ĐĎॹá>ţ˙ ŠŒţ˙˙˙ˆ‰˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ěĽÁ7 đżڎbjbjUU &˛7|7|ŞŠ/˙˙˙˙˙˙l,,,,,,,@%%%8R% ^%|@œ6ść%ć%ü%ü%ü%ü%ü%ü%6666666$R7 r9ÂA6,ü%ü%ü%ü%ü%A6,,,ü%ü%V6,,,ü%Ę,ü%,ü%6,ü%6,˘,¤3Ď5,,6ü%Ú% đžśJrÉ@Ú#%Ć&žç56l60œ6ď5,4:„'~4:6,@@,,,,ŮThe Fulton County Drainage Board met on the 8th of December 2008 at 9:00 A.M. E.S.T. in the Commissioners/Council Room of the Fulton County Office Building. Board members present were Chairman, Roger Rose; Vice Chairman, Richard A. Powell; and Board Member, Mark J. Rodriguez. Also present were Don Towne, Fulton County Surveyor; Tom Chudzynski, Assistant Surveyor; Jean Cloud, Drainage Board Secretary; Drainage Board Attorney, Greg Heller; Kirk W. Ingram; Sherry Fulton; Kenneth Carter; Jeff Healy; Linda Swick; Ty J. Lewis; Chad Lewis; Bill Lewis; Marty Fallon; Derek Mauntel; and Jamie Paschke. Chairman, Roger Rose, called the meeting to order at 9:05 A.M. E.S.T. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked for any additions or corrections to the Drainage Board minutes of November 10, 2008. Being no additions or corrections, Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to approve the Drainage Board minutes of November 10, 2008. Mark Rodriguez made a motion to approve the Drainage Board minutes of November 10, 2008 as presented. Richard Powell seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. IN REF: MUD CREEK BIDS RECEIVED: WORK AWARDED CAUSE NO. 10-1980 #723 Drainage Board Secretary, Jean Cloud, stated the Surveyor’s estimate is $62,000.00 and the completion date for the project is April 15, 2009. There are three (3) bidders on the project. The Drainage Board determined that proper notice has been given to bid on this drain. According to the Plans and Specifications set forth by the Surveyor, the following bids were opened and read aloud: CONTRACTORS LUMP SUM Jesse Rude $49,665.00 Overmyer Excavating LLC $44,890.00 Kirk Ingram $61,980.00 Being no further discussion, Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to award the work on Mud Creek to Overmyer Excavating for their low bid of forty-four thousand eight hundred and ninety dollars ($44,890.00). Richard Powell made a motion to award the work on Mud Creek, Cause No. 10-1980, #723 in Rochester Township; to Overmyer Excavating for their low bid of forty-four thousand eight hundred and ninety dollars ($44,890.00). Mark Rodriguez seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. IN REF: WILLOW CREEK REQUEST FINANCIAL CAUSE NO. 2-1995 #714 ASSISTANCE FOR CLEAN OUT Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, showed the Board on a map where Willow Creek is located and it drains the north edge of Kewanna. Don further explained that Willow Creek is set up on maintenance in Fulton County and is not on maintenance in Pulaski County. Don explained the landowners just in Pulaski County would like to clean out approximately 7,780 feet of the ditch and asked if Fulton County could help monetarily on the cleanout, since it is our outlet. Don stated he does not see a problem helping some on the cleanout. Don further stated there is approximately $64,694.00 in Willow Creek maintenance fund. Don stated there would have to be approximately a quarter of a mile cleaned out in our county, because the maintenance stops at the Fulton/Pulaski County line. After further discussion, Don stated the landowners are going to go to the Pulaski County Drainage Board and ask if they would pay fifteen hundred dollars ($1500.00). Don stated Gudas’ has property on said drain, and Walt Koecbke is the landowner asking because he has land on both sides and also does farming in Pulaski County. Don further explained quite some time ago there was a Joint Board Hearing to try and set this up on maintenance, but the Pulaski County owners did not want it set up in their county. After brief discussion, Don commented the project estimate is approximately seventeen thousand five hundred dollars ($17,500.00). Don also commented that one of the landowners in Pulaski County is going to pay the cost for clean out on his property, which would be approximately fifty-six hundred dollars ($5600.00). Richard Powell commented he feels we could pay at least two thousand dollars ($2,000.00). Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to pay two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) towards the project in Pulaski County. Richard Powell made a motion to pay two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) towards the project in Pulaski County. Mark Rodriguez seconded the motion. