97-1071CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNCI FILE NO. � �,C1�I � ��
FINAL ORDER By � �
File No. 597094
Voting Ward_6
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
on both sides of E. Montana Ave from N. White Bear Ave. to N_ Hazel St.
LAID OVER BY COIINCIL ON 8-13-97 TO 8-27-97.
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5)
foot wide walk and $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction
(where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $3.33 per square foot.
All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of
the property.
MULTI-RESSDENTIAL (More than three family structures), NON RE5IDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
under Preliminary order 97-757 approved August 27, 1997_
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a public hearing upon the
above improvement, due notice thereof having been given as prescribed by the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, The Council has heard all persons, objections and recommendations
pertaining to said proposed improvement and has fully considered the same; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of SainC Paul does hereby order that the
above-described improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby directed
and authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That upon the completion of said improvement, the proper City
officers shall calculate all expenses incurred therein and shall report the same to
the City Council in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Charter.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas Nays
B�,.akey
✓��o s trom
�/ ollins
�rris
�gard
vAY6rton
Thune�{��e,y�}
ro In Favor
�_Against
� �bsev��'
Adopted by Council: Date�.�'�_1 `q�
Q
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
�� a� �
. . j ��-- G%' ` '�
Mayor
Public Hearing Da[e - August 27, i997 RE 8-19-97
Ij
i
q�- lo�t)
�n���
/OFFlCE/COUNCiL DATE INiT1ATED V
T.M. S. JReal Estate Division 8-18-97 GREEN SHEE
CONTACTPERSON&PHONE ODEPARTMENTDIRECTOR �CfTYCOUNCIL INITIAVDATE
Peter j^nllt2 266-8850 AS"`��N OCITYATfORNEY �CITVCLERK
MU5T BE ON CAUNqL AGENDA BY (DATE) M7IHBER FOR � BUDGET DIRECTOF � P�N. 8 MGT. SEflVICES DIR.
LAID OVER SY ROUiING
ORDER MAYOR(ORASS15TAN7J Council Research
COUNCIL ON 8-13-97 TO ❑ �
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES i (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
ACTION IiEQUESTED:
At Council's request on 8-13-97 to 8-27-97. Reconstruction of sidewalk on both sides
E. Montana Ave. from N. White Bear Ave. to N. Hazel St. was laid over for further discussion.
File No. 597094
RECOMMENDA7iONS: Approve (A) or Reject (a) PERSONAL SEFiVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
_ PIANNING COMMISSIQN _ CIVIL SEfiVICE COMMISSION �� Has this pereonHirm ever worked under a contrect for ihis deparimem?
_ CB COMMLTTEE _ 1'ES NO
A S7A 2. Has this personRirm ever been a ciry employee?
— — YES NO
_ DISiRiC7 COURr _ 3. Does ihis qerson/firm possess a skill not normally possessetl by any current city employee?
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTIVE7 YES NO
Explafn all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
INYTIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who, What. When, Where. Why):
"SBE ORIGINAL GREEN SHEET NUMBER 38551"
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED:
Cit�i `u�.�'.T`�j' i <�lR�,����3.. ��
�i
k�� 1 9 «�7
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED�
DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVE�'
707AL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST/AEVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) VES NO
FUNOItdG SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINFNCIALINFOR/nATION�(EXPLAIN)
Public Hearin Date - Au ust 13, 1997 RE 6-6-97 C
DEPAliTMENTrOFFICE�COUNqL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET No. �8551
Public Works Sidewalks 5-2�-g7 INITIAUDATE MRIAL/DATB
CONTACT PEASON b PHONE � DEPARTMENT DIqECTOP � CIiY CAUNCIL /J rl _�� A 1
Robert A. lissick - 286-6121 �B� � � C77Y ATiOANEY � cm c�ax —r-r---�°-�
MUSTBEONCAUNGfLAGEN0A8Y(QA7E) 6 p��� BUWETOIftECT00. �fIN.SMGT.SERVICESOip.
