of the general consensus within the Ramsey County area. C. Retain or have on staff a consulting Psychologist, or other bonafide expert in the areas of sexually oriented material, or another related azea. D. Provide documentation indicating that the expert has reviewed all survey proces- ses including question phrasing, questioning technique, and survey interpretation and agrees with the process, and conclusions set forward in the consultants final report. E Provide a final report to the City Council detailing the process undertaken and the findings which shall include: 1. Public opinion defining the limits of obscenity 2. Definitions describing the specifics of(l.) 3. Statistical breakdowns of(l.) F. Testify in court if the survey is offered as evidence of community standards. 4. Or�ani� zation � � � � . �� .�� -�� To aid in the comparative evaluarion of proposals, all responses will be required to use the following format. Deviations may decrease the proposal's evaluation score. Cover letter Understanding of objective and scope of work Proposed methodology Corporate and personnel qualifications Cost to the City of St. Paul 5. Performance Schedule The chosen consulta.nt shall be required to complete all work within calendar days following award of a contract. , �� 6. Evaluarion Criteria Submitted proposals will be evaluated on the following criteria, listed in order of im- portance. Associated weight values are given for each of the evaluation categories. Understanding of the problem - XX l. Understanding of objectives 2. Approach to be used 3. Survey accuracy Credentials of the firm - XX l. Previous project experience 2. Management history 3. Personnel qualifications _ . . . . . , - ��-�� SUMMATION A professionally designed and executed survey to ascertain community standards ap- peazs reasonable, and legally effective. The City of St. Paul retains latitude in directing its survey contractor as to technique , but should not attempt to pre-determine the results of the survey. It is crucial to remember that survey results do not become law, rather they become a guideline for law enforcement officials in their decisions of whether to investigate or prosecute, or not. Finally, the survey results ultima.tely become a piece of evidence to be considered by a judge and jury in a court of law. The are not rigid, and they will always be taken in the context of a particular case. They are not an end in themselves, they aze tools to be used and ideally will make a tough job just a little bit easier. David Thune,Policy Analyst City Council Research City of Saint Paul, Minnesota �w.�� s � ��8 � � (��--�-3 j A� a��. , - _ c ,+ c f��K__ _ _ _ _ __- - - __ _ -__ __ - -- - ;�. a� s+� �.w _ _ _ _ _ . c _ _ �_ _ � c ___- ---______ _-- ---_ ___ . _ _ _ _ _ __ _____ _ - ----- _ _ _ s-�- � _ -- __ _ . . u,u � w1. �n.v. - _ ._ __ . __ . _ _ _-- _ _ . ___ _ _ _ ___ _ ___. �� - � r � ` D� _`CJ1ti�.rsc�� 1 u..,�_.,�.u-✓__ ( �! �� a►.� `� �� _.__ .___ ___-- ----_____ _ _--- U � __ _ � _�_�.-�-2d'e�S-�-e.� ti rn. -��S-�-�-t- ��. � �... _1-�-2w.._ l� -- ____ -- _ . __ _ _ _ _ __ ---- -- - __ ---- _ _-- - _ --__ t..__ -- ---------- -- � J l � W�"`C.� � S GL. <"2S� I w�� D�-- G �•f Q,c�T� v C o u�,.�,� � �a�52e�✓G� ----- - _ __ --- --- _- -- -___ ___. - _ - - - _ _---- --__ _.__--- ___ ____ ---- ---- -_-- OI,N.t� l�� /-rT7 a P'VLQ i � �"h'r� L�� 'O S p2�.�.{� �u� �"?� ---- - --- __._ ._. __ ___ _ _.._. - - - � __- - _ __ _ ..._._ _ _ __ _-_ c�� 0 a � '�'0 C O v�,�u-c-� 0. __j�t a'�J� - - '"r.0 —�Q-��r w��v�°- —.— --- _ _ __ _ _. _ __ _ _. __ . C,a u.�e u� o s'a c/ Go vv�v,n u.r.t,� S-�-a.v�d a,r s J'e�a.�"' ��2- �"a _ _ ___ ___ _ _ ___. _ _ -- - _ _ � __ _ __ __ __ _- _--- --------___ . . . _ -- --__ ...__ ___— _ ____.._ � - � Q 6-5 c.e.�. W�.a-�,��a��. -__ ----------� -_____--- ---__ _ _ ___ _— _ _______ _ _ __ -- ------ -_ ---- _, __--_._--- � .L T ��"ew� 1 3 i 5— ✓'�-�e.�r�.� '�'O a. SubGow�,w�. �2 �. - -----__._�.___. .____--- __ ____ _ ------_--- � L. �`�S�r�/2� `'{"o �nna�� m G o wt w�.�vl.'�'" -1-0 �--�t aT" __ _ __ _ _} _ ___ ---- ---- - .--- ---- - ---- ___._ _ ._ .. _ -------_ _ ____ _ ___-___ . �.. - I I-' j � Q c,<�� C c�..ti.l ��'E- `�-�a.'� `�'Y�1-- �/'e S o�� a� m a _� - 1 __.___. _------ ---- _. _ --_ _ _ __-- _ ---- -- -- . ____ ------- -._ __ ---- _ _ _ _ _ ---__--_ _--- --� � � _ ��C��Q..(.� �.C_. _ _ . _--- -- . -__ _ . ._ - -. ._ __ t. _.._____ _- ------- _ __ _ _ _--- — __ _._ _. _ _ c.J�t�A�G�.,✓Q' -- __ _. _.._. ---- __ _——-- . ... � ---- _--- _ - - ___-- _ . __ .--- -----_�_ _ U I �� 'va�� \ � --_ .____ __------f -_-�-•_----___ _ _ _- --- - __ __ _ -------------_ ___ .�.�_�__ ±�_--- - -- - --- I - ` �_ � �� , a o7� --� - _wl a`��- s`�'----- - _-- _---- - -__ . �� _ 6- � _ ----- — __ - � _ _.v._'_4�- �'re4_�df.�.____�i�SU� --5-�" u,�.t�( -��,,,,,�,, '_ _ _.. _. - --- -- � -__ _______ __.__---- i __ ._ _ _ _ _ f _____ ________ _ __ s�-, �� _____ _ __ __ _ __ ___ _ __