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented the money would come out the maintenance fund for Willow Creek. Motion carried three to zero. IN REF: LEWIS M. LOUGH DISCUSSION Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, stated the Lewis M. Lough is a drain of county record. The drain is not set up on maintenance, and the old records indicate it is a small tile. Don stated someone has made it an open about a quarter of a mile on the outlet. Ken and Albert Gudas own most of the property on and around the open portion of the drain, and are asking to put a tile back in the open area. Don further commented they want to put a twelve (12) inch tile back in and that is what the old records show. Don stated he does not have a problem with them doing this, and has no idea who or when this portion of the drain was opened. After brief discussion, Don stated there is approximately thirteen hundred (1300) feet that is open. Richard Powell commented that Don needs to monitor the project to make sure the proper tile size is being installed. Chairman, Roger Rose, stated the Board gives the Gudas’ the go ahead subject to the Surveyor’s confirmation of the job being done correctly. Don commented he had told them not to back up water on any of the landowners. Don commented we would not be paying for any of the work discussed. Chairman, Roger Rose, called for a short recess at 9:25 A.M. E.S.T. Chairman, Roger Rose, called the meeting back to order at 9:35 A.M. E.S.T. IN REF: CHARLES TOWN TILE HEARING:ORDER MADE CAUSE NO. 2-2008 NOTICE PUBLISHED CHARLES TOWN OPEN CAUSE NO. 3-2008 Chairman, Roger Rose, opened the hearing on the Charles Town Tile and the Charles Town Open. Landowners/Representatives present were Marty Fallon, Derek Mauntel, Jamie Paschke, Brock Schwenk, Tom Schwenk, Ken Carter, Bill Lewis, Chad Lewis, Ty J Lewis, Linda Swick, Sherry Fulton, Patty Paxton, Larry E. Paxton, Richard W. Fox, Catherine L. Fox and Bill Hansking. Chairman, Roger Rose, read the purpose of the hearing on the Charles Town Tile is to increase the watershed by approximately 72 acres more or less, reconstruction of the tile and establish a maintenance rate on the tile. Roger also read on the Charles Town Open the purpose of the hearing is to increase the watershed by approximately 72 acres more or less and establish a maintenance rate. Roger read that the landowner notices were mailed on November 3, 2008 and the legal notice was published on November 26, 2008. Roger read there are 438.408 benefited acres on the Charles Town Tile and 817.17 benefited acres on the Charles Town Open. Roger gave the following proposed rates: Charles Town Tile: Reconstruction Rate: Allied Waste -$518.00 per benefited acre with a $518.00 Minimum All other landowners - $l88.00 per benefited acre with a $188.00 Minimum Maintenance Rate: All landowners - $2.00 per benefited acre with a $10.00 Minimum Charles Town Open: Maintenance Rate: All landowners - $2.00 per benefited acre with a $10.00 Minimum. Chairman, Roger Rose, stated there are letters of objection on the Charles Town Tile from Brock Schwenk, Larry and Patty Paxton, and William and Joyce Lewis. Roger also commented there are letters of objection on the Charles Town Open from Richard Fox, Brock Schwenk, Schwenk Farms #2, Tom & Charlotte Schwenk, Larry & Patty Paxton, Bill & Joyce Lewis, Chad Lewis and Ty Lewis. Roger stated we received a letter of concern from David & Linda Swick. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented the County Surveyor normally serves as the technical advisor for projects, but he is in the watershed and there is conflict of interest. Roger then introduced Jeff Healy, which is a consultant the Drainage Board has used on other drainage projects and asked him to explain the project. Jeff Healy stated he works for Banning Engineering in Plainfield, Indiana and has worked for the Drainage Board in the past and today I am representing the Drainage Board. Jeff explained several months ago the County Line Landfill and Allied Waste submitted proposed plans for expanding the current landfill operation, which contributes drainage to the Charles Town Tile watershed. Jeff stated their proposal is to enlarge their discharge into the Charles Town by an area of seventy-two (72) acres more or less. Jeff stated there is presently a retention pond on the property and the proposal is to enlarge and reconstruct the retention pond in order to effectively manage the additional acres. Jeff stated he has spoken to Shaw Environmental and the current design does meet the design criteria for retention pond discharges. Jeff stated the design goes beyond normal retention pond discharges, which restricts the outflows. Jeff further stated we had asked Shaw to do this because of the discharge into a regulated drain, which is greater than a hundred years old, and it is only a twelve (12) inch tile. Jeff further explained by the landfill adding additional acres, he was not concerned with the rate of flow, but duration of how long it would flow after a large storm event. Jeff further commented that the Old US 31 intersection by the landfill has overtopped at times and the culverts are not that large and downstream there are no defined channels