Must be in Council Research Office �R MAYOA(OPASSISTANT) tOCounal Research
b noon Frida 6-13-97 �
TOTAL! OF SIGNANNE PAGES I __ (CllP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANAA � ASSOCIATE PA 11AENTAL ACxOUt7TANT
ACT10N REWES7ED �'�a� "0 1
Raconstruct Sidewatk in Ward 6(See attached fist)
� �
RE�MMENDAT1oN5: t�, ove (q� a Reqz (FO pERSONAL SERYICE CONTHACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING DUESTIONS:
PLANNING COMM15S10N __CNd SEPVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes Nis pe N �er worked uMer a ronVaG[ for this tleP�ent?
Y
_C78 CWiM7T7EE _ 2 � s m � yE� NO r been a city emPloyee?
A S7AFF _ 3. Does this person�firm possess a skBl not normally passessed by arry current ary
— L employee?
D15TA�GTCOUNCI�?� J � YES SJO
S�pppAis w.a�CH rAU�C � ECTrvEZ Explain ail yas answers on separota sheet and attaeh to grean sheet
bai
MITIATING PROBIEIA. ISSUE.OPPORTUNIiY (WHO. Wr�AT. WNEN, WHERE, WHY�:
The probVam 'defective sidewafk" was created because of tree roots, deteter'wus subecade material, afternating SreeRhaw cycles,
sarvice {iSe 4imAs, ahemical add+tives, extreme temperature variat+ons, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide levef and must be
addressed and corrected o� an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewa�k condftion would worsen to a state where it wouid be
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
ADVANTAGES iF APPROYED:
The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect tree sidewalks tor ds many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by ¢rivate contractors, so it tollows that private sector jobs are created as a resutt ot this activity.
DISADYANTAGES IG A�'PROVED:
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative teedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simpiy siated, property owners detest assessments, and despite the tad up to one-hali the assessmeni is City subsidized, it still
remains controversial.
DiSADVANTAGE5IF NOS APPROVED:
This option would allow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deterarate, which in turn, witf generate more personaf in}ury su8s,
uttimately resuft+�g in the expenditure of Iarger doilar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTALAMWNTOFTiUNSACTIDNt 36.H3S.JH COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES� No
FLNDMGSOURCE 97-M-0667 A, PiA g7 = 557 ,00� ACITVITYNUMBER ��2T 2-0 8�i�2 O1
FINANCIAL INFORMATIDN: (E%PLAIM B� AST ° 3OO �OOO
C. CIB 97 = 50,000
CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNCI FILE NO. � �,C1�I � ��
FINAL ORDER By � �
File No. 597094
Voting Ward_6
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
on both sides of E. Montana Ave from N. White Bear Ave. to N_ Hazel St.
LAID OVER BY COIINCIL ON 8-13-97 TO 8-27-97.
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5)
foot wide walk and $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction
(where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $3.33 per square foot.
All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of
the property.
MULTI-RESSDENTIAL (More than three family structures), NON RE5IDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
under Preliminary order 97-757 approved August 27, 1997_
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a public hearing upon the
above improvement, due notice thereof having been given as prescribed by the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, The Council has heard all persons, objections and recommendations
pertaining to said proposed improvement and has fully considered the same; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of SainC Paul does hereby order that the
above-described improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby directed
and authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That upon the completion of said improvement, the proper City
officers shall calculate all expenses incurred therein and shall report the same to
the City Council in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Charter.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas Nays
B�,.akey
✓��o s trom
�/ ollins
�rris
�gard
vAY6rton
Thune�{��e,y�}
ro In Favor
�_Against
� �bsev��'
Adopted by Council: Date�.�'�_1 `q�
Q
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
�� a� �
. . j ��-- G%' ` '�
Mayor
Public Hearing Da[e - August 27, i997 RE 8-19-97
Ij
i
q�- lo�t)
�n���
/OFFlCE/COUNCiL DATE INiT1ATED V
T.M. S. JReal Estate Division 8-18-97 GREEN SHEE
CONTACTPERSON&PHONE ODEPARTMENTDIRECTOR �CfTYCOUNCIL INITIAVDATE
Peter j^nllt2 266-8850 AS"`��N OCITYATfORNEY �CITVCLERK
MU5T BE ON CAUNqL AGENDA BY (DATE) M7IHBER FOR � BUDGET DIRECTOF � P�N. 8 MGT. SEflVICES DIR.