to go across agricultural areas. Jeff stated a written report was provided to the Drainage Board back in September that analyzed several different alternatives, which brought us here to the hearing today with the proposed reconstruction and proposed rates. Jeff showed an aerial of the County Line Landfill and Old US 31. Jeff then explained they presume the tile goes along the west side of Old 31 then crosses over Old 31 and goes through a field following a low area that is not linear and outlets into the open drain. Jeff explained they looked at several different locations and did not see a practical way for them to divert the additional acres to another watershed in another direction. Jeff stated there were three (3) alternatives discussed with one being the reconstruction or replacement of the existing twelve (12) inch tile; and two (2) alternatives upsizing the tile to various sizes from twelve (12) to eighteen (18) and perhaps twenty-four (24) at the outlet. Jeff stated the finalized decision was made to go with alternate 2, which was upsizing the existing tile. Jeff stated the proposed alternative that was recommended to the Drainage Board was to reconstruct the tile portion to eighteen (18) inch from the landfill and end up with a twenty-four (24) inch at the outlet at the open drain. Jeff further explained how they came up with the alternative recommended. Jeff then showed pictures taken last week of the area, and explained what they had found in the area, such as erosion scars and tile blowouts. Jeff further explained the maintenance needs of the drain downstream. Jeff explained some the drain is in newly maintained condition. Jeff stated there are several crossings on the drain and are fairly good sized. Jeff further commented there are some of the landowners that have buffer strips and are maintaining them and those are positive not only for the agricultural quality, but also to help in the maintenance of the ditch. Jeff continued to show where the culverts were on the drain and explained where the concrete culvert is on the railroad at Tiosa and then turns goes across the county road, which the culvert under the road was just recently replaced by the county highway. Jeff further commented that there was a maintenance project just recently completed downstream, which outlets into the Shettlerly drain. Jeff further explained and showed on the screen where the maintenance was done. Jeff stated the study that was done summarized the estimated cost to reconstruct the tile and a maintenance assessment for the tile. Jeff also commented even though the tile would be reconstructed and the tile is expected to be in perfect condition when the contractor leaves the job and would be functional for many years, there would still be a recommendation for a maintenance assessment. Jeff commented a maintenance assessment on the open drain is recommended in order to take care of the sediment in the drain and some erosion issues, which can be addressed with the maintenance assessment. Jeff stated they are separate entities and do not have to move forward together, but since we were looking at the entire ditch it seemed appropriate to recommend the maintenance assessment on the open. Richard Powell stated this is based on today’s numbers, what happens if the landfill expands in the next ten (10) years, would the tile handle the situation at that time. Jeff stated this is based on the landfill’s proposed expansion, which involves taking in the additional seventy-two (72) acres and redirecting it to this point, and we are looking at future conditions. Richard Powell asked if the old tile would remain there. Jeff stated the new tile would go close to the old tile and laterals would be hooked into the new tile and the old tile would be taken out of service. After further discussion, Chairman, Roger Rose, asked for public comment. Bill Lewis commented the creek by his place would not take an additional seventy-one (71) acres. Bill Lewis gave the Drainage Board pictures of the area around his property. Bill commented that Don Towne has cleaned his ditch below the railroad, but do not feel the ditch can handle the additional seventy-one (71) acres. Bill commented the landfill is talking about putting in a new retention pond and feel it should be a big one, because the one that is there now is not big enough. Bill further commented the water runs around the pond and will not hold the water. Bill further commented the landfill should put in retention pond big enough to hold all the water and orifice into the tile. Bill further commented when that retention pond was put in at the landfill, he put in a standpipe and an orifice. Bill commented if a twenty-four (24) inch tile were put in that would carry five (5) times the water than a twelve (12) inch. Bill made further comments and stated the sediment in the open ditch is from the landfill, and he had cleaned it three (3) or four (4) times and it was done about a year and half ago and it has sediment in it again. After further comments from Bill Lewis, he commented that part of the water could go down the side of Old 31 into the ditch through John Kuhn and Roger Rose’s property and not bring it all down through the new tile. Bill Lewis made further comments on this issue. Bill Lewis commented he is not in favor of putting in a new tile. Bill has cleaned the ditch on his property several times and has never asked for any help. Bill also commented the landfill should be responsible for the entire cost. Bill further commented the retention pond at the landfill needs to have a high bank. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked Jeff Healy to respond to Bill Lewis’ concern. Jeff Healy commented Shaw’s design is to retain all the water. Jeff also commented the statement Mr. Lewis made about the twenty-four (24) inch tile being five (5) times of the twelve (12), and that is a true statement. Jeff stated the reason we recommend the twenty-four (24) inch is to take the restricted discharge from the landfill. Jeff further explained the assessment for the landowners downstream would only be for the cost of replacing the twelve (12) inch and landfill is responsible for the remainder of the cost. Jeff further stated he understands Bill Lewis’ comments. Jeff explained the capacity of the open ditch. Jeff stated the Charles Town Open has a lot of slope to it, more slope than the average agricultural ditch. Jeff stated an agricultural ditch before spilling out of its banks has about a fifty percent (50%) chance of occurrence, in other words it may be every summer or every other summer that they flood. Jeff further commented if the ditch floods every year or multiple times a year, then it might not have enough capacity. Richard Powell asked Jeff Healy, “if the landfill designs the retention pond as presented would there be less or more water going down the tile?” Jeff responded if constructed according to the plan that was reviewed and operated in that regard, then it should discharge less. There was further discussion. Marty Fallon commented he was from Shaw Environmental and assisted in designing the plan for the landfill and would like to address Mr. Lewis’ comment about putting in a big pond. Mr. Fallon stated that is exactly what has been done. Mr. Fallon stated our review of the existing design was modeled to a twenty-five (25) year storm event with a maximum peak outflow of 110 cfs. Mr. Fallon stated we are taking the additional acreage and reducing the flow to 6 cfs from the 110 cfs and taking it to a hundred (100) year event. Mr. Fallon stated there would be less discharge over a longer period of time, several days verses one or two weeks. Mr. Fallon stated the conditions we are proposing would be much better than what currently exists out there. Tom Schwenk commented from what Mr. Fallon just said, why do anything, we will have less water and if they are held to the plans there should be no problem, there is no problem now. Tom also commented if there are tile blowouts, most farmers fix them on our own. Tom stated he has a question about the total acres in the watershed. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented there would be approximately four hundred and thirty-eight (438) acres will be going into the tile. Tom commented he agreed with what Bill Lewis said. Tom commented stated years ago when the Council and Commissioners was discussing tipping fees, he had suggested that a landfill watershed district be set up with tipping fee money, for instances like these. After further comments by Tom Schwenk, he stated he does not see a need for it, and as Bill commented if there is that much need, then the landfill should be responsible for damages. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked Jeff Healy to comment on the option of doing nothing and continue to use the existing tile. Jeff Healy commented they had talked with Shaw Environmental in the design calculation about restricting the direct discharge to the tile with an orifice and what it could take. Jeff further stated the challenge that we saw was that the twelve (12) tile will only carry one or two and tops three cubic feet per second. Jeff further commented if there would be a large storm event, say a five (5) inch rain in twenty-four (24) hours, and the pond was full and discharging at its maximum, that would discharge six (6) cfs (plus six (6) and a fraction according to the tile calculation) and discharge greater than the twelve (12) inch capacity of the tile, and the remainder go across the surface of the ground. Jeff further stated the concern was the flow across the surface of the ground for long period of time, several days. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented it was mentioned before that we are talking about a one hundred plus year old tile that is showing signs of deterioration. Jeff commented in places it is. Jeff also commented the retention pond would have to be seriously restricted as Mr. Lewis recommended and an orifice to limit the discharge to maybe half cfs (.05 cfs). Jeff stated by doing this there would be more surface water. After further discussion, Chairman, Roger Rose, commented not replacing the tile is not a viable alternative. After further comments from Jeff Healy, Richard Powell asked if the new tile would be put on a different grade. Jeff Healy responded, “Yes, it has been redesigned to have maximum grade. Richard Powell commented that Banning was not assigned to look at why the landfill chose to go that direction with the water instead of a different direction. Jeff commented they did look at some other alternative outlets. Jeff commented down along US 31 there is a lot capacity down the road right of way. Jeff further commented you could not redirect the water all that way without pumping or cutting a lot. Jeff commented that they were not charged with redesigning what Shaw had proposed. Jeff commented they did look at it in general, and it did not seem very practical to redirect the water. Ty Lewis asked about the surface water. Jeff explained the tile can only take a half cubic foot per second, and the landfill is discharging six cubic foot per second, it is going down the road right of way and the fields. Jeff further commented there is no defined drainage swale across there and no grassy waterway and no ditch, so it will be basically running across the surface of the ground. Jeff further explained how the landfill’s design would work when implemented. Richard Powell asked. “Is it real to think all the landfill’s water will end up in the retention pond?” Jeff Healy responded, “If the grades are reflected accurately in what they are presenting, yes.” There was much further discussion on this issue. Jeff commented the drain to the landfill is a county regulated drain, and the County Drainage Board will regulate it. Jeff Healy explained that approximately thirty percent (30%) of the watershed is the landfill and seventy percent (70%) is other land uses. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked for other comments from the public. Richard Fox presented pictures to the Drainage Board showing the flooding on his property at times. Richard also commented copies of the pictures were submitted with his letter. Richard stated Bill Lewis showed you pictures of the water problems in 2001 and that is just one of many. Richard commented he has had water chest deep at the back of his property and waist deep in my yard. Richard commented he has also lost livestock in the flooding. Richard feels there is a problem and feels this is will add more water whether it is in a tile or on the surface. Richard stated there would be more acreage and runoff. After further comments by Richard, he commented he feels the landfill should pay. Linda Swick asked about how her parcels are being assessed. Secretary, Jean Cloud, explained she has four (4) parcel numbers and the proposed assessment is ten dollars ($10.00) per parcel, not being charged per lot. Chairman, Roger Rose, stated it sounds like there has been some consideration in the assessment because they are not being assessed per lot. Secretary, Jean Cloud, stated the ten dollars ($10.00) is a minimum. Jean further stated the four (4) parcels appear to be approximately four (4) acres, so the Drainage Board can combine all four (4) parcels and assess ten dollars ($10.00). The Drainage Board would have to make that decision on how to assess those parcels. Linda commented she feels part of their water does not drain to the north. It was explained to her that all of her properties are in the watershed and that is where the surface water ends up in the open ditch. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented that everyone is in a watershed. There was much further discussion. Patty Paxton commented the cost is very excessive and feels it is the landfill’s problem. Patty further commented they personally cannot afford it. Tom Schwenk commented if the farm ground were torn up to put a tile in, we would not have a crop there for several years. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked for any other comments or questions. Richard Powell commented the tool the Drainage Board uses to make its decision, is the number of acres of objections compared to the number in favor of the project. Richard asked if the numbers were available for the tile watershed. Drainage Board Secretary, Jean Cloud, commented there are one hundred and twenty-five (125) acres benefited acres objecting to the project out of a total of four hundred and thirty-eight (438), or approximately thirty percent (30 %). Drainage Board Attorney, Greg Heller, commented the legal standard for a reconstruction is finding that the benefits outweigh the cost. There was further discussion. Jeff Healy commented that approximately half the soils in the watershed are either poorly drained or somewhat poorly drained under the USDA soil surveys. Jeff also commented in the absence of tile drainage, those soils up to fifty percent (50%) of the acres would grow reduced crops or no crops, and that would be the only way you could come up with what the total economic benefit is. After much further discussion, Jeff Healy commented the twelve (12) inch tile adequately meets a portion or the needs of the agricultural. The comment was made the only reason the tile needs to be upgraded is because of the landfill. Jeff Healy commented that is the reason for the increased cost. Jeff further commented the increased cost is proposed to be born by the landfill. Jeff further commented the proposed cost to the landowners is the cost to replace the twelve (12) inch tile. It was asked who paid to have the tile put in originally? Jeff commented the landowners put it in. The comment was made that the landowners take care of it. Jeff further commented the Statute states the difference between a mutual drain and a regulated drain. Jeff further stated that this drain under the Statute was set up by the Court in 1904 as a regulated drain giving the Drainage Board the authority to do the reconstruction or maintenance on said drain as necessary. Richard Powell stated we got to this point because of the proposed landfill expansion, and would like to hear comments from them on this issue. Marty Fallon, representative from Shaw Environmental, commented if the landfill weren’t there, we would be discharging a lot more than we currently are or what we are proposing. Marty further commented the landfill has the right to discharge their water just as the other property owners. Marty further commented that great steps have been taken to retain and reduce the flow off of the property and feels the landfill is doing their part. After comments from some of the landowners, Chairman, Roger Rose, suggested that the Drainage Board continue this hearing. Chairman, Roger Rose, commented he is not hearing anything real constructive in terms of a resolution and does not want to bring this to a conclusion until we have time to look into more. Chairman, Roger Rose, asked for any thoughts or comments. There was discussion on continuing the hearing in sixty (60) days. Mark Rodriguez commented he would like more information about shifting the water the other direction and know if there is any feasibility to do it. After much further discussion, Larry Paxton, commented he agrees with all the landowners here today. Larry commented if the landfill wants to put in a pond to do the job and put in tile for the other landowners, and then let them do it. Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to take some action. Mark Rodriguez made a motion to continue the Charles Town Tile and Charles Town Open hearing to Monday, February 9 at 9:30 A.M. E.S.T. to hear additional evidence. Richard Powell seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to recess the hearing at 11:15 A.M. The hearing will continue on Monday, February 9, 2009 at 9:30 A.M. Mark Rodriguez made a motion to recess the hearing at 11:15 A.M. The hearing will continue on Monday, February 9, 2009 at 9:30 A.M. Richard Powell seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. Chairman, Roger Rose, stated the Board would take a short recess. Chairman, Roger Rose, called the meeting back to order at 11:25 A.M. E.S.T. IN REF: SAMUEL STAHL OPEN DISCUSS MAINTENANCE CAUSE NO. 3-1988 #671 ON DRAIN Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, stated they have taken shots on this ditch and in January and February during the rain events the banks fell apart on this drain. Don commented in order to do the work right; there are not sufficient funds. Don commented that Bill Widner is going to be doing some work in that area and commented he would swab it out and get some water moving. Don commented Bill stated he would do the work for fifty cents ($.50) a foot, which is a good deal. Don commented there is approximately thirteen thousand (13,000) feet or approximately sixty-five hundred dollars ($6500.00). Don commented there is approximately twenty-five hundred dollars ($2500.00) in the fund. Don further commented it would take three (3) years assessments. Don commented a hearing would need to be set up sometime in that period of time to raise the maintenance rate. Don commented the present maintenance rate is one dollar and twenty five cents ($1.25) and brings in approximately fifteen hundred dollars ($1500.00) a year. Don explained the ditch has wet sandy banks and it would be good to have the entire ditch swabbed out. Jim Kline and Fawnda Fagan have wanted us to do this for quite some time. There