LAID OVER SY ROUiING
ORDER MAYOR(ORASS15TAN7J Council Research
COUNCIL ON 8-13-97 TO ❑ �
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES i (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
ACTION IiEQUESTED:
At Council's request on 8-13-97 to 8-27-97. Reconstruction of sidewalk on both sides
E. Montana Ave. from N. White Bear Ave. to N. Hazel St. was laid over for further discussion.
File No. 597094
RECOMMENDA7iONS: Approve (A) or Reject (a) PERSONAL SEFiVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
_ PIANNING COMMISSIQN _ CIVIL SEfiVICE COMMISSION �� Has this pereonHirm ever worked under a contrect for ihis deparimem?
_ CB COMMLTTEE _ 1'ES NO
A S7A 2. Has this personRirm ever been a ciry employee?
— — YES NO
_ DISiRiC7 COURr _ 3. Does ihis qerson/firm possess a skill not normally possessetl by any current city employee?
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTIVE7 YES NO
Explafn all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
INYTIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who, What. When, Where. Why):
"SBE ORIGINAL GREEN SHEET NUMBER 38551"
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED:
Cit�i `u�.�'.T`�j' i <�lR�,����3.. ��
�i
k�� 1 9 «�7
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED�
DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVE�'
707AL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST/AEVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) VES NO
FUNOItdG SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINFNCIALINFOR/nATION�(EXPLAIN)
Public Hearin Date - Au ust 13, 1997 RE 6-6-97 C
DEPAliTMENTrOFFICE�COUNqL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET No. �8551
Public Works Sidewalks 5-2�-g7 INITIAUDATE MRIAL/DATB
CONTACT PEASON b PHONE � DEPARTMENT DIqECTOP � CIiY CAUNCIL /J rl _�� A 1
Robert A. lissick - 286-6121 �B� � � C77Y ATiOANEY � cm c�ax —r-r---�°-�
MUSTBEONCAUNGfLAGEN0A8Y(QA7E) 6 p��� BUWETOIftECT00. �fIN.SMGT.SERVICESOip.
Must be in Council Research Office �R MAYOA(OPASSISTANT) tOCounal Research
b noon Frida 6-13-97 �
TOTAL! OF SIGNANNE PAGES I __ (CllP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANAA � ASSOCIATE PA 11AENTAL ACxOUt7TANT
ACT10N REWES7ED �'�a� "0 1
Raconstruct Sidewatk in Ward 6(See attached fist)
� �
RE�MMENDAT1oN5: t�, ove (q� a Reqz (FO pERSONAL SERYICE CONTHACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING DUESTIONS:
PLANNING COMM15S10N __CNd SEPVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes Nis pe N �er worked uMer a ronVaG[ for this tleP�ent?
Y
_C78 CWiM7T7EE _ 2 � s m � yE� NO r been a city emPloyee?
A S7AFF _ 3. Does this person�firm possess a skBl not normally passessed by arry current ary
— L employee?
D15TA�GTCOUNCI�?� J � YES SJO
S�pppAis w.a�CH rAU�C � ECTrvEZ Explain ail yas answers on separota sheet and attaeh to grean sheet
bai
MITIATING PROBIEIA. ISSUE.OPPORTUNIiY (WHO. Wr�AT. WNEN, WHERE, WHY�:
The probVam 'defective sidewafk" was created because of tree roots, deteter'wus subecade material, afternating SreeRhaw cycles,
sarvice {iSe 4imAs, ahemical add+tives, extreme temperature variat+ons, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide levef and must be
addressed and corrected o� an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewa�k condftion would worsen to a state where it wouid be
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
ADVANTAGES iF APPROYED:
The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect tree sidewalks tor ds many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by ¢rivate contractors, so it tollows that private sector jobs are created as a resutt ot this activity.
DISADYANTAGES IG A�'PROVED:
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative teedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simpiy siated, property owners detest assessments, and despite the tad up to one-hali the assessmeni is City subsidized, it still
remains controversial.