was further discussion. Being no further discussion, Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to allow the Surveyor to proceed with the work on the Samuel Stahl Open. Richard Powell made a motion to allow the Surveyor to proceed to have the work done on the Samuel Stahl and let the fund go in the hole for approximately three (3) years. Mark Rodriguez seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. IN REF: THOMPSON WYNN RANNELS DISCUSS MAINTENANCE CAUSE NO. 5-1987 #664 ON DRAIN Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, commented the work to be done is on Roger Rose’s property. Roger Rose abstained from discussion and voting on this issue. Don further explained the drain has been cleaned upstream and downstream. Don explained there is a stretch of ditch north of County Road 600 N where there is heavy brush on both sides of the ditch. Don commented Kirk Ingram was working on his property and while in the area, Roger asked Kirk to remove the brush on both sides and dipped out the ditch downstream. Don commented normally we only brush one side of the ditch and Don felt the maintenance fund could pay for brushing one side of the ditch and dipping downstream, and then Roger would pay for the brushing of the other side of the ditch. Richard Powell commented we have paid for brushing on both sides of ditches in the past. Don commented on this particular drain, we have only brushed one side in the past and feels that we should only pay for the one side. Don commented the work was all done on Roger’s property. Don stated there was approximately thirteen hundred (1300) feet of brushing and approximately four hundred (400) feet of dredging. Being no further discussion, Richard Powell made a motion that the maintenance fund pay for brushing one side and dredging of the Thompson Wynn Rannels ditch on Roger Rose’s property and Roger Rose pay for the brushing of the other side of the ditch on his property. Mark Rodriguez seconded the motion. Motion carried two to zero. IN REF: JUD L HUDKINS OPEN UPDATE ON WORK CAUSE NO. 5-1998 #733 Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, stated this is the drain out by IMI where the road blew out. Don stated the contractor started reshaping the corner, and Jana’s were assuming that IMI would pay to clean the drain all the way to the main. Don commented in the minutes in the past, Troy Cowles stated that IMI would maintain that portion of the drain while they were pumping into the ditch. Don stated that Troy Cowles does not work for IMI now and the other IMI people were not aware of the negotiations that were made with us. Don stated he will be meeting with representatives from IMI this afternoon and discuss this situation. Don commented Chairman, Roger Rose, would also be attending the meeting. Don commented there is twelve thousand seven hundred dollars ($12,700.00) in the maintenance fund. Don commented there will be cost to move the ditch at the curve. Drainage Board Secretary, Jean Cloud, commented that IMI did receive a copy of the letter that was sent to Troy Cowles stating that they would maintain the ditch. After further discussion, Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, stated the main concern is to clean the ditch and pull the banks while we have a contractor there. IN REF: HENRY SMITH PROGRESS ON HIS PROJECTS Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, stated Henry had called this a.m. and stated he would not be at the meeting today. Don stated they were out to the Graham ditch on Thursday and Friday and Henry was not working on the project at that time. Don stated when Henry called this morning he commented he had about three fourths of the Graham ditch completed and has also done some brushing on the Bucher. After brief discussion, Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, commented that Henry is to have the three (3) projects done by the end of the year. Fulton County Surveyor, Don Towne, commented he has landowners calling in regularly inquiring about when the projects are going to be completed. After further discussion, the Drainage Board stated a letter needs to be sent to Henry Smith informing him that the work needs to be completed by the end of the year, or we will contact another contractor to finish the projects. IN REF: CHARLES TOWN TILE DISCUSSION CHARLES TOWN OPEN Jeff Healy from Banning Engineering asked the Drainage Board what they expected of him before the February 9th meeting. The Drainage Board asked Jeff to contact Marty Fallon at Shaw Environmental and see what their thoughts were after today’s hearing. There was discussion about their Drainage Plan has to come to the Drainage Board for approval. Drainage Board Attorney, Greg Heller excused himself at 12:05 P.M. There was further discussion on today’s hearing. Being no further business to come before the Board, Chairman, Roger