DiSADVANTAGE5IF NOS APPROVED:
This option would allow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deterarate, which in turn, witf generate more personaf in}ury su8s,
uttimately resuft+�g in the expenditure of Iarger doilar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTALAMWNTOFTiUNSACTIDNt 36.H3S.JH COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES� No
FLNDMGSOURCE 97-M-0667 A, PiA g7 = 557 ,00� ACITVITYNUMBER ��2T 2-0 8�i�2 O1
FINANCIAL INFORMATIDN: (E%PLAIM B� AST ° 3OO �OOO
C. CIB 97 = 50,000
CITY OF ST. PAIIL COUNCI FILE NO. � �,C1�I � ��
FINAL ORDER By � �
File No. 597094
Voting Ward_6
In the Matter of Reconstruction of sidewalks at the following location(s):
on both sides of E. Montana Ave from N. White Bear Ave. to N_ Hazel St.
LAID OVER BY COIINCIL ON 8-13-97 TO 8-27-97.
*ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION RATES
RESIDENTIAL RATES (One, two or three family structures)
Reconstruction (replacement of old sidewalk) -$7.45 per front foot for a five (5)
foot wide walk and $8.94 per front foot for a six (6) foot wide
walk. Al1 other widths will be prorated accordingly. Naw construction
(where no walk existed) - 100� of the actual cost estimated to be
approximately $3.33 per square foot.
All corner residential properties will receive a credit up to the first 150
feet of new or reconstructed sidewalk along and abutting the "long side" of
the property.
MULTI-RESSDENTIAL (More than three family structures), NON RE5IDENTIAL RATES
For new and reconstructed sidewalk; 1000 of actual cost estimated to be
approximately $4.50 per square foot.
under Preliminary order 97-757 approved August 27, 1997_
The Council of the City of Saint Paul has conducted a public hearing upon the
above improvement, due notice thereof having been given as prescribed by the City
Charter; and
WHEREAS, The Council has heard all persons, objections and recommendations
pertaining to said proposed improvement and has fully considered the same; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of SainC Paul does hereby order that the
above-described improvement be made, and the proper City officers are hereby directed
and authorized to proceed with the improvement; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That upon the completion of said improvement, the proper City
officers shall calculate all expenses incurred therein and shall report the same to
the City Council in accordance with Chapter 14 of the City Charter.
COUNCILPERSONS
Yeas Nays
B�,.akey
✓��o s trom
�/ ollins
�rris
�gard
vAY6rton
Thune�{��e,y�}
ro In Favor
�_Against
� �bsev��'
Adopted by Council: Date�.�'�_1 `q�
Q
Certified Passed by Council Secretary
�� a� �
. . j ��-- G%' ` '�
Mayor
Public Hearing Da[e - August 27, i997 RE 8-19-97
Ij
i
q�- lo�t)
�n���
/OFFlCE/COUNCiL DATE INiT1ATED V
T.M. S. JReal Estate Division 8-18-97 GREEN SHEE
CONTACTPERSON&PHONE ODEPARTMENTDIRECTOR �CfTYCOUNCIL INITIAVDATE
Peter j^nllt2 266-8850 AS"`��N OCITYATfORNEY �CITVCLERK
MU5T BE ON CAUNqL AGENDA BY (DATE) M7IHBER FOR � BUDGET DIRECTOF � P�N. 8 MGT. SEflVICES DIR.
LAID OVER SY ROUiING
ORDER MAYOR(ORASS15TAN7J Council Research
COUNCIL ON 8-13-97 TO ❑ �
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES i (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
ACTION IiEQUESTED:
At Council's request on 8-13-97 to 8-27-97. Reconstruction of sidewalk on both sides
E. Montana Ave. from N. White Bear Ave. to N. Hazel St. was laid over for further discussion.
File No. 597094
RECOMMENDA7iONS: Approve (A) or Reject (a) PERSONAL SEFiVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEH THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
_ PIANNING COMMISSIQN _ CIVIL SEfiVICE COMMISSION �� Has this pereonHirm ever worked under a contrect for ihis deparimem?
_ CB COMMLTTEE _ 1'ES NO
A S7A 2. Has this personRirm ever been a ciry employee?
— — YES NO
_ DISiRiC7 COURr _ 3. Does ihis qerson/firm possess a skill not normally possessetl by any current city employee?
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTIVE7 YES NO
Explafn all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
INYTIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who, What. When, Where. Why):
"SBE ORIGINAL GREEN SHEET NUMBER 38551"
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED:
Cit�i `u�.�'.T`�j' i <�lR�,����3.. ��
�i
k�� 1 9 «�7
DISADVANTAGESIFAPPPOVED�
DISADVANTAGES IF NOTAPPROVE�'
707AL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST/AEVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) VES NO
FUNOItdG SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINFNCIALINFOR/nATION�(EXPLAIN)
Public Hearin Date - Au ust 13, 1997 RE 6-6-97 C
DEPAliTMENTrOFFICE�COUNqL DATEINITIATED GREEN SHEET No. �8551
Public Works Sidewalks 5-2�-g7 INITIAUDATE MRIAL/DATB
CONTACT PEASON b PHONE � DEPARTMENT DIqECTOP � CIiY CAUNCIL /J rl _�� A 1
Robert A. lissick - 286-6121 �B� � � C77Y ATiOANEY � cm c�ax —r-r---�°-�
MUSTBEONCAUNGfLAGEN0A8Y(QA7E) 6 p��� BUWETOIftECT00. �fIN.SMGT.SERVICESOip.
Must be in Council Research Office �R MAYOA(OPASSISTANT) tOCounal Research
b noon Frida 6-13-97 �
TOTAL! OF SIGNANNE PAGES I __ (CllP ALL LOCATONS FOR SIGNANAA � ASSOCIATE PA 11AENTAL ACxOUt7TANT
ACT10N REWES7ED �'�a� "0 1
Raconstruct Sidewatk in Ward 6(See attached fist)
� �
RE�MMENDAT1oN5: t�, ove (q� a Reqz (FO pERSONAL SERYICE CONTHACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLI.OWING DUESTIONS:
PLANNING COMM15S10N __CNd SEPVICE COMMISSION 1. Hes Nis pe N �er worked uMer a ronVaG[ for this tleP�ent?
Y
_C78 CWiM7T7EE _ 2 � s m � yE� NO r been a city emPloyee?
A S7AFF _ 3. Does this person�firm possess a skBl not normally passessed by arry current ary
— L employee?
D15TA�GTCOUNCI�?� J � YES SJO
S�pppAis w.a�CH rAU�C � ECTrvEZ Explain ail yas answers on separota sheet and attaeh to grean sheet
bai
MITIATING PROBIEIA. ISSUE.OPPORTUNIiY (WHO. Wr�AT. WNEN, WHERE, WHY�:
The probVam 'defective sidewafk" was created because of tree roots, deteter'wus subecade material, afternating SreeRhaw cycles,
sarvice {iSe 4imAs, ahemical add+tives, extreme temperature variat+ons, etc. These problems occur on a cRywide levef and must be
addressed and corrected o� an annual basis. Left uncorrected, the sidewa�k condftion would worsen to a state where it wouid be
rendered unusable and subject to increased pedestrian injuries from falls and possible litigations.
ADVANTAGES iF APPROYED:
The community will benefit from this project because it will provide safe detect tree sidewalks tor ds many citizens. The sidewalk
contracts are executed by ¢rivate contractors, so it tollows that private sector jobs are created as a resutt ot this activity.
DISADYANTAGES IG A�'PROVED:
Historicaliy, the sidewalk reconstructions have created negative teedback in the area of construction procedure and assessment.
Simpiy siated, property owners detest assessments, and despite the tad up to one-hali the assessmeni is City subsidized, it still
remains controversial.
DiSADVANTAGE5IF NOS APPROVED:
This option would allow the infrastructure ot sidewalk stock to deterarate, which in turn, witf generate more personaf in}ury su8s,
uttimately resuft+�g in the expenditure of Iarger doilar amounts in eventual repairs and/or replacement, as well as claim payouts.
TOTALAMWNTOFTiUNSACTIDNt 36.H3S.JH COST/REVENUEBUDGETED(CIRCLEONE) YES� No
FLNDMGSOURCE 97-M-0667 A, PiA g7 = 557 ,00� ACITVITYNUMBER ��2T 2-0 8�i�2 O1
FINANCIAL INFORMATIDN: (E%PLAIM B� AST ° 3OO �OOO
C. CIB 97 = 50,000