Rose, entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 P.M. E.S.T. Mark Rodriguez made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 P.M. E.S.T. Richard Powell seconded the motion. Motion carried three to zero. RECONSTRUCTION: Banning Engineering, P.C. County Line Landfill Expansion $ 432.50 MAINTENANCE: Bill Morris Excavating Inc. Jud Hudkins Open #733 $3,400.00 Right of Way Management Willow Creek #714 $1,343.60 Jim Kline Jackson & Wagoner Tile #562 $ 797.33 Big Dig, Inc. Weaver & Kitchen Open #638 $ 300.00 Widner & sons Excavation, Inc. Jackson & Wagoner Open #562 $ 540.00 Heltzel Construction Graham Arm #3 Tile #546 $ 401.50 CLAIMS: Board Members $ 183.00 Clerical $1,830.84 Quill $ 214.62 Fine Things $ 7.65 Rochester Telephone Co., Inc. $ 21.92 Peru Tribune $ 15.54 Rochester Sentinel $ 22.36 FULTON COUNTY DRAINAGE BOARD ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ Surveyor ATTEST:________________________________________ Jean E. Cloud, Drainage Board Secretary DRAINAGE BOARD DECEMBER 8, 2008  PAGE 10 -/% 0 4 = ű‡ý‡ËŽĚŽŇŽÓŽŐŽÖŽÚŽýűűýôńôéô0JmHnHu0J j0JU>*H*Z[Ą˘JKL}˜™U V " # = > Z  Ÿ   ˜ ™ š Ä ů ú  VýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýŞŽŮŽţţVW789_bĺćäĺć+,-yzŠĐŃĺůúWXghqýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýqrîď-.ƒÓŢ1 2 3 G H œ  ž b"c"¤#Ľ#R$€))a*b*l+m+ýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýým+,,ˆ.‰.Ô.Ő.d/e/11¤2Ľ2ö2÷24‚4P5Q566É6Ę6–7—7h8i8´8ľ89ýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý99e9f9ú9ű9ó:ô:ĺ;ć;f<g<@=A=>>K>L>8?9?Ž??Ú?Ű?@@ş@ť@íAîAýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýîA(B)B D DœDDE E?E@EôEőE5H6H†I‡I J JKKËKĚKDLEL„O…OCPDP,Qýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý,Q-Q›QœQ R RXRYR´TľTßTŕTGVHV—V˜VWWcWdW–W—W XXšX›XÜXÝXY‘Yýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý‘YN[O[Ą[˘[ŕ[á[~\€\ ]]V^W^+_,_n_o_“_”_*`+`Ś`§`é`ę`aaŐaÖaŔbýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýŔbÁbJcKcjckcddďdđd|e}eÝeŢeßfŕfggÁhÂhSiTikkGlHlƒl„lČlÉlýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýÉl^m_mMnNnxoyo×pŘpŮpqqjqkqlqœqÂqĂqĎuĐuƒv„vŁv¤v&x'x(x\x…x†xýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý†xćxçx'y(y‚{ƒ{c|d|!}"}q~r~s~Ą~ž~ż~˛łK€L€×€Ř€Š‹2‚3‚ւׂ؂ýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý؂قzƒ{ƒ|ƒŤƒŹƒ#„$„ „Ą„A…B…Ń…Ň…d†e†K‡L‡M‡N‡O‡P‡Q‡y‡‡Ž‡ˆ ˆŽˆýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýŽˆˆďˆđˆ5‰6‰h‰i‰ƒŠ„Š…Š–Š—ŠÜŠÝŠëŠěŠ+‹c‹˜‹Ď‹ŒOŒPŒQŒYŒ[ŒwŒŒ˘Œýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý˘ŒžŒčŒ&'()GHŽŽ‹ŽŒŽŽŽŽŽŽ“Ž•Ž–Ž™ŽšŽ›ŽœŽŽžŽŸŽ Ž˘Žýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýýý˘ŽŁŽ¤ŽĽŽ¨ŽŠŽŞŽšŽĘŽËŽ×ŽŘŽŮŽÚŽýýýýýýřřýóýýý$a$$a$ $1h°Đ/ °ŕ=!° "° # $`%°°đ i8@ń˙8 NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH <A@ň˙Ą< Default Paragraph Font,@ň, Header  ĆŕŔ!, @, Footer  ĆŕŔ!&)@˘& Page Numberڊ˛˙˙˙˙Z[Ą˘JKL}˜™UV"#=>ZŸ ˜™šÄůú V W 789_bĺćäĺć+,-yzŠĐŃĺůúWXghqrîď-.ƒÓŢ123GHœžbc¤ĽR €%%a&b&l'm'((ˆ*‰*Ô*Ő*d+e+--¤.Ľ.ö.÷.0‚0P1Q122É2Ę2–3—3h4i4´4ľ455e5f5ú5ű5ó6ô6ĺ7ć7f8g8@9A9::K:L:8;9;Ž;;Ú;Ű;<<ş<ť<í=î=(>)> @ @œ@@A A?A@AôAőA5D6D†E‡E F FGGËGĚGDHEH„K…KCLDL,M-M›MœM N NXNYN´PľPßPŕPGRHR—R˜RSScSdS–S—S TTšT›TÜTÝTU‘UNWOWĄW˘WŕWáW~X€X YYVZWZ+[,[n[o[“[”[*\+\Ś\§\é\ę\]]Ő]Ö]Ŕ^Á^J_K_j_k_``ď`đ`|a}aÝaŢaßbŕbccÁdÂdSeTeggGhHhƒh„hČhÉh^i_iMjNjxkyk×lŘlŮlmmjmkmlmœmÂmĂmĎqĐqƒr„rŁr¤r&t't(t\t…t†tćtçt'u(u‚wƒwcxdx!y"yqzrzszĄzžzżz˛{ł{K|L|×|Ř|Š}‹}2~3~Ö~×~Ř~Ů~z{|ŤŹ#€$€ €Ą€ABŃŇd‚e‚KƒLƒMƒNƒOƒPƒQƒyƒƒŽƒ„ „Ž„„ď„đ„5…6…h…i…ƒ†„†…†–†—†Ü†Ý†ë†ě†+‡c‡˜‡Ď‡ˆOˆPˆQˆYˆ[ˆwˆˆ˘ˆžˆčˆ‰&‰'‰(‰)‰G‰H‰ŠŠ‹ŠŒŠŠŽŠŠŠ“Š•Š–Š™ŠšŠ›ŠœŠŠžŠŸŠ Š˘ŠŁŠ¤ŠĽŠ¨ŠŠŠŞŠšŠĘŠËŠ×ŠŰŠ˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€š@0€€˜@0€€š@0€€š@0€€ 0!!...1ڎHVqm+9îA,Q‘YŔbÉl†x؂Žˆ˘Œ˘ŽÚŽIKLMNOPQRSTUVWXَJ!(+1!T˙•€óř”›ŁŞ˛šżĆěîţ]e‘.›.ŢLáLçLęL[b_b ‡‡Ď‡Ő‡ˆˆŞŠŘŠŰŠ[desIb_bцۆ‡—‡Ĺ‡Î‡ ˆˆEˆNˆlˆvˆ—ˆĄˆąˆ˝ˆÜˆçˆřˆ‰‰$‰ŞŠŘŠŰŠ33333333333333H H Ż ´ ŔŇ69=WÔőDJŢčééíî15Vf÷÷x|""ˆ'‹'I(I(Ë-ć-€.€.†.‡.‰.Œ.á0ä022Ž2”2Ę2Ę25464á4ć4˙5˙5Z7a7Ü7ă788&8+81979°9ś9Ý9č9';+;ż=Á=>>Ó>Ő>ć?ë?ůCţCöF÷FřFůF“G”GH›H×HŢHOJPJJŽJXLXLąL¸LáLëLN"N$N'NŸNŁN PPŻRąRSSáS TlTwT_UbUćUčUď[)\H\S\T\X\v\{\-_>_ę`í`UbXb^b_b,cDcÝdŢd{eˆe¤eŤe4jpÉ@( €?pÉ@pĘCrÉVrţ˙ŐÍ՜.“—+,ůŽ04 hp|„Œ” œ¤Ź´ ź ä uó:iŒ  KThe Fulton County Drainage Board met on the 8th of December 2008 at 9:00 A Title  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYţ˙˙˙[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwţ˙˙˙yz{|}~ţ˙˙˙‚ƒ„…†‡ţ˙˙˙ý˙˙˙ý˙˙˙‹ţ˙˙˙ţ˙˙˙ţ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙Root Entry˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ ŔFŕyťJrɍ€1Table˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙Z4:WordDocument˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙&˛SummaryInformation(˙˙˙˙xDocumentSummaryInformation8˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙€CompObj˙˙˙˙jObjectPool˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ŕyťJrÉŕyťJrÉ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ţ˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙ţ˙ ˙˙˙˙ ŔFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8ô9˛q